BeachyBear;842550821 said:

---

I'm not convinced at all Boise St. is a good team. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see them end the season with a losing record. UCLA is good (maybe not top 10 good) and they lost a close one. So did Colorado last year - UCLA has a tendency to play down to the level of their competition. BYU may be good, but they're getting a huge benefit of the doubt from the voters here and I certainly wouldn't say they "deserve" anything as far as rankings go.

Go Bears!!

---

Boise might not be great, but I feel comfortable saying that they are probably better than Grambling or San Diego St. We also probably have not played any opponents as good as UCLA yet (maybe Texas will get there, but they aren't there now).

It's very early, so no one truly "deserves" anything and they probably shouldn't even do rankings until Week 6 or something. But based on current resume, yes, it's clear that BYU has shown more against a tougher slate than Cal (so far).

The polls are as of right now... from starting points, based upon last year, and notable changes in between.

BYU had a better 2014 than us, and also beat us at home. It should not be surprising that they start 2015 with a leg-up. And, as said, their schedule:

@ Nebraska
Boise State
@UCLA

There must be better examples of teams ranked above us who do not belong. This is clearly not one, at least for the objective fans...

Had we won by the three touchdown lead we had in the 4th quarter we would be at the least number 20. Given the waterbug like style of Heard it wasn't to be. People still hold against us the performance of our defense, as if it were the same as last year...which it is not.

Counter argument - they LOST to UCLA. We're 3-0. Those sorts of differences have to count for something.
If we beat UW this weekend, we should be ranked above BYU, regardless of what they do this weekend.

sycasey;842550828 said:

---

Boise might not be great, but I feel comfortable saying that they are probably better than Grambling or San Diego St. We also probably have not played any opponents as good as UCLA yet (maybe Texas will get there, but they aren't there now).

It's very early, so no one truly "deserves" anything and they probably shouldn't even do rankings until Week 6 or something. But based on current resume, yes, it's clear that BYU has shown more against a tougher slate than Cal (so far).

---

Like Missouri

Mostly people in our own fan base, unfortunately. Not sure why our fans have such a hard time rallying behind their teams.

Go Bears!!

BeachyBear;842550844 said:

---

Mostly people in our own fan base, unfortunately. Not sure why our fans have such a hard time rallying behind their teams.

Go Bears!!

---

I really don't get it. And according to some every call that went against Cal was the right call... and the guy clearly faking the injury wasn't, and the only reason the 7000 fans at Cal made any impact was because of where the microphones were placed etc...

BeachyBear;842550844 said:

---

Mostly people in our own fan base, unfortunately. Not sure why our fans have such a hard time rallying behind their teams.

Go Bears!!

---

I am a fan, but that doesn't mean I'm going to constantly argue that my team is the best in the face of all available evidence.

That other fanbases do this is not a good argument. I don't WANT TO BE LIKE those fans.

Unless you start out in the top 25, or very near it, it is hard to crack the top 25, even with a 3-0 record.

Looking at the rankings this week, there are just too many teams that started out in the 25 who are also 3-0. They're not likely to drop out. Plus, there are some teams that started out highly ranked with 1 loss, like SC, Oregon, Bama. They're not likely to drop out.

Even by mid season, it's tough for teams that started out unranked, but are 6-0, to crack the top 15. Still too many teams ahead of them that started out ranked who are going to be 6-0, 5-1, in some cases 4-2.

sycasey;842550849 said:

---

I am a fan, but that doesn't mean I'm going to constantly argue that my team is the best in the face of all available evidence.

That other fanbases do this is not a good argument. I don't WANT TO BE LIKE those fans.

---

sycasey, I share in your reasonable, objective approach... Damn passionate about my school and Cal football. Evidence-based conclusions, keep the keel even, emotions in check...

We win, and convincingly in Seattle, maybe we crack the top 25. There are many dynamics at play of course. BYU plays too, seemingly a comparable opponent on the road in Michigan. If BYU handles their business, I imagine that we would not leapfrog them...

We keep winning, we'll get to where we want to be... 5-0 or going 4-1 heading into SLC against the Utes has been the forecast, and looks very likely. We handle the Utes, come into a bye week 5-1 or 6-0, this forum will be talking Pac-12 championship possibilities, and rightly so, I feel.

