College Football Rankings Week 2: Three Teams the AP Nailed in the Rankings
There will always be quips about which team goes where and who deserves what ranking, but there will also be times when the AP absolutely hammers a team to where it needs to be.
Granted in the grand scheme of things, the AP Poll will be less significant once the BCS Polls are released on Oct. 16. But while we wait for the end-all be-all that is the BCS, we have to sit on the AP.
Disregarding the four idle teams this week, the press nailed it on these three teams: no. 2 Alabama, no. 7 Wisconsin and no. 24 Texas.
Here is the breakdown.
No. 2 Alabama
The Crimson Tide rolled into Happy Valley and ran over the Nittany Lions in true Tide fashion, rushing the ball for 193 yards behind Trent Richardson's 111 yard, two TD effort.
Nevermind LSU's week one win over a very respected Oregon team, Bama went into the heart of the Big Ten and pounded its way to a statement victory that could be a highlight en route to a BCS National Championship bid.
Nick Saban's team would have had to pour on 60+ points to jump the idle Sooners, who hold the top spot.
No. 7 Wisconsin
The Badgers did what they were supposed to do, run the ball, control the line of scrimmage and physically embarrass the Beavers.
A 35-0 win via 208 rushing yards and some nasty run defense lifted Wisconsin over Texas A&M to claim the 7th spot in the top 25, right behind Andrew Luck and Stanford.
Look for that top seven to remain pretty quiet, save for the OU-FSU matchup this weekend, but we digress.
No. 24 Texas
The feeling from the AP is that Texas is on the cusp of something great.
There is a reason the Longhorns are in the top 25, but there is also a reason why they are on the edge. The Horns have shown flashes of a top 15-type team, but none of that has come into fruition for a full four quarters.
Texas is in the conversation as long as it is winning football games, but until the Horns show a little more dominance, they remain on the fence.
Most recent updates:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?