Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 2/24/2025 at 7:23 PM, TrashMaster G said:

Akina is seriously back?

Some folks around here 'bout to lose their damn minds.

Which is dumb. The dude has put 41 DBs in the league, has multipke Thorpe winners. He's still on the road recruiting. He has so much knowledge and he's a god teacher. 

People who think this is some kind of nostalgic offer is dumb. The guy still has it and will help these kids learn how to play man, yell at them for using bad technique and will make our safety room much better. His age means nothing. People need atop with the "meh" hire. Dude is a legend for good reason. Let the man do his job and give knowledge to help these kids get to the league. 

All of his former players are praising the hire. He'll be a good one. People still not trusting his hires needs to chill. I can't believe they still don't trust his hires. It's baffling. 

Huff Daddy will tell these kids what he's done and theylll show up ready to wreck shit. He and Orphey will absolutely crush it. 

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Funk Doctor Spock said:

Which is dumb. The dude has put 41 DBs in the league, has multipke Thorpe winners. He's still on the road recruiting. He has so much knowledge and he's a god teacher. 

People who think this is some kind of nostalgic offer is dumb. The guy still has it and will help these kids learn how to play man, yell at them for using bad technique and will make our safety room much better. His age means nothing. People need atop with the "meh" hire. Dude is a legend for good reason. Let the man do his job and give knowledge to help these kids get to the league. 

All of his former players are praising the hire. He'll be a good one. People still not trusting his hires needs to chill. I can't believe they still don't trust his hires. It's baffling. 

Huff Daddy will tell these kids what he's done and theylll show up ready to wreck shit. He and Orphey will absolutely crush it. 

It’s possible TrashMasterG meant this in a good way.   

  • Like 1
Posted

Bill Connelly came out with his initial SP+ rankings for 2025. Texas is 7th. Full list below along with how he calculates the rankings.

 

Spoiler

I base SP+ projections on three primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:

1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. Combine last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on current returning production numbers, and you're pretty far down the projections road. In fact, this factor accounts for more than 60% of the overall projection at this point.

2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by both the past few years of recruiting rankings and the quality of incoming transfers, and it accounts for about 14% of the current projection.

3. Recent history. Using a chunk of information from previous seasons gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This factor accounts for a little more than 20% of the projection, and it only focuses on what happened within the last three seasons. I used to use a weighted history stretching back five years, but that's a less effective approach now with the changes in the sport.

I will update these numbers in May and August after there have been further transfers and roster changes, and my annual preview series will begin after the May numbers are posted. But for now, let's establish the 2025 hierarchy.

A reminder on SP+: It's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking. Along those same lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the season. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather to date.

In addition to the rankings of every FBS team (overall, offense, defense and special teams), we'll look at conference breakdowns and how SP+ matches up with the eyeball test in terms of which teams seem to be overrated and which could be underrated at this early stage.

Initial 2025 SP+ rankings

Here are the full rankings, now featuring 136 teams with the addition of Delaware and Missouri State.

 

