2024 College Football Power 5 Tier List
Interesting discussion Six Categories
The guy likes Cal in his fourth category.
Bowl Season. Says some nice thing about Wilcox and Mendoza. I think he says Cal could have their best season in awhile.
JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
I think it is to be expected that only one name would likely be used to refer to a player and that name would be their last name.Golden One said:
Gotta take his assessment with a bit of skepticism. He doesn't even know the first name of our QB (called him Francisco Mendoza). And I think he is very generous in his opinion of Wilcox and in placing us in the "Bowl Season" category. "Below Mid Sadly" might be more appropriate.
move Syracuse to should win and Miami to toss up.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rushinbear said:move Syracuse to should win and Miami to toss up.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
I mentioned before, but it didn't go through, that it is more likely that someone would refer to our QB with one work and that would be "Mendoza."Golden One said:
Gotta take his assessment with a bit of skepticism. He doesn't even know the first name of our QB (called him Francisco Mendoza). And I think he is very generous in his opinion of Wilcox and in placing us in the "Bowl Season" category. "Below Mid Sadly" might be more appropriate.
calumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
sycasey said:calumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.
The interesting thing is that the ACC right now is pretty terrible, Florida State will reload but Louisville this past season was a pretender and Clemson is wobbling, so if anything we should win a lot more games just because we are entering a pretty weak league, and Florida State despite ongoing legal silliness does have a legit gripe with how bad the league has fallen off compared to 10-15 years ago, Virginia Tech has not been the same since Beamer left, Pitt and Wake had decent seasons recently but crashed quickly, Miami keeps showing glimpses but has not won a major bowl in two decades, etc.calumnus said:It is the opposite, we had the misfortune of having great teams when another team in the conference was the best in the country ('75 USC, '91 UW, '04 and '06 USC). Stanford manages to have their best teams when the conference is down. Instead of taking advantage when the traditional conference powers are weak, Cal hangs onto bad defense minded coaches (Holmoe and Wilcox) using their mediocre or worse record and occasional "upset" in a weakened conference as an excuse to extend them,sycasey said:Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.calumnus said:Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:The more things change, the more things stay the same.JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
Bad take. Oregon actually during the bulk of the Tedford era was pretty sucky (corresponded to the fall off ofcalumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
Other than USC it WAS down. What other programs were good? None. And especially the traditionally good schools - like Washington. After the Fiesta win in 2001 Oregon under Belloit was 35 ad 24 in in Pac12sycasey said:calumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.
Strykur said:The interesting thing is that the ACC right now is pretty terrible, Florida State will reload but Louisville this past season was a pretender and Clemson is wobbling, so if anything we should win a lot more games just because we are entering a pretty weak league, and Florida State despite ongoing legal silliness does have a legit gripe with how bad the league has fallen off compared to 10-15 years ago, Virginia Tech has not been the same since Beamer left, Pitt and Wake had decent seasons recently but crashed quickly, Miami keeps showing glimpses but has not won a major bowl in two decades, etc.calumnus said:It is the opposite, we had the misfortune of having great teams when another team in the conference was the best in the country ('75 USC, '91 UW, '04 and '06 USC). Stanford manages to have their best teams when the conference is down. Instead of taking advantage when the traditional conference powers are weak, Cal hangs onto bad defense minded coaches (Holmoe and Wilcox) using their mediocre or worse record and occasional "upset" in a weakened conference as an excuse to extend them,sycasey said:Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.calumnus said:Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:The more things change, the more things stay the same.JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
socaltownie said:Other than USC it WAS down. What other programs were good? None. And especially the traditionally good schools - like Washington. After the Fiesta win in 2001 Oregon under Belloit was 35 ad 24 in in Pac12sycasey said:calumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.
socaltownie said:Other than USC it WAS down. What other programs were good? None. And especially the traditionally good schools - like Washington. After the Fiesta win in 2001 Oregon under Belloit was 35 ad 24 in in Pac12sycasey said:calumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.
socaltownie said:Other than USC it WAS down. What other programs were good? None. And especially the traditionally good schools - like Washington. After the Fiesta win in 2001 Oregon under Belloit was 35 ad 24 in in Pac12sycasey said:calumnus said:socaltownie said:It is very very hard for Cal to get to the next level of 8 or 9 wins. We just are not that kind of program (and the historical period when we were had a number of "odd" things in the Pac12 that helped Tedford (along with building good teams). A once in a generation talent at QB; the low of Huskie football even with all the advantages; a Furd team in the valley of pre-hairball horribleness.Econ141 said:JB was a Chieftain said:
Looks like:
3 teams should lose (based on higher tier): FSU, Miami, NC State
3 teams should win (based on lower tier): WF, Furd, Pitt
4 teams toss up (based on same tier): SMU, Oregon St. Syracuse, Auburn
2 teams have to win: Davis & SDSU
Looks like another 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 season...... on paper
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Rodgers had one full season at QB. USC and Oregon had National Championship level teams during the Tedford era.
Yeah, I have never bought the argument that the conference was significantly easier in Tedford's day than it has been since. Heck, in our one full season with Rodgers we had the misfortune of going up against the absolute best USC squad in decades. Basically the reason we didn't get a Rose Bowl out of it.