College Football Top 25: 6 Teams Only Ranked Because of Reputation

Some programs just seem like they naturally belong in the Top 25, and quite frankly, the rankings seem incomplete when their names aren’t listed (i.e. Texas).

Other teams just don’t fit the bill…I mean, seriously, who ever heard of Miami (OH) in the Top 25?

There is absolutely no doubt that some teams are either ranked or remain unranked due to their reputation, whether they’ve been a consistent winner (or loser) over a long period of time or if they’ve just come off a great (or crappy) season, they just seem to fit in a certain category.

It’s almost like type casting an actor or actress to play a certain role; Sylvester Stallone is an action figure, Adam Sandler is a goofy screw-up who wins the hot chick in the end and Ohio State is a top ranked team.

It all makes perfect sense.

The following slideshow identifies six teams that are prominent in many current preseason Top 25 rankings who, it could be argued, are ranked mainly based on their favorable reputation.

The truth is, these teams could still be among the top teams in the land by season’s end, but so could a myriad of other squads who don’t have the benefit of “a name brand” to boost their national confidence level and therefore are not mentioned in the early rankings.

Auburn

I’m all for respecting Auburn and what they accomplished in 2010: an undefeated season, an SEC Crown and a thrilling BCS national championship win against a very good Oregon team.

All accomplishments worth celebrating, honoring and admiring.

But, ranking the Tigers among the best of the best coming into the 2011 season seems almost extending a little too much respect after the fact.

Auburn returns only five starters from their championship edition and faces a full SEC West schedule that is anything but agreeable.

Can they reload and do they have talent?

Absolutely.

However, it seems a stretch that the Tigers are among the best 25 teams going into 2011, and therefore, finding their name on the rankings is somewhat due to respect (well-earned) and reputation.

Florida

Florida has the speed, the talent and the recent success to be ranked year in and year out, but 2011 presents an intriguing scenario for the Gators.

Florida returns only nine starters (six on offense and three on defense) from their 2010 squad that went 8-5 (underwhelming by Gator standards) and also faces the huge coaching turnover (which, no matter how positive it may be, will require some time to adjust to).

The Gators looked better as last season progressed, but their youth and the unknowns presented by a heralded yet untested coach make Florida seem less “rankable” than they have been in the past several years.

The Top 25 doesn’t look like the Top 25 without Florida in the mix, and the SEC East doesn’t seem like a race unless the Gators are a part of the equation, but you have to at least consider the idea that there are other teams with better arguments for being ranked than the University of Florida.

Texas

The Longhorns' 5-7 season in 2010, the fact that they return only 10 starters, the clear lack of on-field leadership and question marks that outweigh answer marks make Texas one of the most questionable preseason ranked teams in the nation.

Texas has all the “right stuff” to be good this year (and every year), but last season’s monumentally poor performance makes the Longhorns definitely fit the bill as a team that is ranked based on name brand recognition only.

It seems reasonable to assert that Texas will play well again, sooner than later, but putting them ahead of teams such as Penn State, Maryland and Air Force who actually played well last year and have plenty of returners is borderline outlandish.

USC

USC has been so good over the past several seasons that last year’s 8-5 finish seemed almost horrific.

What the Trojans had to soften the blow (in a very ironic way) was the fact that their NCAA sanctioned postseason ban lowered expectations both locally and nationally.

This same scenario (which is mandated through the 2011 season) makes the water once again murky for the Trojans, who return 14 starters this season and play in the newly expanded and divisionalized Pac-12.

Should USC be ranked?

Well, they certainly have the talent (like Texas), but there are still more questions than answers, which makes you believe that the Trojan’s stunning past successes must have at least something to do with their preseason expectations.

Miami FL

The Hurricanes are another team that just seem to belong up top, and the new expectations created by incoming coach Al Golden (who totally turned the tables at Temple) amp the level of anticipation even higher.

But at the end of the day, Miami hasn’t even won a divisional title since joining the ACC in 2004 and have posted just three nine win seasons since that time, hardly stuff that inspires confidence moving forward.

The Hurricanes might be the team on this list ranked on the reputation that is the oldest. Indeed, fans of “The U” has been waiting for almost eight years for something really good to happen with their football team.

All this doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be ranked; it just makes you really question why they are.

TCU

Like Auburn, the Horned Frogs deserve the full measure of our reverence and admiration for their 2010 campaign of perfection, which ended triumphantly when TCU smote Wisconsin in an epic Rose Bowl performance.

But (and again like Auburn), the Horned Frogs return only six starters from their glorious squad of yore, and despite an easier schedule than the Tigers, they will have plenty of rebuilding work to in order to even come close to earning last season’s laurels.

TCU will rebuild, which is exactly what they have done very successfully during the Gary Patterson era, but saying they among the best 20 percent of teams in the country coming into 2011 (without looking backwards at 2010) is, at the very least, a stretch.