Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    CFN has begun their annual descent into the preseason rankings, beginning with #80-119. Two of our foes have shown up on the list so far, but ISU has yet to make an appearance.

    100. Kent State

    The ranking is too low because ... the defense should be solid with a fantastic pass rush and a promising secondary with All-MAC quality performers in CB Jack Williams and SS Fritz Jacques to count on. Colin Ferrell might be the league's best defensive linemen, while Kevin Hogan might lead the conference in sacks and/or quarterback pressures. Julian Edelman is a good enough quarterback to lead the offense to a good year.
    The ranking is too high because ... the passing game isn't going to be anything to write home about. If the ground attack isn't working, the offense will go nowhere. The secondary might be decent, but statistically, that was because the Golden Flashes didn't face too many good passing teams. The D might be strong, but it won't be as good as last year's, while the offense won't make a dramatic enough leap to challenge for the conference title.
    Relative Strengths: Offensive Backfield, Linebacker
    Relative Weaknesses: Receiver, Special Teams

    88. Toledo
    The ranking is too low because ... the offensive line should be good enough to be a major factor against most MAC teams, and that should allow a good stable of running backs to shine. QB Aaron Opelt appears to be ready to make a major jump up in production, going from a promising, athletic rookie to a consistent, dangerous threat. The receiving corps might have been disappointing over the last few years, but it's very big, very fast, and very promising.
    The ranking is too high because ... the defense got ripped apart by just about everyone last year, and while there's plenty of depth, there has to be more pressure and more production. The corners have to be night-and-day better for the Rockets to have any hope of challenging for the MAC title, much less getting through a tough early part of the schedule.
    Relative Strengths: Running Back, Special Teams
    Relative Weaknesses: Defensive Line, Cornerback


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  2. #2
    Pro
    Points: 40,577, Level: 62
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 1,073
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran25000 Experience Points
    dinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    3,426
    Points
    40,577
    Level
    62
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 20
    Given: 63

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by AirWalke View Post
    100. Kent State
    The ranking is too high because ... the passing game isn't going to be anything to write home about. If the ground attack isn't working, the offense will go nowhere.
    i like starting our year against this. get some good experience for the D



  3. #3
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by dinger7203 View Post
    i like starting our year against this. get some good experience for the D
    If anything, that worries me. If our defense has a great game statistically, it still doesn't say anything for our talent level.

    I like the fact that Kent State has a supposed great pass rush. It won't be like the defensive lines that they'll face later in the year, but I think that's a better test to see how the OL will perform.


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  4. #4
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 39,545, Level: 61
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 805
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    cloneu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Twin Cities
    Posts
    4,215
    Points
    39,545
    Level
    61
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 45
    Given: 26

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Our defense better have a good showing vs. kent st. their leading reciever had 16 catches last year. Hopefully it will build the confidence of the team for future games. They return a lot of expierence on the o and d line, it should be a good test for the first game with all the inexpierence ISU has in those spots. Also no offensive skills player over 200 pounds, with the running back at 5'5" 160. Small line up so I assume they will have good team speed.



  5. #5
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by cloneu View Post
    Our defense better have a good showing vs. kent st. their leading reciever had 16 catches last year. Hopefully it will build the confidence of the team for future games. They return a lot of expierence on the o and d line, it should be a good test for the first game with all the inexpierence ISU has in those spots. Also no offensive skills player over 200 pounds, with the running back at 5'5" 160. Small line up so I assume they will have good team speed.


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  6. #6
    Pro
    Points: 30,396, Level: 53
    Level completed: 59%, Points required for next Level: 454
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    price26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ames, IA
    Posts
    2,026
    Points
    30,396
    Level
    53
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Hopefully the good talent on Kent State's defensive line will be a good test for our offensive line right away as should the defensive backfield of Kent State being a good test for the air attack that will hopefully be opened up this year.

    I didn't know Collin Ferrell was going to college at Kent State either . . .