Team SP+ Off. SP+ Def. SP+ ST SP+
1. Ohio St. 28.0 38.6 (6) 10.6 (2) 0.3 (11)
2. Alabama 26.1 39.1 (5) 13.0 (5) 0.2 (20)
3. Penn St. 25.3 39.1 (4) 13.8 (7) 0.1 (58)
4. Georgia 24.5 37.9 (7) 13.3 (6) 0.6 (1)
5. Notre Dame 23.4 37.3 (10) 13.9 (8) -0.2 (106)
6. Oregon 22.6 39.5 (3) 16.9 (15) 0.5 (3)
7. Texas 21.9 32.0 (28) 10.1 (1) -0.5 (135)
8. Tennessee 21.3 33.6 (22) 12.3 (4) 0.2 (21)
9. Ole Miss 20.2 34.5 (19) 14.3 (9) 0.3 (7)
10. LSU 19.5 39.7 (2) 20.2 (26) 0.1 (48)
11. Clemson 18.8 37.8 (8) 19.0 (21) -0.3 (133)
12. Texas A&M 18.5 35.7 (12) 17.1 (16) 0.2 (24)
13. Michigan 17.7 28.7 (51) 11.0 (3) 0.2 (22)
14. Miami 16.9 42.5 (1) 25.6 (49) 0.2 (19)
15. Missouri 15.7 32.0 (27) 16.3 (13) -0.1 (96)
16. S. Carolina 15.4 33.1 (24) 17.7 (18) 0.1 (50)
17. Florida 14.4 33.6 (23) 19.2 (22) 0.3 (8)
18. SMU 14.1 37.4 (9) 23.3 (38) 0.1 (40)
19. Kansas St. 13.7 34.4 (20) 20.8 (28) 0.2 (26)
20. Oklahoma 13.1 29.7 (43) 16.6 (14) 0.2 (31)
21. Iowa 12.5 27.5 (64) 15.0 (10) 0.3 (12)
22. Louisville 12.4 36.7 (11) 24.4 (45) -0.1 (97)
23. Auburn 12.1 29.9 (42) 17.8 (19) -0.1 (83)
24. Indiana 12.0 32.0 (29) 20.0 (24) 0.2 (29)
25. Illinois 11.2 30.5 (38) 19.3 (23) 0.2 (30)
26. TCU 10.5 34.6 (18) 24.1 (41) -0.1 (92)
27. BYU 10.1 31.6 (32) 21.5 (31) 0.3 (10)
28. Iowa St. 9.9 30.5 (39) 20.6 (27) -0.1 (87)
29. Arizona St. 9.8 31.3 (34) 21.5 (32) -0.6 (136)
30. USC 9.7 35.4 (14) 25.8 (52) 0.1 (63)
31. Boise St. 9.5 35.3 (15) 25.8 (53) -0.3 (132)
32. Utah 9.5 26.7 (70) 17.3 (17) 0.2 (36)
33. Texas Tech 8.7 35.5 (13) 26.8 (61) 0.2 (23)
34. Nebraska 8.2 24.5 (89) 16.3 (12) -0.2 (119)
35. Arkansas 8.2 31.9 (30) 23.7 (39) 0.2 (35)
36. Baylor 8.0 34.6 (17) 26.6 (58) 0.2 (38)
37. Minnesota 7.9 23.4 (98) 15.5 (11) 0.0 (64)
38. Washington 7.3 28.5 (54) 21.2 (29) -0.2 (121)
39. Duke 6.5 27.8 (62) 21.3 (30) 0.0 (66)
40. Kentucky 6.4 26.5 (73) 20.1 (25) 0.3 (14)
41. Wisconsin 6.1 25.1 (83) 19.0 (20) 0.0 (70)
42. Va. Tech 5.2 29.4 (49) 24.2 (43) 0.2 (37)
43. Rutgers 4.6 28.7 (50) 24.1 (42) 0.1 (52)
44. N. Carolina 4.6 31.4 (33) 26.8 (60) 0.0 (72)
45. NC State 4.5 31.6 (31) 27.1 (63) 0.1 (55)
46. Ga. Tech 4.5 32.0 (26) 27.5 (65) -0.1 (100)
47. JMU 4.0 29.7 (46) 25.7 (51) 0.1 (53)
48. Colorado 3.9 30.0 (41) 26.1 (54) -0.2 (114)
49. Kansas 3.9 32.5 (25) 28.6 (78) -0.1 (94)
50. Tulane 3.4 31.0 (35) 27.6 (66) 0.0 (77)
51. Florida St. 3.2 25.0 (85) 21.7 (33) 0.3 (13)
52. Memphis 2.8 35.2 (16) 32.3 (101) 0.1 (42)
53. Pittsburgh 2.7 29.7 (45) 27.0 (62) 0.2 (17)
54. Vanderbilt 1.8 27.4 (67) 25.7 (50) 0.3 (9)
55. Cincinnati 1.7 26.1 (76) 24.4 (44) -0.1 (88)
56. UCF 1.3 27.7 (63) 26.3 (56) 0.0 (81)
57. Syracuse 1.2 30.9 (36) 29.7 (84) -0.2 (101)
58. California 1.2 26.7 (71) 25.5 (48) 0.0 (82)
59. Liberty 1.1 27.8 (61) 26.7 (59) -0.2 (105)
60. Army 1.1 24.3 (93) 23.2 (35) 0.0 (75)
61. UTSA 0.7 34.0 (21) 33.2 (106) 0.2 (33)
62. S. Alabama 0.6 29.6 (47) 29.0 (79) 0.0 (69)
63. Navy 0.0 28.2 (58) 28.2 (69) -0.2 (113)
64. W. Virginia 0.0 28.5 (55) 28.5 (75) 0.2 (18)
65. Miss. St. 0.0 28.0 (59) 28.0 (67) 0.2 (27)
66. Arizona -0.1 27.4 (68) 27.5 (64) 0.2 (16)
67. Maryland -0.2 24.7 (87) 24.9 (47) 0.0 (68)
68. Boston College -0.3 26.3 (74) 26.6 (57) -0.2 (127)
69. UCLA -0.8 24.0 (94) 24.8 (46) 0.1 (54)
70. UNLV -1.1 28.3 (56) 29.4 (81) 0.4 (5)
71. Oregon St. -1.3 28.6 (52) 29.9 (85) 0.0 (67)