Cal88;842550795 said:

---

Rankings are nice, but the main goal is[U] the division title and the CCG[/U],

---

The two are somewhat related. Look how much better our recruiting was last time we were consistently ranked for a couple seasons. Sure it backfired and went down in flames last time, but that doesn't mean having a better national profile won't help us achieve our goals going forward.

I don't know why anyone would take a crack at BYU when there are teams like Auburn in the rankings.

elpbear;842550978 said:

---

I don't know why anyone would take a crack at BYU when there are teams like Auburn in the rankings.

---

Yeah, that one is truly unjustified. They haven't looked good against anyone.

sycasey;842550985 said:

---

Yeah, that one is truly unjustified. They haven't looked good against anyone.

---

They only have that squeaker against Jacksonville State and a touchdown win over a winless Louisville.

sycasey;842550849 said:

---

I am a fan, but that doesn't mean I'm going to constantly argue that my team is the best in the face of all available evidence.That other fanbases do this is not a good argument. I don't WANT TO BE LIKE those fans.

---

Right. Heaven forbid we show exuberance. But how about not making irrational arguments about how much we suck in the face of all available evidence? Is that too much to ask for a CAL fan?
When people have a hard time grasping that our offense is GOOD, despite MOUNTAINS of available evidence pointing to this being the most prolific Cal offense in modern Cal football history (yes, better by every measure than the much-hyped Chuck Muncie team that backed its way into a Pac 10 tie in the before-many-Cal-players-PARENTS-were-born-era)... that's not rational skepticism, that's irrational negativity. (And perhaps some irrational generational homerism by a generation that really should stop tooting its own horn, IMHO.)

Look, I went to school during the Russell White era. Those teams were a lot of fun to watch. And as much as I loved Marriucci's offenses during those years, they didn't hold a candle to this offense. (Yes defense and ST were considerably better in ONE of those years - 1991 - but the offense sputtered in a lot of games and we struggled against even poor teams like UofA and Purdue that season.) That's not irrational exuberance, it's just a hard fact that even Mike P would agree with. So when I hear people moaning about how they're "not sure" about this offense, I'm not seeing rationality here. I'm seeing a really annoying "I'm never going to be happy about anything" attitude I see in quite a few Cal fans that just doesn't make sense. There's plenty to find fault with, yet some fault-finders are way off-target and it seems to be a pattern.

Go Bears!!

BeachyBear;842551102 said:

---

When people have a hard time grasping that our offense is GOOD

---

Yeah, exactly nobody has a hard time with that one.

BeachyBear;842551102 said:

---

Right. Heaven forbid we show exuberance. But how about not making irrational arguments about how much we suck in the face of all available evidence? Is that too much to ask for a CAL fan?
When people have a hard time grasping that our offense is GOOD, despite MOUNTAINS of available evidence pointing to this being the most prolific Cal offense in modern Cal football history (yes, better by every measure than the much-hyped Chuck Muncie team that backed its way into a Pac 10 tie in the before-many-Cal-players-PARENTS-were-born-era)... that's not rational skepticism, that's irrational negativity. (And perhaps some irrational generational homerism by a generation that really should stop tooting its own horn, IMHO.)

Look, I went to school during the Russell White era. Those teams were a lot of fun to watch. And as much as I loved Marriucci's offenses during those years, they didn't hold a candle to this offense. (Yes defense and ST were considerably better in ONE of those years - 1991 - but the offense sputtered in a lot of games and we struggled against even poor teams like UofA and Purdue that season.) That's not irrational exuberance, it's just a hard fact that even Mike P would agree with. So when I hear people moaning about how they're "not sure" about this offense, I'm not seeing rationality here. I'm seeing a really annoying "I'm never going to be happy about anything" attitude I see in quite a few Cal fans that just doesn't make sense. There's plenty to find fault with, yet some fault-finders are way off-target and it seems to be a pattern.

Go Bears!!

---

Oh, are people arguing that our offense is not that good? That's plainly ridiculous. This is a great offense.