  7. #7
    Pro
    Points: 26,010, Level: 49
    Level completed: 46%, Points required for next Level: 540
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    ornryactor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ames
    Posts
    2,633
    Points
    26,010
    Level
    49
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by cloneu View Post
    Our defense better have a good showing vs. kent st. their leading reciever had 16 catches last year. Hopefully it will build the confidence of the team for future games. They return a lot of expierence on the o and d line, it should be a good test for the first game with all the inexpierence ISU has in those spots. Also no offensive skills player over 200 pounds, with the running back at 5'5" 160. Small line up so I assume they will have good team speed.
    Whoa. I think my littlest sister is bigger than him. Man, I look at teams like that and it makes me bitter that I never got a chance to try playing football...


    True and Valiant

    I also remember a game with Kansas when Cy (wore a huge suit then) went out to center field, squatted, and "pooped" a couple of chickens that had been dyed blue then chased them around.
    Quote Originally Posted by DJK15

    God I hope so, even if it's not the right thing to do, KF needs to do it.
    Victory before honor.

  8. #8
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    The next batch of rankings are out, this time it's #40-79. ISU makes the first appearance, followed by Kansas, Kansas State, then Colorado.

    71. Iowa State
    The ranking is too low because ... the coaching change will be eased with the return of Bret Meyer at quarterback. One of the league's best all-around signal callers, he should make everyone around him shine if he gets a little bit of time to work. Todd Blythe is a star receiver to combine with Meyer to get the Cyclone air attack going on a more consistent basis. Defensively, having a head coach like Gene Chizik should make a world of difference.
    The ranking is too high because ... the offensive line has to be far, far better than it was last year for the team to have any hope of improving. There's no depth whatsoever up front and four new starters trying to figure out what they're doing. Defensively, the secondary will be a big problem without a top-flight number one corner to rely on.
    Relative Strengths: Quarterback, Special Teams
    Relative Weaknesses: Defensive Line, Secondary

    67. Kansas
    The ranking is too low because ... the team appears to be just good enough to throw a wrench into the Big 12 North. No, KU isn't going to challenge for the title, but it'll have a little bit of pop on offense with a good receiving corps and nice quarterback situation, even if the starter hasn't been named yet. The defense isn't as bad as last year's stats might have made it appear.
    The ranking is too high because ... there are gigantic question marks all over the place. Losing ultra-productive runner Jon Cornish is a killer, the O line isn't anything special, the secondary has to make huge improvements just to be mediocre, and the linebacking corps is ridiculously small, even if the idea is to go light and quick.
    Relative Strengths: Quarterback, Wide Receiver
    Relative Weaknesses: Running Back, Secondary

    55. Kansas State
    The ranking is too low because ... there's more than enough experience on defense to come up with a big year. All-American Ian Campbell will be used partly as an outside linebacker and partly as an end in a mixed 3-4, and he should wreak havoc in opposing backfields, while safety Marcus Watts leads a good secondary that should be the team's strength. On offense, the rushing tandem of Leon Patton and James Johnson should be devastating.
    The ranking is too high because ... Josh Freeman still isn't ready for primetime. The rising star quarterback still needs a lot of work to do before he's the type of consistent playmaker who'll be counted on game in and game out. While his talent is undeniable, he's not going to make the average receiving corps better, at least over the first half of the season. The offensive line has more than enough depth to come up with a good rotation, but there's not much in the way of talent.
    Relative Strengths: Defensive Line, Secondary
    Relative Weaknesses: Wide Receiver, Offensive Line

    43. Colorado
    The ranking is too low because ... the defense will once again be excellent. A strong defensive season was swept under the rug thanks to the horrendous offense, and now Jordon Dizon and the linebacking corps, and All-America caliber corner Terrence Washington, will lead the way to a big year. The offense can't, and won't, be any worse. Dan Hawkins is too good a coach to let that happen again. Hugh Charles is a nice running back to carry things until the right quarterback can be found.
    The ranking is too high because ... the offensive line isn't up to snuff thanks to injury issues. The receiving corps has the potential to shine, but the new quarterback, Cody Hawkins or Nick Nelson, will have to be consistent without any real experience to fall back on. As good as the defense should be, it needs to find a consistent pass rush.
    Relative Strengths: Linebacker, Wide Receiver
    Relative Weaknesses: Offensive Line, Quarterback


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  9. #9
    Speechless
    Points: 254,276, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    BryceC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    16,713
    Points
    254,276
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 160
    Given: 0

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Colorado at 43 seems to be WAYYY to high after last year, in my opinion.




