Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2014 21:09:43 GMT -5
It means he didn't watch the same team I did against Stanford. When you vote your team the actual number that you are ultimately ranked by the other coaches, I would say its probably fairly close to accurate. Nebraska didn't play well for sure, but Stanford is going to make a lot of teams look bad. Stanford isn't Notre Dame, or Louisville good sir. How funny. Nebraska would have lost to Louisville if they played the way they did against Stanford.
|
|
|
Post by herdmentality on Sept 1, 2014 21:10:42 GMT -5
Plus as long as Texas wins they will be back at 2 next week anyway cause one of top two is guaranteed to lose Assuming we win at Florida. If Florida wins at FSU on Thursday, and beats Texas on Saturday, they will make a big jump next Monday. That's a big IF. In fact that's 2 big IF's.
|
|
|
Post by coloradokidd on Sept 1, 2014 21:52:16 GMT -5
I think a lot of posters are underestimating Texas. In the end I think they will be there right along with Stanford. * IMO: The winner of the PSU/Stanford match will be sitting 'very strong' in #1 - assuming no losses.
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Sept 1, 2014 21:53:21 GMT -5
It means he didn't watch the same team I did against Stanford. When you vote your team the actual number that you are ultimately ranked by the other coaches, I would say its probably fairly close to accurate. Nebraska didn't play well for sure, but Stanford is going to make a lot of teams look bad. Stanford isn't Notre Dame, or Louisville good sir. I didn't say anything about Louisville or ND, but thanks for the additional predictive commentary. WI's competition was not my point of comparison. You are tiresome. I guess the season will be the decider, but I'm putting my money on them finishing lower than 12th nationally in the polls.
|
|
|
Post by texasnewbie on Sept 2, 2014 10:09:01 GMT -5
Stanford is a battle tested team right out of the gate, PSU is not. Did PSU play well, yes but look at their competition compared to Stanford. Same for Texas, they will not be as battle tested a team like Stanford, but I'm glad we play Florida before we go into Husker country, Nebraska is in that gym working hard on what they did wrong this weekend. I would expect PSU to win, I would expect Texas to win, same with Florida and Purdue and so on and so on...but Stanford, I didn't expect it, I thought ISU and NU would of come out stronger, they didn't so Stanford being as talented as they are, they played their game and grabbed some nice wins. I did notice that when Nebraska has some clicking moments of nice plays, Stanford had to battle, it wasn't easy for them, so it will be interesting to see a very young PSU team play a veteran Stanford team with solid defense and pins and a crazy good middle with Inky. If it's an all out brawl to five then hats off to whoever wins, if it's a blowout then let the card lay where they may. PSU has to earn their number 1 spot, right now it is not earned this season, it's riding last seasons title. Iona and William and Mary don't cut for me, Stanford, Nebraska, Texas, Florida State, Purdue...play against those teams and that will earn what's rightfully yours. I say the same for Texas, no reason for a score of 25-23 against UTEP but hey, it's the first set of the first match of the season, Texas ripped the rest of the tournament as did all the other big teams, so quit bashing these great teams / top teams...I seen a post of AYHUSKY or whatever their name is and couldn't agree more, it's nice to see the poll recognize teams that need to be recognized---BYU, Purdue, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Arizona and drop the teams that needed to be dropped. Kansas put a wrench in things when they lost to lipscomb then beat Creighton a team that beat Lipscomb LOL, whatever, the poll really doesn't matter right now as we all know, but teams are playing for high RPI's and Stanford is cruising. I want to see how well they play against a team that has the potential to man handle them if they play their card right. PSU vs. Stanford will be a test and the right of earning the number 1 spot in the poll, but come November / December, the poll is about 5% to nothing. I believe PSU is very talented and will play well and possibly earn a spot back in the final four, but they aren't dominating, nobody is right now...teams that have potential to be dominating in the end in my opinion:
PSU USC Washington Purdue BYU Texas Stanford Florida Wisconsin (maybe)
So enjoy the match ups and quit bitching about number 1 this and number 1 that and Texas needs to be 5th at best and PSU wins it all and Stanford rocks the nation....please.....we all know what happened when all the PAC 12 top teams lost to nothing but unranked teams midseason. Anything can happen this year, enjoy it. Good luck to all teams.
|
|
|
Post by texasnewbie on Sept 2, 2014 10:11:34 GMT -5
John Cook voted his team 12th. Does that mean he's twice as classy as Russ Rose? It means he didn't watch the same team I did against Stanford. HAHAHAHAHA! I agree, Nebraska needs to be in the low teens at best. Sorry but they looked like a bunch of kids that play good ball individually, almost like they put together a quick team to play against Stanford. LOL I hope they better themselves or it will be a long season of losses for them.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Sept 2, 2014 10:15:33 GMT -5
When you vote your team the actual number that you are ultimately ranked by the other coaches, I would say its probably fairly close to accurate. Nebraska didn't play well for sure, but Stanford is going to make a lot of teams look bad. Stanford isn't Notre Dame, or Louisville good sir. How funny. Nebraska would have lost to Louisville if they played the way they did against Stanford. Do you think Louisville is better than FSU?
