DoubtfulBear said:
https://theacc.com/news/2025/7/30/clemson-picked-as-preseason-favorite-in-2025-acc-football-media-poll.aspx
Hoping we can prove the rest of the conference wrong, but #15 Cal vs #17 Furd could be the worst Big Game of all time
C6Bear said:
How can you even rate these teams with all of the offseason turnover and changes until you see them play? More than half of the conference looks like a huge question mark. Seems to me that from Duke on down in that list could finish anywhere.
Strykur said:
We were last in the ACC halfway through last season and that was after losing to the worst Florida State team of all time, losing to a Pitt squad that started 7-0 but crashed out to 7-5, losing to a dog**** NC State, etc...
Preseason polls don't mean much but think of it as a power ranking, what juice do we have going into 2025 to convince media members that we will compete in the ACC, especially after last year's showing?
calumnus said:
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
bear2034 said:calumnus said:
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
On paper, we looked like a 8-4 team last year.
DoubtfulBear said:
https://theacc.com/news/2025/7/30/clemson-picked-as-preseason-favorite-in-2025-acc-football-media-poll.aspx
Hoping we can prove the rest of the conference wrong, but #15 Cal vs #17 Furd could be the worst Big Game of all time
Strykur said:bear2034 said:calumnus said:
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
On paper, we looked like a 8-4 team last year.
On paper we were a 10-win team last year, if not for having the worst placekicking in FBS.
calumnus said:C6Bear said:
How can you even rate these teams with all of the offseason turnover and changes until you see them play? More than half of the conference looks like a huge question mark. Seems to me that from Duke on down in that list could finish anywhere.
People are looking at where teams finished last year and then looking at the ratings of the talent that left and the ratings of the talent that came in.
Cal had a top 20 Portal class last year and finished 2-6 and second to last. From that second to last team we lost Mendoza our 4 star QB, Ott our 4 star RB, Hunter our 4 star WR and Endries our 4 star TE. Plus all our other RBs, WRs and our DBs (the latter to graduation). Our only incoming 4 star is Sagapolutele but everyone seems to think 3 star Brown will start. We have the #69 recruiting class. Our transfer class is #38, but that is buoyed by highly ranked Sagapolutele, without him we have only 3 stars and below and would be ranked in the bottom half of FBS.
Of course that doesn't mean that is where we will finish. Rankings can be very wrong. SMU was picked near the bottom of the ACC last year (and also with a top 20 Portal class) made the CFPs. We have less rational reason for anyone outside of irrational Cal fans to pick us any higher. Again, we can hope that analysis is wrong. For one, I thought coaching held us back last year losing 4 or 5 conference games we easily could have won. Or better FG kicking. 6-2 or 7-1 would look very different. So maybe that doesn't happen again this year? Maybe not 7-1, but 4-4 or 5-3? With 3 or 4 OOC wins is entirely possible even if we are not as talented as last year's team.
Oski87 said:calumnus said:C6Bear said:
How can you even rate these teams with all of the offseason turnover and changes until you see them play? More than half of the conference looks like a huge question mark. Seems to me that from Duke on down in that list could finish anywhere.
People are looking at where teams finished last year and then looking at the ratings of the talent that left and the ratings of the talent that came in.
Cal had a top 20 Portal class last year and finished 2-6 and second to last. From that second to last team we lost Mendoza our 4 star QB, Ott our 4 star RB, Hunter our 4 star WR and Endries our 4 star TE. Plus all our other RBs, WRs and our DBs (the latter to graduation). Our only incoming 4 star is Sagapolutele but everyone seems to think 3 star Brown will start. We have the #69 recruiting class. Our transfer class is #38, but that is buoyed by highly ranked Sagapolutele, without him we have only 3 stars and below and would be ranked in the bottom half of FBS.
Of course that doesn't mean that is where we will finish. Rankings can be very wrong. SMU was picked near the bottom of the ACC last year (and also with a top 20 Portal class) made the CFPs. We have less rational reason for anyone outside of irrational Cal fans to pick us any higher. Again, we can hope that analysis is wrong. For one, I thought coaching held us back last year losing 4 or 5 conference games we easily could have won. Or better FG kicking. 6-2 or 7-1 would look very different. So maybe that doesn't happen again this year? Maybe not 7-1, but 4-4 or 5-3? With 3 or 4 OOC wins is entirely possible even if we are not as talented as last year's team.
Mendoza was a 2 star QB.
C6Bear said:
How can you even rate these teams with all of the offseason turnover and changes until you see them play? More than half of the conference looks like a huge question mark. Seems to me that from Duke on down in that list could finish anywhere.
BearSD said:Strykur said:bear2034 said:calumnus said:
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
On paper, we looked like a 8-4 team last year.
On paper we were a 10-win team last year, if not for having the worst placekicking in FBS.
Cal's 2023 kicker, Bhaghani, was 20-24 on FG attempts and 20-20 on PATs for UCLA in 2024.
Strykur said:bear2034 said:calumnus said:
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
On paper, we looked like a 8-4 team last year.
On paper we were a 10-win team last year, if not for having the worst placekicking in FBS.
bear2034 said:Strykur said:bear2034 said:calumnus said:
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
On paper, we looked like a 8-4 team last year.
On paper we were a 10-win team last year, if not for having the worst placekicking in FBS.
On paper, Cal defeats everyone except Miami and SMU?
panda said:Oski87 said:calumnus said:C6Bear said:
How can you even rate these teams with all of the offseason turnover and changes until you see them play? More than half of the conference looks like a huge question mark. Seems to me that from Duke on down in that list could finish anywhere.
People are looking at where teams finished last year and then looking at the ratings of the talent that left and the ratings of the talent that came in.
Cal had a top 20 Portal class last year and finished 2-6 and second to last. From that second to last team we lost Mendoza our 4 star QB, Ott our 4 star RB, Hunter our 4 star WR and Endries our 4 star TE. Plus all our other RBs, WRs and our DBs (the latter to graduation). Our only incoming 4 star is Sagapolutele but everyone seems to think 3 star Brown will start. We have the #69 recruiting class. Our transfer class is #38, but that is buoyed by highly ranked Sagapolutele, without him we have only 3 stars and below and would be ranked in the bottom half of FBS.
Of course that doesn't mean that is where we will finish. Rankings can be very wrong. SMU was picked near the bottom of the ACC last year (and also with a top 20 Portal class) made the CFPs. We have less rational reason for anyone outside of irrational Cal fans to pick us any higher. Again, we can hope that analysis is wrong. For one, I thought coaching held us back last year losing 4 or 5 conference games we easily could have won. Or better FG kicking. 6-2 or 7-1 would look very different. So maybe that doesn't happen again this year? Maybe not 7-1, but 4-4 or 5-3? With 3 or 4 OOC wins is entirely possible even if we are not as talented as last year's team.
Mendoza was a 2 star QB.
He was a four star transfer QB to Indiana.
calumnus said:Strykur said:
We were last in the ACC halfway through last season and that was after losing to the worst Florida State team of all time, losing to a Pitt squad that started 7-0 but crashed out to 7-5, losing to a dog**** NC State, etc...
Preseason polls don't mean much but think of it as a power ranking, what juice do we have going into 2025 to convince media members that we will compete in the ACC, especially after last year's showing?
Exactly. And on paper at least, we appear to be worse than last year. There is no reason for any outsider to pick us higher.
calumnus said:bear2034 said:
On paper, Cal defeats everyone except Miami and SMU?
We had Miami beat at home up 20 in the 4th quarter in front of a big, loud Game Day crowd.