72. Ohio -1.8 24.3 (92) 26.1 (55) -0.3 (131)
73. Oklahoma St. -2.0 27.5 (65) 29.5 (82) 0.0 (78)
74. Louisiana -2.2 28.5 (53) 30.7 (87) 0.4 (6)
75. Toledo -2.2 26.2 (75) 28.4 (71) -0.1 (86)
76. Michigan St. -2.2 21.0 (107) 23.2 (37) 0.2 (32)
77. Troy -2.6 25.9 (78) 28.4 (73) -0.1 (84)
78. Houston -2.9 20.3 (111) 23.2 (36) -0.2 (120)
79. Texas St. -3.5 29.5 (48) 33.0 (104) 0.0 (79)
80. Ga. Southern -4.3 26.9 (69) 31.1 (91) 0.2 (15)
81. USF -4.3 29.7 (44) 34.0 (111) 0.2 (25)
82. Virginia -4.8 24.3 (91) 29.1 (80) 0.1 (56)
83. Wake Forest -5.2 25.2 (81) 30.5 (86) 0.1 (60)
84. Wash. St. -5.4 30.3 (40) 35.7 (117) -0.2 (110)
85. San Jose St. -5.7 25.7 (79) 31.4 (94) -0.2 (108)
86. Fresno St. -5.9 22.6 (101) 28.4 (74) -0.2 (102)
87. Northwestern -6.1 17.6 (122) 23.7 (40) -0.2 (103)
88. Stanford -6.2 25.4 (80) 31.6 (96) 0.2 (28)
89. E. Carolina -6.2 28.2 (57) 34.4 (114) 0.0 (65)
90. UConn -6.4 24.9 (86) 31.3 (92) 0.1 (61)
91. Marshall -6.5 24.6 (88) 31.1 (90) 0.1 (59)
92. N. Texas -6.7 30.5 (37) 37.3 (123) -0.1 (91)
93. App. St. -7.3 25.0 (84) 32.3 (100) -0.2 (112)
94. West. Kent. -7.6 20.7 (108) 28.3 (70) 0.6 (2)
95. Air Force -7.8 20.3 (110) 28.1 (68) -0.2 (125)
96. Buffalo -7.9 21.7 (102) 29.6 (83) 0.1 (49)
97. Old Dominion -8.3 23.2 (99) 31.5 (95) 0.0 (80)
98. Coastal Caro. -8.7 27.8 (60) 36.6 (121) 0.1 (43)
99. Miami-OH -9.0 14.2 (134) 23.2 (34) 0.4 (4)
100. Colorado St. -9.5 23.8 (96) 33.2 (107) -0.1 (89)
101. Bowling Green -9.9 23.2 (100) 33.0 (105) 0.0 (71)
102. J'ville St. -10.4 26.0 (77) 36.4 (120) -0.4 (134)
103. Wyoming -11.0 19.7 (115) 30.8 (88) 0.1 (46)
104. Delaware -11.1 21.4 (105) 32.5 (102) -0.2 (115)
105. Hawaii -11.9 20.0 (113) 31.9 (97) -0.2 (118)
106. Arkansas St. -12.1 27.4 (66) 39.5 (131) 0.1 (51)
107. La. Tech -12.7 15.7 (130) 28.4 (72) -0.1 (98)
108. FAU -12.7 21.6 (103) 34.3 (113) -0.2 (107)
109. San Diego St. -12.9 15.6 (131) 28.5 (76) -0.1 (93)
110. East. Mich. -13.4 19.9 (114) 33.4 (108) 0.1 (57)
111. Sam Houston -13.5 19.4 (117) 32.9 (103) -0.2 (129)
112. UAB -13.6 25.2 (82) 38.7 (129) 0.1 (47)
113. Georgia St. -13.7 23.4 (97) 37.2 (122) -0.2 (109)
114. N. Illinois -14.1 14.4 (133) 28.5 (77) -0.2 (124)
115. UL-Monroe -14.4 17.0 (127) 31.4 (93) -0.1 (95)
116. Purdue -14.6 17.7 (121) 32.3 (99) -0.2 (117)
117. Rice -14.8 16.1 (129) 30.9 (89) -0.2 (104)
118. New Mex. St. -14.9 21.3 (106) 36.2 (119) 0.2 (34)
119. FIU -15.2 18.3 (120) 33.4 (110) -0.1 (99)
120. Utah St. -15.2 24.4 (90) 39.6 (132) 0.0 (76)
121. Cent. Mich. -15.9 17.5 (124) 33.4 (109) 0.1 (44)
122. West. Mich. -16.4 19.1 (118) 35.5 (116) 0.1 (39)
123. Missouri St. -16.6 26.6 (72) 43.2 (134) -0.2 (115)
124. UTEP -16.6 17.5 (123) 34.1 (112) -0.2 (130)
125. Tulsa -17.2 21.5 (104) 38.6 (126) -0.2 (111)
126. Middle Tenn. -17.5 17.2 (125) 34.7 (115) -0.1 (90)
127. Temple -18.4 19.6 (116) 38.0 (125) 0.1 (62)
128. So. Miss -18.6 20.1 (112) 38.7 (127) -0.1 (85)
129. Akron -18.9 17.2 (126) 36.1 (118) 0.1 (41)
130. Kennesaw St. -19.7 12.3 (136) 32.0 (98) 0.0 (73)
131. Nevada -20.4 18.3 (119) 38.7 (128) -0.2 (126)
132. New Mexico -21.5 23.9 (95) 45.4 (136) -0.2 (123)
133. Ball St. -22.3 16.9 (128) 39.1 (130) 0.0 (74)
134. Charlotte -22.8 14.8 (132) 37.6 (124) 0.1 (45)
135. UMass -24.0 20.3 (109) 44.4 (135) -0.2 (128)
136. Kent St. -27.2 13.2 (135) 40.4 (133) -0.2 (122)
 