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Sept 2, 2014 10:16:50 GMT -5
It means he didn't watch the same team I did against Stanford. HAHAHAHAHA! I agree, Nebraska needs to be in the low teens at best. Sorry but they looked like a bunch of kids that play good ball individually, almost like they put together a quick team to play against Stanford. LOL I hope they better themselves or it will be a long season of losses for them. and what in the hell is the difference between 12 and "low teens" ?
|
|
|
Post by texasnewbie on Sept 2, 2014 10:20:12 GMT -5
HAHAHAHAHA! I agree, Nebraska needs to be in the low teens at best. Sorry but they looked like a bunch of kids that play good ball individually, almost like they put together a quick team to play against Stanford. LOL I hope they better themselves or it will be a long season of losses for them. and what in the hell is the difference between 12 and "low teens" ? by the look of it not really much-- maybe I should of just said that Nebraska needs to get their %*$# together because they will get bounced in the B1G and at best make a regional...and 12 also is not a "teen" more like nineTEEN
|
|
|
Post by texasnewbie on Sept 2, 2014 10:22:44 GMT -5
If anyone watched FSU early on, are they the same as the team from 2011? Final four in San Antonio but it was sort of laughed at with their presence, are they the same this year or can they compete by the end of the season for a title?
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Sept 2, 2014 10:26:14 GMT -5
and what in the hell is the difference between 12 and "low teens" ? by the look of it not really much-- maybe I should of just said that Nebraska needs to get their %*$# together because they will get bounced in the B1G and at best make a regional...and 12 also is not a "teen" more like nineTEEN "nineteen" isn't low teens Einstein. Nebraska didn't play very well for sure, but before you have them bottoming out in Big, remember that nobody in the Big has played two top ten teams to this point. Lots of Big Ten teams would have been 0-2 this weekend.
|
|
|
Post by texasnewbie on Sept 2, 2014 10:43:32 GMT -5
by the look of it not really much-- maybe I should of just said that Nebraska needs to get their %*$# together because they will get bounced in the B1G and at best make a regional...and 12 also is not a "teen" more like nineTEEN "nineteen" isn't low teens Einstein. Nebraska didn't play very well for sure, but before you have them bottoming out in Big, remember that nobody in the Big has played two top ten teams to this point. Lots of Big Ten teams would have been 0-2 this weekend. Very true Columbus! Also, I'm not arguing with you either so you can chill out! Pull panties out and un-wad them please. I'm no Einstein and didn't take one to see how bad Nebraska played this weekend and how well Stanford did, same for ISU. Am I saying they will be horrible all season, no, just calling out what was seen this weekend, I hope Nebraska will be the team they've always been able to become in past seasons but this weekend, they are low teens at best.
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Sept 2, 2014 10:51:15 GMT -5
by the look of it not really much-- maybe I should of just said that Nebraska needs to get their %*$# together because they will get bounced in the B1G and at best make a regional...and 12 also is not a "teen" more like nineTEEN "nineteen" isn't low teens Einstein. Nebraska didn't play very well for sure, but before you have them bottoming out in Big, remember that nobody in the Big has played two top ten teams to this point. Lots of Big Ten teams would have been 0-2 this weekend. Is this the same dorothy that was so vehemently against name-calling when directed his way or has someone hacked your account? Should we expect nude selfies coming from dorothy shortly? And before I have to explain a social reference to those who have no social aptitude or awareness, google celeb selfie hacked accounts, or something to that effect.
|
|
|
Post by volleyvolleyfan on Sept 2, 2014 10:51:11 GMT -5
If anyone watched FSU early on, are they the same as the team from 2011? Final four in San Antonio but it was sort of laughed at with their presence, are they the same this year or can they compete by the end of the season for a title? What does that mean? "laughed at with their presence"
|
|
|
Post by lionsfan on Sept 2, 2014 10:54:03 GMT -5
When discussing the poll, "low" and "high" should be taken in context of the poll. Would you say "No. 1" is a low ranking because 1 is a low number? Is "No. 25" a high ranking? When texasnewbie wrote "low teens", I took that to mean 17-18-19 as taken in the context of the poll (not saying I necessarily agree with the idea, just defending the language...carry on!)
|
|