  10. #10
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by BryceC View Post
    Colorado at 43 seems to be WAYYY to high after last year, in my opinion.
    I agree, but then, I also thought last year that Colorado was going to jump back in a big way. They had a lot of close losses go the other way.


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  11. #11
    Bench Warmer Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    335
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    I would take the CFN rankings with a grain of salt. At the conlusion of last season (Jan 14), they released a "rediculously early" pre-season ranking for 2007. Here is where they had the teams already covered in a previous post:

    Kansas State - 42
    Colorado - 50
    Kansas - 57
    Iowa State - 84
    Kent State - 88
    Toledo - 89

    So I guess we've improved quite a bit since Jan to jump 13 spots. Obviously it's all speculation at this point. Guess we'll have to wait for a few games to see who's for real.



  12. #12
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by mjlane View Post
    I would take the CFN rankings with a grain of salt. At the conlusion of last season (Jan 14), they released a "rediculously early" pre-season ranking for 2007. Here is where they had the teams already covered in a previous post:

    Kansas State - 42
    Colorado - 50
    Kansas - 57
    Iowa State - 84
    Kent State - 88
    Toledo - 89

    So I guess we've improved quite a bit since Jan to jump 13 spots. Obviously it's all speculation at this point. Guess we'll have to wait for a few games to see who's for real.
    They stress that this is simply where the teams stand before the season starts, and not at where they'll end up. I like these rankings because they stress the reasons why a particular ranking might be too high or too low, listing the teams' strengths and weaknesses. It's not helpful when a site gives their preseason rankings and only explaining why the top 25 teams are good.


    Last edited by AirWalke; 08-02-2007 at 04:27 PM.
    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  13. #13
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    To round out the rest of our opponents, here is #1-39...

    39. Texas Tech
    The ranking is too low because ... it's Texas Tech; the passing game will be there. Yeah, there's a big concern about the receiver experience, but the production will be there. Graham Harrell should take another step in his development now that he's a veteran triggerman with a nice résumé of being able to lead the team to clutch comeback wins. The secondary might be the best unsung unit in the Big 12 thanks to the safety tandem of Darcel McBath and Joe Garcia along with corner Chris Parker.
    The ranking is too high because ... there's bound to be a period of adjustment in the receiving corps with almost all the top pass catchers gone. The O line loses four starters, and there's the continued drama around RB Shannon Woods and the question of effort, at least in the eyes of the coaching staff. The defensive front seven, with only one starter returning up front and no depth whatsoever, will give up rushing yards in chunks.
    Relative Strengths: Quarterback, Secondary
    Relative Weaknesses: Defensive Line, Linebacker

    35. Iowa
    The ranking is too low because ... the defensive line should be devastating. With the healthy return of Ken Iwebema, getting into the backfield won't be too much of a problem. The running backs are in place to ease new starting quarterback Jake Christensen into the job, while Dominique Douglas, Andy Brodell, and a few good prospects are causing some to call this the best receiving corps yet in the Kirk Ferentz era.
    The ranking is too high because ... the offensive line could be a problem. Injuries were the issue last season, and now everyone has to show they can form a consistent unit. Iowa always seems to give up plenty of passing yards, and this year likely won't be any different with a secondary that'll be merely average. Overall, the defense needs to force more turnovers.
    Relative Strengths: Defensive Line, Running Back
    Relative Weaknesses: Offensive Line, Secondary

    23. Nebraska
    The ranking is too low because ... Zac Taylor was good, Sam Keller is better. The Huskers were able to get to the Big 12 championship with a good passer in Taylor, but Keller is an NFL caliber bomber with all the skills to make the offense shine exactly like it's supposed to for the first time since the old school offense was blown up. While it might not be saying much, the receiving corps could be the best in school history. The linebacking corps should be outstanding, while the secondary will be far better than it's been over the past few seasons, even if it'll have its problems from time to time.
    The ranking is too high because ... Keller isn't Taylor. Taylor had an even keel and a knack for making plays when he had to. Keller is still relatively unproven and needs to show he can get the job done for a full season. Also needing to prove himself is RB Marlon Lucky, an elite talent who hasn't lived up to his billing. The offensive line will be merely average unless the tackles are great out of the gate.
    Relative Strengths: Linebacker, Wide Receiver
    Relative Weaknesses: Offensive Line, Secondary