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Bill Connelly came out with his initial SP+ rankings for 2025. Texas is 7th. Full list below along with how he calculates the rankings.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I base SP+ projections on three primary factors, weighted by their predictiveness:

1. Returning production. The returning production numbers are based on rosters I have updated as much as possible to account for transfers and attrition. Combine last year's SP+ ratings and adjustments based on current returning production numbers, and you're pretty far down the projections road. In fact, this factor accounts for more than 60% of the overall projection at this point.

2. Recent recruiting. This piece informs us of the caliber of a team's potential replacements (and/or new stars) in the lineup. It is determined by both the past few years of recruiting rankings and the quality of incoming transfers, and it accounts for about 14% of the current projection.

3. Recent history. Using a chunk of information from previous seasons gives us a good measure of overall program health. It stands to reason that a team that has played well for one year is less likely to duplicate that effort than a team that has been good for years on end (and vice versa), right? This factor accounts for a little more than 20% of the projection, and it only focuses on what happened within the last three seasons. I used to use a weighted history stretching back five years, but that's a less effective approach now with the changes in the sport.

I will update these numbers in May and August after there have been further transfers and roster changes, and my annual preview series will begin after the May numbers are posted. But for now, let's establish the 2025 hierarchy.

A reminder on SP+: It's a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of college football efficiency. It is a predictive measure of the most sustainable and predictable aspects of football, not a résumé ranking. Along those same lines, these projections aren't intended to be a guess at what the AP Top 25 will look like at the end of the season. These are simply early offseason power rankings based on the information we have been able to gather to date.

In addition to the rankings of every FBS team (overall, offense, defense and special teams), we'll look at conference breakdowns and how SP+ matches up with the eyeball test in terms of which teams seem to be overrated and which could be underrated at this early stage.

Initial 2025 SP+ rankings

Here are the full rankings, now featuring 136 teams with the addition of Delaware and Missouri State.

