BLOGPOLL ROUNDTABLE NUMBER 8178: BRUCE CISKIE SAYS FTBITTTD AND GETS TO THE POINT

by Orson on Sep 6, 2006 11:12 AM EDT

Bruce Ciskie asks three very efficient, to-the-point questions in this week's Blogpoll. Somewhat belatedly, we answer.

1. What team best met your overall expectations of them in their opener?

Tennessee. We had them at eight and we were right right right right right right right right right right right. A return to prime fat man jujitsu Tennessee football with lineman shoving gaps into the defense, nitpicky little routes broken for big gains in the pass game, and some burly running by the ground game. It was like 1995 all over again, minus that ill-advised nipple piercing we got in Panama City Beach. (Our undergrad major: English. Undergrad minor: Hepatitis A.)

Did we mention that we were right about them? Oh, sorry, can't hear you because of this trophy we got for being right in our ear. Or maybe it's the fragment of hoagie that flew in our ear watching Phil devour his celebratory feast post-game. Stand clear when you watch him, by the way; in 1997 Joe Biddle of the Tennessean lost a hand when standing too close to Phil in a post-game frenzy involving a spread of barbecue ribs and egg rolls; Fulmer pronounced Biddle "savory" and had to be restrained by Tennessee National Guardsmen.

Said Fulmer: "savory"

2. What team jumped off the map and surprised you the most? (Bonus points to anyone who can make an argument for someone besides Tennessee.)

Besides the trio of 1-AA teams biting unwary 1-A teams in the ass on opening day? Since Tennessee's off-limits, how about Pitt bombing away on UVA? Not that an underwhelming performance by an Al Groh team surprises anyone, but the Wannstache and company seem to have realized Tyler Palko throws a nice deep ball that looks even nicer when floating into the middle of wide open busted coverages by the Cavalier secondary.

(UVA is not good. This cannot be stated with enough strength. Their badness may require an animated gif, or its own dirge-like theme song.)

The sad flapping of Depression Penguin: most appropriate bad gif for UVA fans in 2006?

Actually, the gleaming potential of a competitive Big East somewhat excites us: an improved Pitt, Rutgers playing competent football, and Louisville and West Virginia playing the heavies makes for something more than decent filler football. Toss in USF occasionally stabbing an unsuspecting favorite in the back and the moribund conference begins take on some depth and promise. When this all goes to hell in three months and UConn slides into a Sugar Bowl slot with five losses, don't hate us.

3. What team best moved themselves into a position to surprisingly contend for a national title?

USC. A dismal showing by most everyone else in the Pac-10 means that only Oregon stands between them and a guaranteed BCS bowl--and Oregon must travel to the Coliseum this year. Their non-conference schedule seems manageable since both Nebraska and Notre Dame come to them in L.A., though winning both of those calls for a leap of the imagination where Booty and company shake their way through both teams with the ease of cutting through the Razorbacks. That does, by the way, constitute pure imagination; USC could easily lose one of those games, but the residual prestige from five years of dominance (all most sportswriters and voters can remember at once) should get them a national title invite in a universal one-loss environment.

Ohio State also looked machine-like and primed, but Texas remains the litmus test for them. Sweatervests for all if they rampage in that game, which will answer tons of questions for both teams. Fortunately, Tressel's already answering your questions and handing them back to you with a free serving of asskick salad.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

That Tressel-blog link is really effing funny, actually

by sandman227 on Sep 6, 2006 11:54 AM EDT reply actions

Note: Cheatypants has lied about ranking Texas #1 on his ballot. He infact voted himself #1….

by Jon (Austin) on Sep 6, 2006 12:36 PM EDT reply actions

The Big East had an outstanding weekend, at the ACC’s expense. The ACC confirmed what many suspected; that it is a mess. Bunting is now dead-man walking and Groh should be. Duke loses to Richmond. Maryland sucked. Gailey sucks. FSU and Miami are disfunctional, at best, on offense. BC struggled. My Tigers have now lost two senior starting linebackers, so who knows? I don’t see a worthy BCS contender in the ACC at the moment.

