T1B

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/footba ... /polls/ap/

Nice to have brand recognition - Michigan still in there with one loss and struggling to beat Air Force....


others receiving votes: Louisiana Monroe

Jsc810 wrote:La Monroe should have more votes, considering it beat a top 10 team.

Look at it this way. They beat an overrated team that had no business being in the top 25.
The SEC bump only counts until you start losing (OOC) games.

The Seer wrote:Nice to have brand recognition - Michigan still in there with one loss and struggling to beat Air Force....

Won't argue with you but it's still too early for polls...

Papa Willie wrote:Still lol'ing at the Gayzorbacks. Don't kid yourself - the Warhawks have fucked up a LOT of point spreads over the years, but I didn't expect THIS!

Props to UCLA. I always liked Jr., but I always thought his style was much better suited for college. Starting to look that way...

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Remember, this is UCLA.

oh wow, another year of the polls have no merit but i'm going to spend all my time analyzing and bitching about them anyhow.

who gives a fuck if lsu is #2 all year and sc #3? won't be the case after the lsu/bama game.

And unless USC kicks things up at least a couple of notches in terms of execution and intensity it won't matter anyway because they're going to lose at some point, quite possibly this week in Palo Alto. So far, USC really hasn't looked that great. No one has had an answer for Woods and Lee so they're scoring their fair share, but the defense is playing far too softly with this 'keep everything in front of you/bend but don't break' nonsense, and the offensive line has looked little better than average.

Depending on how badly their best O-lineman, center Khalid Holmes, injured his ankle in the Syracuse game, that O-line may be in a world of hurt.

We're only two games in and the widespread speculation is that Kiffin has basically been sandbagging, but the team that played Hawaii and Syracuse is not a national title-worthy squad. They still have a long way to go.

Mikey wrote: Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Remember, this is UCLA.

Your post-Harbaugh reality will hit home this weekend and beyond....

Our respective programs are going in opposite directions so laugh it up.

The Seer wrote:

Mikey wrote: Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Remember, this is UCLA.

Your post-Harbaugh reality will hit home this weekend and beyond....

Our respective programs are going in opposite directions so laugh it up.

You may be right but they'll both have to move a long way before they pass each other.

Mikey wrote: You may be right but they'll both have to move a long way before they pass each other.

Well...maybe not. As recently as 2009 your dynastic record was 8-5. Prior to that you don't want to even mention.

Your actual "dynasty" lasted two years with a 12-1 in 2010 and an 11-2 in 2011.

UCLA is (45-34-3) against Stanford

Average score: UCLA 21.5 - Stanford 19.7

Per decade
W L T PFPG PAPG
2010's 0 2 0 9.5 40.0
2000's 7 3 0 27.3 20.0
1990's 6 4 0 25.7 25.4
1980's 6 4 0 30.3 19.7
1970's 5 4 1 26.4 20.4
1960's 8 1 1 19.1 12.0
1950's 6 4 0 25.9 14.3
1940's 4 3 0 18.3 16.1
1930's 3 6 1 5.9 11.9
1920's 0 3 0 2.3 61.3

Don't see a whole bunch of catching up to do....

Who cares?

Mikey wrote: Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Remember, this is UCLA.

Establishing your perch is not that lofty....successfully apparently.... :P