 

Team SP+ Off. SP+ Def. SP+ ST SP+
1. Ohio St. 28.0 38.6 (6) 10.6 (2) 0.3 (11)
2. Alabama 26.1 39.1 (5) 13.0 (5) 0.2 (20)
3. Penn St. 25.3 39.1 (4) 13.8 (7) 0.1 (58)
4. Georgia 24.5 37.9 (7) 13.3 (6) 0.6 (1)
5. Notre Dame 23.4 37.3 (10) 13.9 (8) -0.2 (106)
6. Oregon 22.6 39.5 (3) 16.9 (15) 0.5 (3)
7. Texas 21.9 32.0 (28) 10.1 (1) -0.5 (135)
8. Tennessee 21.3 33.6 (22) 12.3 (4) 0.2 (21)
9. Ole Miss 20.2 34.5 (19) 14.3 (9) 0.3 (7)
10. LSU 19.5 39.7 (2) 20.2 (26) 0.1 (48)
11. Clemson 18.8 37.8 (8) 19.0 (21) -0.3 (133)
12. Texas A&M 18.5 35.7 (12) 17.1 (16) 0.2 (24)
13. Michigan 17.7 28.7 (51) 11.0 (3) 0.2 (22)
14. Miami 16.9 42.5 (1) 25.6 (49) 0.2 (19)
15. Missouri 15.7 32.0 (27) 16.3 (13) -0.1 (96)
16. S. Carolina 15.4 33.1 (24) 17.7 (18) 0.1 (50)
17. Florida 14.4 33.6 (23) 19.2 (22) 0.3 (8)
18. SMU 14.1 37.4 (9) 23.3 (38) 0.1 (40)
19. Kansas St. 13.7 34.4 (20) 20.8 (28) 0.2 (26)
20. Oklahoma 13.1 29.7 (43) 16.6 (14) 0.2 (31)
21. Iowa 12.5 27.5 (64) 15.0 (10) 0.3 (12)
22. Louisville 12.4 36.7 (11) 24.4 (45) -0.1 (97)
23. Auburn 12.1 29.9 (42) 17.8 (19) -0.1 (83)
24. Indiana 12.0 32.0 (29) 20.0 (24) 0.2 (29)
25. Illinois 11.2 30.5 (38) 19.3 (23) 0.2 (30)
26. TCU 10.5 34.6 (18) 24.1 (41) -0.1 (92)
27. BYU 10.1 31.6 (32) 21.5 (31) 0.3 (10)
28. Iowa St. 9.9 30.5 (39) 20.6 (27) -0.1 (87)
29. Arizona St. 9.8 31.3 (34) 21.5 (32) -0.6 (136)
30. USC 9.7 35.4 (14) 25.8 (52) 0.1 (63)
31. Boise St. 9.5 35.3 (15) 25.8 (53) -0.3 (132)
32. Utah 9.5 26.7 (70) 17.3 (17) 0.2 (36)
33. Texas Tech 8.7 35.5 (13) 26.8 (61) 0.2 (23)
34. Nebraska 8.2 24.5 (89) 16.3 (12) -0.2 (119)
35. Arkansas 8.2 31.9 (30) 23.7 (39) 0.2 (35)
36. Baylor 8.0 34.6 (17) 26.6 (58) 0.2 (38)
37. Minnesota 7.9 23.4 (98) 15.5 (11) 0.0 (64)
38. Washington 7.3 28.5 (54) 21.2 (29) -0.2 (121)
39. Duke 6.5 27.8 (62) 21.3 (30) 0.0 (66)
40. Kentucky 6.4 26.5 (73) 20.1 (25) 0.3 (14)
41. Wisconsin 6.1 25.1 (83) 19.0 (20) 0.0 (70)
42. Va. Tech 5.2 29.4 (49) 24.2 (43) 0.2 (37)
43. Rutgers 4.6 28.7 (50) 24.1 (42) 0.1 (52)
44. N. Carolina 4.6 31.4 (33) 26.8 (60) 0.0 (72)
45. NC State 4.5 31.6 (31) 27.1 (63) 0.1 (55)
46. Ga. Tech 4.5 32.0 (26) 27.5 (65) -0.1 (100)
47. JMU 4.0 29.7 (46) 25.7 (51) 0.1 (53)