by cutiger89 on Sep 6, 2006 12:49 PM EDT reply actions

Good call on the Vols.
They looked good this weekend, but how much of their offense was due to poor tackling by Cal? On Meachem’s two long touchdowns the DB missed him resulting in 14 easy points. I don’t remember much else from the game, but was the offense playing like gangbusters or was Cal’s D just weak?
Chavis will always have the defense ready, but Cutcliffe having the offense humming without a Manning brother would be scary.
In honor of Chavis breaking the spirit of the Bears, I nominate him for Mustache of the Day.
http://utsports.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/chavis_john00.html

by AUAlum on Sep 6, 2006 12:54 PM EDT reply actions

AUAlum,

There were some missed tackles, but you have to chalk some of those up to the revitalized strength and condition regimen. There was definately no missed tackle on Swain’s 50 yard TD. The main difference I can tell is from the offensive line and the receivers. Trooper Taylor had them catching bricks over the summer. BRICKS! “If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.”

by VolBrian on Sep 6, 2006 1:03 PM EDT reply actions

I will never get enough of hearing about how un-good UVa is.

Make that check out to cash you say?

As for the ACC as a whole, it’s easy to mistake solid defense for lack of capability. Let ND or Pitt take a tilt with any of the ranked ACC teams and see what happens.

by Hokie Andrew on Sep 6, 2006 1:22 PM EDT reply actions

Don’t get too high on Pitt yet. The Wannstache is going to lose to the Bearcats at Cincinnati this Friday at 8:00. Mark it down.

Cincinnati is fresh off a 31-0 thrashing of I-AA Eastern Kentucky(!), has two decent starting quarterbacks, many returning starters on both sides of the ball and our leading tackler (who missed the first game with a groin pull) will be healthy and ready to start.

UVa and the ACC have both been overrated for some time.

by ohiodawg on Sep 6, 2006 1:29 PM EDT reply actions

while 5-6 is out of the question, i’m not ready to hand them the sec just yet. its really hard to know anything about a team after one week (as fans of almost every school will tell you after this past weekend). is tennessee that good or is cal that bad? methinks its somewhere inbetween.

by tim on Sep 6, 2006 1:32 PM EDT reply actions

Sandman, you have no idea. Scroll through his back pages and see if you don’t come away with a strong urge to party with big Jimbo.

by Phil K. on Sep 6, 2006 1:40 PM EDT reply actions

Jon (Austin),
Tressel did Not lie about it. If you read the article and not pick out just some key words and phrases, he voted TX #1 in the preseason. Stan Jefferson, who in fact called in the coaches picks for this past weekend, put OSU #1 “cuz thats how they ended up in the preseason polls”, saying that he didnt talk to Tressel about how he wanted them in his.

by Bhors on Sep 6, 2006 1:50 PM EDT reply actions

I knew you were a fucking English major.

by Donnie trismegistus on Sep 6, 2006 10:27 PM EDT reply actions

“Stan Jefferson, Ohio State’s director of player development, called in Tressel’s ballot Tuesday morning. He said he changed the ballot to match the preseason poll and did not have time to tell Tressel.

“When it came time to vote on the preseason poll, we voted Texas No. 1 and us No. 3 after talking about it as a staff,” Jefferson told The (Manfield Ohio) News Journal. “When I called in his poll [Tuesday morning], he did not tell me to put Ohio State No. 1. I put that down because we were No. 1 in the preseason poll that came out.”

Translation: “We voted them #1 and ourselves #3, but voted ourselves #1, because that’s how it was you see, and since it was that way and we voted differently, we just kept it that way, because 2+2=5 and Elvis killed Kennedy.”

There’s less fuzzy math in a Presidential debate.

by Ank on Sep 7, 2006 11:15 AM EDT reply actions