MWC Rankings Week 1

1. TCU

2. BYU

3. UU

4. AFA

5-9. Who cares

But for those who do

5. SDSU

6. UW

7. UNLV

8. CSU

9. UNM



The big three all got off to good starts this season with home wins over BCS teams, two of which were ranked. TCU was strong against OSU in a virtual home game, but could still only muster 45k fans to Jerry's world, where BYU at least played before 75k same time last season. BYU contained Washington yesterday and let them self destruct at times in making Locker beat them single handledly. He didn't. And :utard: nearly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory against what looked like a very overrated Pitt team.



AFA struggled for a half and then dominated in the next to beat a very bad FCS team. As BYU and AFA play Saturday, will AFA be ready for a BYU team that played a real game yesterday instead of a glorified scrimmage? Probably not. SDSU and UW both beat FCS teams while UW struggled against a good looking SUU program. Perhaps Thompson should invite SUU in an attempt to keep the Utah market?!!! :P



UNLV selfdestructed at home against a very strong Wisconsin team and CSU and UNM demonstrated that they probably don't belong in FBS and should consider dropping down to FCS competition. It looks like the bottom feeders of the WAC might just be a step up for BYU next season. :lol:



Your turn

I was going to retort that your blue goggles must be awfully thick to put BYU ahead of Utah until I stopped and thought about it. My gut still tells me Utah's a little better than we are this year, but if we're judging based on comparative wins, I have no idea how good/bad Washington OR Pitt is this year. I think of Pitt as being a stronger win, but almost every opinion I had of the two teams was influenced by preseason hype. (I knew D. Lewis was good, but just assumed his O-line would be up to snuff. Likewise, I thought Locker was/would continue to be good, but the more I think about that one the more I start to wonder why I EVER thought Locker was that good, media speculation aside.)

I viewed Washington's trio of Locker, Kearse, and Polk to be stronger than Lewis and the rest of Pitts' offense. And BYU shut down Washington in the second half while Pitt got stronger in the 4th quarter. Granted, Sarkisian made some questionable calls that could have led to a tied game in regulation, but if you listened to his post game comments, he didn't have any confidence in his defense stopping BYU and thought his only chance to win was to go for it on 4th down when a field goal would have cut the lead in half. Then again, perhaps BYU would have blocked the field goal attempt.



One reason I have BYU ahead of UU is BYU beat UU last season and until BYU loses, they are the better team. Thank heavens for blue goggles. ;)

Pitt looks like the more impressive win according to extremely inaccurate pre-season rankings that mean nothing.



I watched both games, and I didn't see much difference between Pitt/Washington, other than that UW has a much better QB (Pitt's is awful, but just a freshman), and a better running game. Washington will do well in the Pac-10, Pitt will be lucky to finish in the top 3 of a very weak Big East.



Also, Yewtah had several mistakes and turnovers in their game, while a young BYU team did not.



Week 1 Advantage: BYU

Dcr36 wrote:
I was going to retort that your blue goggles must be awfully thick to put BYU ahead of Utah until I stopped and thought about it. My gut still tells me Utah's a little better than we are this year, but if we're judging based on comparative wins, I have no idea how good/bad Washington OR Pitt is this year. I think of Pitt as being a stronger win, but almost every opinion I had of the two teams was influenced by preseason hype. (I knew D. Lewis was good, but just assumed his O-line would be up to snuff. Likewise, I thought Locker was/would continue to be good, but the more I think about that one the more I start to wonder why I EVER thought Locker was that good, media speculation aside.)

The frUtes win will look better at the end of the year because UW will be middle to bottom of the pac 10 while Pitt will probably win the crappy Big Least and be ranked, while UW won't even come close to smelling the top 25. Perhaps if we could get UW playing in the big least their record would be a lot better.

I saw that utah scout site rankings and laughed. Actually it wasn't the rankings so much as the comments next to them.



"1. TCU (1-0)- The first test has been passed in Oregon State. Didn't play that well and still beat the team I think will win the Pac 10.

2. Utah (1-0)- Beating a top 15 team to open the season is always impressive. Nice start to what could be a magical season.

3. Air Force (1-0)- 437 yards rushing will get the job done. Let's see how they do next week against BYU.

4. BYU (1-0)- They beat a Washington team that will struggle to make a bowl game. Don't put too much weight on it. Still, Riley Nelson and Jake Heaps were both better than expected.

5. San Diego State (1-0)- Doesn't matter who it's against, a 47-0 shutout is always impressive. Should jump to the 4 spot next week after either Air Force or BYU fall.

.

.

."



I love how he talks about Pitt as if they were this formidable opponent and UW will struggle to make a bowl game. I watched both games and UW was by far the better (losing) team. Pitt was way overranked, probably due to the media's need to give someone from the Big East a high ranking, whether they deserved it or not. UW will not only play in a better conference than Pitt, but they will have a better record than Pitt at the end of the year too. If it weren't for a few special teams miscues, and four or five catchable drops by their supposedly amazing receiver, Kearse, UW could have walked out of LES with a win. But BYU's receivers had many a drop too that should have been caught too so that's really a wash. The bottom line is, Pitt isn't going to do a thing with that QB. Locker certainly wasn't Heismanesque, but he wasn't awful either and was victimized by poor special teams play and bad performances by his receivers (mainly Kearse).