48. Colorado 3.9 30.0 (41) 26.1 (54) -0.2 (114)
49. Kansas 3.9 32.5 (25) 28.6 (78) -0.1 (94)
50. Tulane 3.4 31.0 (35) 27.6 (66) 0.0 (77)
51. Florida St. 3.2 25.0 (85) 21.7 (33) 0.3 (13)
52. Memphis 2.8 35.2 (16) 32.3 (101) 0.1 (42)
53. Pittsburgh 2.7 29.7 (45) 27.0 (62) 0.2 (17)
54. Vanderbilt 1.8 27.4 (67) 25.7 (50) 0.3 (9)
55. Cincinnati 1.7 26.1 (76) 24.4 (44) -0.1 (88)
56. UCF 1.3 27.7 (63) 26.3 (56) 0.0 (81)
57. Syracuse 1.2 30.9 (36) 29.7 (84) -0.2 (101)
58. California 1.2 26.7 (71) 25.5 (48) 0.0 (82)
59. Liberty 1.1 27.8 (61) 26.7 (59) -0.2 (105)
60. Army 1.1 24.3 (93) 23.2 (35) 0.0 (75)
61. UTSA 0.7 34.0 (21) 33.2 (106) 0.2 (33)
62. S. Alabama 0.6 29.6 (47) 29.0 (79) 0.0 (69)
63. Navy 0.0 28.2 (58) 28.2 (69) -0.2 (113)
64. W. Virginia 0.0 28.5 (55) 28.5 (75) 0.2 (18)
65. Miss. St. 0.0 28.0 (59) 28.0 (67) 0.2 (27)
66. Arizona -0.1 27.4 (68) 27.5 (64) 0.2 (16)
67. Maryland -0.2 24.7 (87) 24.9 (47) 0.0 (68)
68. Boston College -0.3 26.3 (74) 26.6 (57) -0.2 (127)
69. UCLA -0.8 24.0 (94) 24.8 (46) 0.1 (54)
70. UNLV -1.1 28.3 (56) 29.4 (81) 0.4 (5)
71. Oregon St. -1.3 28.6 (52) 29.9 (85) 0.0 (67)
72. Ohio -1.8 24.3 (92) 26.1 (55) -0.3 (131)
73. Oklahoma St. -2.0 27.5 (65) 29.5 (82) 0.0 (78)
74. Louisiana -2.2 28.5 (53) 30.7 (87) 0.4 (6)
75. Toledo -2.2 26.2 (75) 28.4 (71) -0.1 (86)
76. Michigan St. -2.2 21.0 (107) 23.2 (37) 0.2 (32)
77. Troy -2.6 25.9 (78) 28.4 (73) -0.1 (84)
78. Houston -2.9 20.3 (111) 23.2 (36) -0.2 (120)
79. Texas St. -3.5 29.5 (48) 33.0 (104) 0.0 (79)
80. Ga. Southern -4.3 26.9 (69) 31.1 (91) 0.2 (15)
81. USF -4.3 29.7 (44) 34.0 (111) 0.2 (25)
82. Virginia -4.8 24.3 (91) 29.1 (80) 0.1 (56)
83. Wake Forest -5.2 25.2 (81) 30.5 (86) 0.1 (60)
84. Wash. St. -5.4 30.3 (40) 35.7 (117) -0.2 (110)
85. San Jose St. -5.7 25.7 (79) 31.4 (94) -0.2 (108)
86. Fresno St. -5.9 22.6 (101) 28.4 (74) -0.2 (102)
87. Northwestern -6.1 17.6 (122) 23.7 (40) -0.2 (103)
88. Stanford -6.2 25.4 (80) 31.6 (96) 0.2 (28)
89. E. Carolina -6.2 28.2 (57) 34.4 (114) 0.0 (65)
90. UConn -6.4 24.9 (86) 31.3 (92) 0.1 (61)
91. Marshall -6.5 24.6 (88) 31.1 (90) 0.1 (59)
92. N. Texas -6.7 30.5 (37) 37.3 (123) -0.1 (91)
93. App. St. -7.3 25.0 (84) 32.3 (100) -0.2 (112)
94. West. Kent. -7.6 20.7 (108) 28.3 (70) 0.6 (2)
