It's official: Chris(tina) Fowler is an idiot

[Rocky Style]

We beat WVU last year also, so why is it a shocker?

Also we did deserve that ranking at the time.  It was ours to lose and we sure took care of that.

[TRUTH D. Antagonist]

While I think we deserved the ranking I'll admit we kind of got lucky that so many ranked teams lost.  We could have easily went on the same run and plateaued as a top ten team.

i agree, but MOST of the teams that have been at the top--- BC, OSU, Cal--- were there because other teams lost. that's how the polls work...  u win your games, especially against ranked opponents, and u move up over those who lose.  when the week 7 polls came out ranking us #2, we had 6 wins and 0 losses, and our wins at that point were better than BC, OSU, Oklahoma and the other teams that were in the Top 5 at that time.... 

so i think we definetely were a legitimate #2 team in week 7. 

a few bad bounces (and bad calls) and an "illegal forward propulsion of the ball" later, we're not even ranked anymore... and rightfully so.

but our big wins (#17 AU, #5 WVU) are STILL bigger than Oregon's (#12 USC, #4 ASU), Oklahoma's (#19 TX, #11 Mizzou), Kansas' (#24 KState), WVU's (#25 Buttgers), and pretty much anybody else currently in the Top 5.

[dabull80]

While I think we deserved the ranking I'll admit we kind of got lucky that so many ranked teams lost.  We could have easily went on the same run and plateaued as a top ten team.

i agree, but MOST of the teams that have been at the top--- BC, OSU, Cal--- were there because other teams lost. that's how the polls work...  u win your games, especially against ranked opponents, and u move up over those who lose.  when the week 7 polls came out ranking us #2, we had 6 wins and 0 losses, and our wins at that point were better than BC, OSU, Oklahoma and the other teams that were in the Top 5 at that time.... 

so i think we definetely were a legitimate #2 team in week 7. 

a few bad bounces (and bad calls) and an "illegal forward propulsion of the ball" later, we're not even ranked anymore... and rightfully so.

but our big wins (#17 AU, #5 WVU) are STILL bigger than Oregon's (#12 USC, #4 ASU), Oklahoma's (#19 TX, #11 Mizzou), Kansas' (#24 KState), WVU's (#25 Buttgers), and pretty much anybody else currently in the Top 5.

Nice post, when you look at our wins against other ranked teams they sure do look good.  That illegal forward pass is just going to haunt us for a long time - what a load of crap that was.

[smazza]

From the Tampa Tribune: Bulls Beat / A NON BULLIEVER

ESPN's Chris Fowler said when this crazy football season ends, USF over West Virginia will rank as one of the biggest shockers.

"In retrospect, was USF deserving of a No. 2 ranking?" Fowler said. "Of course not.

"I think USF beating West Virginia, if you look back at the end of the year, that will be a shocker. That was fueled by six WVU turnovers. USF played a great game, but that's one of the games, if you look back, that still stands as a surprise."

Also...

Courtesy of the Tampa Tribune

That's just not fair, is it?!

he is right

[smazza]

Yes, because people who state the obvious are idiots.

1. "USF played a great game." We did.

2. "USF did not deserve a #2 ranking." Losses to Rutgers, UConn and Cincinnati have verified this.

I fail to see what's so wrong about his observation.

We did not play a great game.  We had four turnovers.  Who should have been ranked ahead of us?  Cal - you mean the former number 2 team that now has 4 losses?  A bunch of 1 loss teams?  We beat everybody we played at that time.  He said it was "a Shocker".  Do you really think if we played West Virginia again that we would lose?  I think we would beat them at least 8 times out of 10 in Ray Jay at a night game.

and usf would lose 8 out of ten to rutgers/uconn and cinnci

so what is your point

[USF Colby]

the problem with the current system is the voters ask themselves who deserves to be #2 based on their opinion. the question they should ask is based on the wins and loses so far in the season who deserves to be #2. at that point in time we deserved to be number 1. preseason rankings shouldn't matter as they are proven wrong every year. at this point in time we should be ranked in the twenties but human voters see we lost three straight and rank us lower than the likes of michigan and auburn which is a complete joke. the ucf getting a vote in coaches poll should be enough evidence to get rid of the coaches in the bcs equation

The coaches don't abuse it though, if O'Leary was voting the Knights #10 or something I would have a problem with it. Or if all the Big Ten coaches had a vote and they all voted the winner of the OSU/Michigan game #1 and the loser #2, that would be a problem. For the most part coaches are honest with their vote. Yeah Spurrier votes for Duke in the preseason, and yeah O'Leary voted for UCF in 2005, and it doing it again this year but it's just one point. Their not going to be going to a BCS Bowl because of that one point.

[BJ]

Yes, because people who state the obvious are idiots.

1. "USF played a great game." We did.

2. "USF did not deserve a #2 ranking." Losses to Rutgers, UConn and Cincinnati have verified this.

I fail to see what's so wrong about his observation.

The part about beating WVU was one of the biggest shockers of the year.  WIth al the shockers that HAVE happen, this is not one of the biggest.

[Mag Pie]

Guys, we didn't deserve the #2 spot.  Thinking about it when we first were #2 I couldn't believe it.

BUT....beating WV should NOT be a shocker.  We've beat them 2/3 times.

[Economics_Nerd82]

He's making it sound as if it should rank up there with Stanford/USC or App State/Michigan.

[usfmasters]

To say that beating WVU was a shocker, really shows his lack of credibility.  As many have already stated in this thread how is it a shocker when we beat them last year in their house.  How is it a shocker when USF were only 7 pt underdog.  7pt underdogs win every week in college football.

It has been evident for years that Fowler dislikes the Big East.  Every chance he gets he takes shots at the BE.

I would argue with anyone that the BE is the best football conference (I really do not think the BE is the best, but definitely top 3 this year).  I have really thought about starting a thread on this, but I have been holding off.

For people to say that we did not deserver the #2 rank is crazy.  Who deserved it more then use BC, ASU, KU or OSU?  Those were the only undefeated teams at the time from BCS conf.  Teams are to be judged on their body of work to the current date.  After week 7 we had the 2 best wins in all of college football... we may still have the 2 best wins.  At that the time everyone knows we would of been #1 if we had a different name on our helmets.

College football is a popularity contest and we were crashing the party @ #2 and a bulk of the national media did not like it.  Do we deserver to be ranked at 6-3, I think not, but why is Michigan ranked they are 8-3 with a real bad loss, or how about 8-3 Wisconsin that only has 1 win against Ill, or 8-3 Tenn their only win is Georgia, or 8-3 UF who has only beaten Kentucky and my favorite is Auburn @ 7-4 with their only win against UF and while they are not ranked now, they are still getting more votes then 7-3 USF.  Just food for thought if USC's lost to Stanford was really so bad why are they ranked?

We made it to #2 and deserved it, next time we will keep our high ranking and play in a BCS game.

GO BULLS!!!