Urban Meyer Says He "Had Oregon Ranked No. 1 For Quite Some Time"

There was a collective head-scratch when people found out that Urban Meyer was the ONLY SEC head coach who did not rank the Auburn Tigers No. 1. Some perceived it as sour grapes—Meyer was just mad that Auburn was winning with his cast-off quarterback.

While others didn't feel Urban needed to make any explanation at all. He had his vote, he used it on Oregon—it is what it is.

Well, Urban Meyer finally let the world know exactly why he dismissed Auburn in favor of Oregon, here's what Meyer had to say about his decision not to vote Auburn No. 1:

"It could have been 1A, 1B,'' Meyer said. "I watched that SEC Championship game and to say they are not the best team in America would be incorrect. I have not watched Oregon as much, earlier in the year I did. I've had Oregon ranked No. 1 for quite some time now. And it's just like when we were up there in the rankings _ unless you deserve to lose that ranking _ that's no disrespect to Auburn obviously. But it's 1A, 1B in my mind. I just had Oregon No. 1 for a longer period of time.''

Okay, Urban...whatever you say, buddy.

The USA Today Coaches' Poll Is Out—Who Won? Lost? Got Totally Hosed?

This morning, the dawn of the college football season officially peaked through the bedroom windows and dormitories of rabid fans across the nation as USA Today released it's annual Coaches' Poll.  While it offered very little in the way of a surprise at No. 1 (Alabama), there were some glaring omissions, low blows, and head-scratchers.

The poll, in it's entirety can be found at the link above, but here are just a few quick thoughts on a few of the picks. 

Winners:

Alabama (No. 1)

I don't think there should be any doubt that Alabama is the No. 1 team in the nation. They have some holes to fill, absolutely, but they are also loaded with talent and return the bulk of their position players on offense.


Iowa (No. 10)

The talk of the Big Ten has largely been focused on two teams this offseason, Ohio State and Penn State. Wisconsin has been looked at as a sleeper, but Iowa has gotten little, if any, love thus far. So, it has to feel pretty good to Kirk Ferentz that his peers can see what others cannot—the Hawkeyes have a good team this season and will definitely be making a little noise.


Oregon (No. 11)

Say what you want about their lack of an experienced QB, Chip Kelly has been on this train before—just ask Dennis Dixon. He has all that he needs at QB and the Ducks will be just fine—as long as their potency in the running game continues.


Georgia (No. 21)

After finishing the season unranked, ridiculed, and doubted by many as a feasible team in the SEC, much less the nation, Georgia makes a triumphant return to the polls after finishing the season unranked. It's a small victory as they are slotted in at No. 21, but when you consider the fact that South Carolina—the team many picked to win the east this season—wasn't ranked at all, you have to feel pretty confident that the Bulldogs are on the right track.


Losers:

South Carolina (Not Ranked)

Speaking of which, where on earth is South Carolina? As mentioned above, aren't they the team that many pundits are locking in as the sexy pick to overtake? Talk about billboard fodder. Spurrier's team not only lagged behind Utah. They fell behind Cincinnati, Houston, and Ole Miss—ouch!

Boise State (No. 5)

Boise State is at five, which is okay, but they can't be too happy about it. Many thought they would at least rate as the second team in the nation. After all, they did finish the season undefeated and return 22 starters—the most of any Division I team in the country.  Oh, and did anyone else find it curious that the coaches' chose to rank Virginia Tech directly after them?

That game at RFK Stadium in September just got more interesting if those rankings stand up. Virginia Tech as the underdog?...Interesting.

Wisconsin (No. 12)

They return a lot of talent, most importantly John Clay, and they have a schedule so blah that a Pee Wee league team could get ten wins—easy. So, why are they ranked behind Iowa? My best guess is the coaches tried not to rank teams ahead of the ones that beat them, but this is supposed to be the Badgers year, isn't it? Or maybe the coaches just didn't feel a need to reward mediocrity—just saying.

Glaring Omissions:

USC (Received No Votes)

Quick...tell me the last time you saw a poll that did not include the Trojans? It's been a long time. Again, it is the coaches' poll and I am sure they didn't feel a need to include a sanctioned team that isn't going to be bowl eligible for two years, but it still looks a touch odd, doesn't it ?

Michigan (Received No Votes)

Something tells me that people aren't buying the talk of a resurgence in Ann Arbor this season. Rich Rod is in the news for all the wrong reasons...again and none of his peers seem to be on board with his tactics. I still like the Wolverines to make it back to bowl season in 2010 but the fact that the team didn't even warrant one vote is astonishing.

Head-scratchers:

Florida (No. 3)

I do find it curious that Florida came in at No. 3. How on earth do you lose Tim Tebow, Joe Haden, Major Wright, Aaron Hernandez, and Riley Cooper and still be considered a Top 5 team? Obviously, people either think a lot of Urban Meyer or the Gatorade coming out of Gainesville is laced with something a lot stronger than electrolytes.

Texas (No. 4)

The same song applies for the Texas Longhorns—seriously? Garrett Gilbert may be the all-world quarterback that Mack Brown needs to replace the exited Colt McCoy, but he's not THAT guy THIS season—no way. No. 4 is tremendously optimistic for the 'Horns in my opinion. 

Utah (No. 24)

Really?...Why? I understand they have a soft schedule and a new home in the Pac-10 starting in 2011, but their are other teams more worthy of this spot than they are right now—see South Carolina, Connecticut, Navy...

Jordan Wynn is a talented QB and the Utes have a better than average offense with him in place but, last I checked, he doesn't play defense. This is a lame duck year for Utah in the Mountain West and every team will be gunning for them to fail—miserably.

Well, those are my thoughts on the poll...what say you?

The Big East Wants Coaching Staff Sizes To Be Smaller

An article published in USA Today states that the NCAA cabinet is looking into introducing legislation that would limit the support staff allowed in college football programs.

Currently, the NCAA places a limit on the number of coaches that can be involved with assisting the players—on or off the field. That number, currently, is capped at 12 (the head coach, nine assistants, and two graduate assistants).

However, it gets a little sketchier when discussing non-coaching personnel. There are no limits to that number and, just a quick browse of some of the more well-known programs in college football will attest to that; Ohio State (41), Rutgers (36), and Michigan (33) all boast large amounts of non-coaching staff on their payroll.

The latter was recently forced to impose a self-sanction on their football program when it was discovered that inappropriate actions were being executed by the non-coaching staff hired by head coach, Rich Rodriguez. The report was stated as such:

The school said two main problems - too many people acting as coaches and too many hours being put into football by the players - occurred in part because of "inattention by the football staff."

After his hire from West Virginia, Rodriguez filled all five quality control positions in the program - essentially assistants to assistants who were paid $17 per hour to "run errands for the coaches, check on student-athlete class attendance and academic issues, and chart plays."

The school said the staff "crossed the line in specific situations and engaged in 'coaching activities"' as defined by the NCAA.