95. Air Force -7.8 20.3 (110) 28.1 (68) -0.2 (125)
96. Buffalo -7.9 21.7 (102) 29.6 (83) 0.1 (49)
97. Old Dominion -8.3 23.2 (99) 31.5 (95) 0.0 (80)
98. Coastal Caro. -8.7 27.8 (60) 36.6 (121) 0.1 (43)
99. Miami-OH -9.0 14.2 (134) 23.2 (34) 0.4 (4)
100. Colorado St. -9.5 23.8 (96) 33.2 (107) -0.1 (89)
101. Bowling Green -9.9 23.2 (100) 33.0 (105) 0.0 (71)
102. J'ville St. -10.4 26.0 (77) 36.4 (120) -0.4 (134)
103. Wyoming -11.0 19.7 (115) 30.8 (88) 0.1 (46)
104. Delaware -11.1 21.4 (105) 32.5 (102) -0.2 (115)
105. Hawaii -11.9 20.0 (113) 31.9 (97) -0.2 (118)
106. Arkansas St. -12.1 27.4 (66) 39.5 (131) 0.1 (51)
107. La. Tech -12.7 15.7 (130) 28.4 (72) -0.1 (98)
108. FAU -12.7 21.6 (103) 34.3 (113) -0.2 (107)
109. San Diego St. -12.9 15.6 (131) 28.5 (76) -0.1 (93)
110. East. Mich. -13.4 19.9 (114) 33.4 (108) 0.1 (57)
111. Sam Houston -13.5 19.4 (117) 32.9 (103) -0.2 (129)
112. UAB -13.6 25.2 (82) 38.7 (129) 0.1 (47)
113. Georgia St. -13.7 23.4 (97) 37.2 (122) -0.2 (109)
114. N. Illinois -14.1 14.4 (133) 28.5 (77) -0.2 (124)
115. UL-Monroe -14.4 17.0 (127) 31.4 (93) -0.1 (95)
116. Purdue -14.6 17.7 (121) 32.3 (99) -0.2 (117)
117. Rice -14.8 16.1 (129) 30.9 (89) -0.2 (104)
118. New Mex. St. -14.9 21.3 (106) 36.2 (119) 0.2 (34)
119. FIU -15.2 18.3 (120) 33.4 (110) -0.1 (99)
120. Utah St. -15.2 24.4 (90) 39.6 (132) 0.0 (76)
121. Cent. Mich. -15.9 17.5 (124) 33.4 (109) 0.1 (44)
122. West. Mich. -16.4 19.1 (118) 35.5 (116) 0.1 (39)
123. Missouri St. -16.6 26.6 (72) 43.2 (134) -0.2 (115)
124. UTEP -16.6 17.5 (123) 34.1 (112) -0.2 (130)
125. Tulsa -17.2 21.5 (104) 38.6 (126) -0.2 (111)
126. Middle Tenn. -17.5 17.2 (125) 34.7 (115) -0.1 (90)
127. Temple -18.4 19.6 (116) 38.0 (125) 0.1 (62)
128. So. Miss -18.6 20.1 (112) 38.7 (127) -0.1 (85)
129. Akron -18.9 17.2 (126) 36.1 (118) 0.1 (41)
130. Kennesaw St. -19.7 12.3 (136) 32.0 (98) 0.0 (73)
131. Nevada -20.4 18.3 (119) 38.7 (128) -0.2 (126)
132. New Mexico -21.5 23.9 (95) 45.4 (136) -0.2 (123)
133. Ball St. -22.3 16.9 (128) 39.1 (130) 0.0 (74)
134. Charlotte -22.8 14.8 (132) 37.6 (124) 0.1 (45)
135. UMass -24.0 20.3 (109) 44.4 (135) -0.2 (128)
136. Kent St. -27.2 13.2 (135) 40.4 (133) -0.2 (122)
 

