ESPN's Program Rankings

[Bernini]

Top 25

What does everybody think? Who is too high, too low?

No problem here with USC at the top. They weren't great before Carroll took the reigns, but since have been by far the most dominant team in college football. Texas has a pretty shiny overall record, and a national championship; but outside of that they were really Oklahoma's whipping boy in the big 12 for a long time. 4 conference championships for Oklahoma and one for Texas. To have Texas above Oklahoma seems a little bit short-sighted and submitting to the hype. They are tied for the 2nd most overrated team in college football since 1990 as evidenced by preseason v. postseason rankings, and this continues the trend. If this ranking was assembled last year, I think Miami and FSU would be comfortably ahead of Michigan, and one year shouldn't change that. Virginia Tech is maybe a little low. Notre Dame and Iowa shouldn't even have made the list. Iowa has 9 wins less than any team on the list and a mediocre bowl record. It's not as if they've been good lately, with a combined 13-12 record the last two years. They're basically living off 3-4 years of success, which wasn't even near the national championship caliber level. Notre Dame hasn't even won a bowl game.

[GoRU]

I'm not sure how relevant going back an entire decade is. The only ties Rutgers under Greg Schiano has to Rutgers under Terry Shea is a lingering stereotype that is finally starting to disappear.

[Bernini]

How far should they go back then. 10 or 15 years seems about the proper length. 5 years? That's the length that one recruiting class could be eligible, so success could be hinged off just a few players. You need a substantial period of time to measure program strength. But you also don't want to go back to the 70's, because very few coaches were around, and the state of many programs change dramatically over that time, as well as the level of athletes. I don't know if it was a stereotype that Rutgers was putrid for most of that 10 year period. They were putrid. One decent year and one good year does not a program make. Not that I don't believe some of their improvement is legit. The tranformation in recruiting is evident. However, I think both Rutgers and the Big East have a lot to prove because of where the Scarlet Knights were just two short years ago as well as half that conference. Half of those teams were mid majors, and I find it hard to believe they translated into major caliber teams overnight. Beating East Carolina, K-State, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Western Michigan; in bowl games, isn't doing enough to dissuade any skeptics.

[GoRU]

What I meant was that people still see the current team through the lense of the Terry Shea years. That team regularly lost recruits to I-AA. It was the worst BCS program in the nation. Regardless of how good the program currently is, it has absolutely nothing in common with those miserable years. About as much as say, Wisconsin does with the dark ages before Alvarez.