    16. Missouri
    The ranking is too low because ... the offense is stunningly loaded. There might not be any college football household names, but QB Chase Daniel, WR Will Franklin and RB Tony Temple form the nucleus of a potentially unstoppable attack. The All-America tight end tandem of Martin Rucker and Chase Coffman could be legendary. The defensive back seven is very fast and very athletic, while the tackle pair of Evander Hood and Lorenzo Williams will clog things up.
    The ranking is too high because ... you've heard it all before. Missouri was supposed to be the Big 12's big sleeper when Brad Smith was running the show, and it never really happened. Last year's team had everything in place before melting down over the second half of the season and bottoming out in the bowl collapse to Oregon State. The defensive front seven will produce, but it should get run on by the better Big 12 ground games.
    Relative Strengths: Wide Receiver, Quarterback
    Relative Weaknesses: Defensive Line, Linebacker

    4. Texas
    Why Texas should be No. 1: Colt McCoy proved he could be a big-game, big-time quarterback, and he has Limas Sweed and a loaded receiving corps to work with. If Jamaal Charles is over his sophomore slump, there's enough speed and talent in the backfield to run on anyone keeping the safeties back to deal with the NFL-caliber receiving corps. The linebacking corps is deep and very, very good. Average teams can all but forget about running the ball on this group.
    Why Texas isn't No. 1: Let's not mince words here; the secondary flat-out sucked, and that was with a slew of NFL talent and a Thorpe Award winner. Part of the problem was an aggressive scheme that led the DBs out in the cold, but that's no excuse considering the talent level. Now the secondary is in transition after losing three starters, but with a change in scheme that'll help out the pass defense, the defensive backs might not be the team's biggest concern. If injuries hit the offensive line, the whole machine might stall. There's stunningly little depth up front.
    Relative Strengths: Wide Receiver, Linebacker
    Relative Weaknesses: Secondary, Offensive Line Depth

    3. Oklahoma
    Why Oklahoma should be No. 1: You've dismissed the defending Big 12 champions after they lost to Boise State and after all the off-season controversy and vacated wins. That's a big, big mistake. This is a national title-level Sooner team that has, arguably, the nation's best offensive line, the nation's best secondary, the country's best NFL receiver prospect in Malcolm Kelly, and great special teams that'll pull out at least one win. Losing Adrian Peterson isn't a plus, but three great running backs, highlighted by emerging superstar DeMarco Murray, will run wild behind the elite line.
    Why Oklahoma isn't No. 1: The Sooners always seem to get by with mediocre talent at quarterback (Jason White included), but they're going to be pushing it early on. Sam Bradford can play and will eventually be terrific, and Joey Halzle can certainly lead the attack considering all the time he'll have to operate, but compared to other top teams, OU is woefully untested under center. To nitpick, the linebacking corps is relatively new and could use a little time to grow into a cohesive unit.
    Relative Strengths: Offensive Line, Secondary
    Relative Weaknesses: Quarterback, Linebacker


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  14. #14
    Addict
    Points: 51,066, Level: 69
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 84
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    AirWalke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    5,732
    Points
    51,066
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 16
    Given: 8

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Missouri at 16 is WAY too high, especially considering what a clunker their 2nd half of the year was. The more I hear about them, the more I'm believing they'll be like ISU in '05, or dare I say '06? They may lose a few more games than I anticipated.

    Texas Tech is starting to look like the most likely upset for the Cyclones. If their rushing defense is as bad as it sounds, and one of our RBs comes out and opens the year strong, that could be a fun game as well. Iowa sounds like it may be back and forth also, with no definite o-line to protect the QB.


    Go Sssssssssyclones!

  15. #15
    Speechless
    Points: 736,473, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 86.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience PointsOverdrive
    Cyclonepride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    A pineapple under the sea
    Posts
    47,920
    Points
    736,473
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,544
    Given: 733

    Re: CFN's 2007 Preseason Rankings

    Missouri is way too high. And Nebraska too.... with the offensive line as a weakness? That's a little weird in the context of their past, I suppose true.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • TV: TBD
  • Iowa State vs. Oklahoma
  • November 1, 2014
  • 07:00 PM