I've skimmed his stuff this time around. It looks like a lot of pseudo-math lumped in with his opinions in an effort to look credible. I get it, but anyone putting weight on his numbers early in the season is messing with fool's gold.

Posted

Those ST rankings are abysmal. Probably doesn’t improve the final outcome of last season, but we’d be reigning SEC champs if they were even average. 
 

Can’t let that be an issue again this year. 

  • Like 1
Posted
51 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Ryan Niblett, Running Back to Star

Say what? My jaw dropped, but it makes sense. We’ve reported he wants to stay at running back because he can carve out a role there. It’s clear he’s a selfless player and just wants to get on the field. The staff wants to see the former slot receiver’s speed (fastest guy on the team) back in the slot, just on the opposite side of the ball.

Niblett has all the traits for the position, but he will need time. We’re not saying this move, or any of these moves, is permanent, but as of now, Ryan Niblett is a defensive player.

unfortunate.  we're gonna talk about him like we talk about d.j. monroe.

Posted
I've skimmed his stuff this time around. It looks like a lot of pseudo-math lumped in with his opinions in an effort to look credible. I get it, but anyone putting weight on his numbers early in the season is messing with fool's gold.

Yes - and too much to scan over on a phone.

Hook’em!!!
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

Why tf would they move Trey Moore to LB? He's a baller DE and we have Hill, Lefau, and Spence at LB.

He played LB last year as a hybrid edge/LB. My guess is they're going to highlight his versatility in being multiple and improve his draft prospects by doing so where as if he stayed at EDGE he's undersized.

Edited by BurntOrange&White
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
30 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

Why tf would they move Trey Moore to LB? He's a baller DE and we have Hill, Lefau, and Spence at LB.

Edge is crowded, LB room not so much. Plus it allows scheme versatility. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
37 minutes ago, Tex-19 said:

Why tf would they move Trey Moore to LB? He's a baller DE and we have Hill, Lefau, and Spence at LB.

You will see Moore at both DE and LB this season. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Tex-19 said:

Why tf would they move Trey Moore to LB? He's a baller DE and we have Hill, Lefau, and Spence at LB.

 Played some off-ball last year. Collins is the best pass rusher. He is going to be the Buck. It would be hard to start Moore and Collins on the EDGEs in the SEC. I see this as a way to increase the versatility with Moore and help his NFL prospects. I would not worry much about this. If it works out, awesome. If it does not, he is going to split reps with Collins in base downs and be on the field in pass rush situations. 

Posted (edited)

Yeah it may let them play him more if they can move him to lb on some of the non-obvious passing downs.

Edited by kevwun
Posted

Coach can demand review (maybe only for targeting) any time. If review fails, Delay of Game penalty assessed. Subsequent failures add additional five yards to penalty distance rather than disallowing reviews.

Posted
3 hours ago, Codaxx said:

 Played some off-ball last year. Collins is the best pass rusher. He is going to be the Buck. It would be hard to start Moore and Collins on the EDGEs in the SEC. I see this as a way to increase the versatility with Moore and help his NFL prospects. I would not worry much about this. If it works out, awesome. If it does not, he is going to split reps with Collins in base downs and be on the field in pass rush situations. 

I know you just flipped the names, but it’s funny you got Colin Simmons’ name wrong so many times in such a short amount of time 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
 Played some off-ball last year. Collins is the best pass rusher. He is going to be the Buck. It would be hard to start Moore and Collins on the EDGEs in the SEC. I see this as a way to increase the versatility with Moore and help his NFL prospects. I would not worry much about this. If it works out, awesome. If it does not, he is going to split reps with Collins in base downs and be on the field in pass rush situations. 

And by Collins you mean Simmons, I’m assuming.
Posted (edited)
On 2/26/2025 at 8:41 PM, TexEx15 said:

 

Im so in. Arch about murder everybody, and I'm glad he's on every cover,every network, talking points, you,name it. He's a natural leader who will take us to the top. Is football IQ is higher than CTJ's  business courses he tells us about. 
Oh, and he's 6'4 225 lwith.zerp injuries?.this kid is ready. He knows the playbook front amd center. His favorite targets are Ryan Wingo who caught 4 TD's from him..and DeAndre Moore
 
Let's add which cat steps up next. Livingstone. Ffrench, Lockett, Butler' McCutchin. Arch ain't afraid to step into the pocket and scared to get hit. Georgia better watch their assholes because Arch is going full Diddy freak party on that ass.

Edited by Funk Doctor Spock
Posted
5 hours ago, TexasMan said:

Texas is targeting former West Virginia head coach Neal Brown for a role on its staff, sources tell @CBSSports/@247Sports

They better hurry up, he's already got the job per his wiki.

Neal Brown
220px-SunBeltMD-2015-0720-NealBrown.png
Brown at 2015 Sun Belt Media Day
Current position
Title Assistant coach
Team Texas
Conference SEC
Posted

I think Texas and Ohio state split wins this season, honestly.

And I’m fine with starting out 0-1. No, that’s not an aggy bitchout response to a loss. I just think it will happen with these teams and both will go 1-1.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...