Why is Virginia Tech ranked 14 and 17 in Football?

AZ State has not beaten better teams.

Tech started the season ranked #9, lost big to #2, and has otherwise taken care of business. It's all about where you start in the polls.

LSU should be ranked ahead of USC, but since USC hasn't done anything to lose the #1 ranking, it wont happen.

Can't have it both ways, people.

Well USC(Cal) and LSU(Florida) might not even be the best teams in their own conference. Lots of ball to be played!

Not only are you a retard, but are a major douche as well. The BCS has no pity unless the team in question is Notre Dame, which pity cannot even save this year.

Man this is simple to answer. They have Mike Vick, Marcus Vick and Angelo Hall as Alumz. I mean that says it all right there.

ASU will have their chance. If they beat one of Cal, USC, Oregon, plus UW and UCLA, they'll get their ranking. You're not going to get much movement playing 4 home games against mediocre opposition. At this point of the season the rankings are mostly based on reputation, and sorry to tell you it's been a while since Jake Plummer was at ASU, and they weren't that great then either.

your arguement makes sense...until you look at the fact that a west coast school is No.1.

airzona doesn't deserve it and VT would crush them. Game over.

VA Tech has been doing this for years. Somehow or another they start every year way higher in the polls than they should be. Then they schedule the weakest teams possible and wait for the teams ranked ahead of them who are playing better competition to lose. At the end of the year, they generally have a solid win total and a decent ranking. It's actually a pretty smart tactic. When VT goes head to head with ranked teams, they don't fare so well, so why play anybody you don't have to. Beamer admitted in the local paper that they put off playing LSU as long as they could (the game was supposed to be in 2004). They've been pretty fortunate to be in the weak ACC for the past few years. This year, however, they are likely to take some lumps. They're not that good at all, and when they play BC, GA Tech, Clemson, Miami, and maybe even UVA, it'll be interesting.

This just speaks to how ridiculous it is that there are pre-season college rankings in football. It is PURELY for print media/selling TV advertisements, so that ESPN and CBS can say they've got the #2 and #9 teams in the country meeting up in an early season match-up!!

A few years ago, when Auburn was left out of the national championship -- they would SURELY have gone if they had been preseason ranked #1. The opinions of writers before they even see a team play should not determine which teams get to go to big bowl games.

VT is overrated this year but if you talk to their bonehead fans - all the LSU game did was knock them out of a shot at the National Title - how unrealistic is that??

I see VT with at least 3, maybe 4 losses this year and then there will be some excuse why they were not that good - it's true their QB and OL is awful but they have a new young QB who may be the answer to their offensive problems....

ASU is another case of west coast bias, under the radar stuff.... I. they haven't played anyone and 2 they were not that good last year - so no notice in the preseason...

You're an idiot. Virginia Tech was a member of the Big East and now is a member of the ACC, their schedules have always been determined by the teams in their conference. Look at any major D1 school's out of conference schedule and you'll see some easy win games. All teams do this, not just VT. Also, the VT v LSU game was part of a series of games that was scheduled years and years in advance. Coincidentally, VT blew out LSU when they played the first time. Do you have any other useless and uninformed comments to add?

Well what do you know, a member of the Hokie Nation. All I know is VT doesn't play ANYONE they don't have to. Almost all of their out of conference games are against cupcakes. Not just a few of them, almost all of them. Take a look at their record against ranked teams during the Beamer era. I've seen a statistic on it before and it's terrible, a massive losing record. If they wanted to prove they were one of the best teams in the nation they would look forward to playing teams like LSU and they would also try to schedule teams like Penn State, WVU, maybe some schools in the SEC, but they'd rather beat up on Ohio, William and Mary, East Carolina (who they actually couldn't beat up on even though WVU just crushed them 45-7), etc. I see plenty of other top schools playing much, much better competition. Sure they have a game or two against a cupcake, but they also have out of conference games against good teams so they can prove they are good and boost their BCS rankings.

Ok, just to prove my point I went and found the stat. This is straight from the Roth report by Bill Roth, the voice of Hokie's football:

"Tech has compiled a record of 21-31-1 vs. ranked teams since 1987."

Now who's an idiot? Like I said, they schedule cupcakes and when they have to play good teams they don't fare so well. The proof is in the record, not in what the polls might say.

Enlightening Lightning wrote:

your arguement makes sense...until you look at the fact that a west coast school is No.1.

airzona doesn't deserve it and VT would crush them. Game over.

The catch is that one school is USC. They are the ONLY western school that has been able to fight through the east coast media bias and win championships and heismans. It may have something to do with all those years playing Notre Dame (thar is, years prior to Weis when ND football didn't play like their xc team), so the east coast media actually saw them.

Would the BYU team that won the NC in the 1980's even have a chance to play for it now? Did Utah before Urban left? Oregon a few years ago (even though they were ranked)? Would an undefeated Louisville play for the NC last year but not undefeated Boise State? That's the bias in practice.

It's true that a lot of the western teams other than USC don't play defense. But...There IS more than one football team playing west of the Missouri River.

Strange that you would bring up WVU. I think VT has played WVU a few times. They fell off the schedule when WVU couldn't get into the ACC. The nonconference schedules are worked out way in advance. VT had Wisconsin on the schedule the next few years, but they backed out. They've got home and away against Nebraska the next couple of years. They've got Ohio St penciled in for the mid-2010s.

It's not that WVU didn't get into the the ACC - they just didn't bitch and cry and get the Governor to intervene....

I think it worked out just fine with the Big East as they are proving to be every bit as good if not better than the ACC in football.

VT had two great seasons - the national championship game year and their 1st season in the ACC (when they got stomped by Auburn) Other than that it has been mostly good - but not great football - 15-25 range football but not top 10..... Of course the bonehead fans will tell you everyyear that this year is their national championship year - how unrealistic! Only USC, Florida and lately LSU can even hope to make that claim a legitimate goal year after year....

WVU had no desire to go into the ACC. Why would anyone want that? The ACC was billed as the first football "superconference" but it has backfired. In my opinion the ACC is weaker than the Big East.

The ACC is down alot right now.

You also have to look at the shootings at VT and wonder if that has something to do with why they are ranked as they should not be ranked. They are not a good football team at all. They barely beat ECU.

Uh huh.

It IS that WVU didn't get into the ACC. They tried, and they're not in. Couldn't be more clear than that. And that's why they're not on the schedule anymore. I could also say it's because VT didn't stay in the Big East. Does that make you feel better?

"Stomped" by Auburn, 16-13? I agree that VT never really had a chance to win that game, but I still don't think you could call it a stomping.

Anyway, they're ranked 15-25 now, so you should be satisfied with that. What's your point with that? They haven't had many great years, but they haven't had any bad years either for the past 15 years. They've actually finished the season in the top 10 three times since 2000, and five times since 1995. That's pretty close to half the time.

Every team has bonehead fans that think this is their year. I don't think even most of those fans really believed VT was going to win the championship this year with Glennon at QB. The only reason to think so was that the schedule works in their favor this year (BC, FSU and Miami at home), if they could get by the LSU game (which they didn't --- not even close).

Your ignorance is staggering. Three of the last 5 Heisman winners were from USC and there are compelling arguments they shouldn't have won any of those (as there are always compelling arguments the Heisman winner wasn't deserving).

Utah didn't have a chance to play for the title because they weren't in a BCS conference. Louisville is in a BCS conference. That's the difference, it's not an East Coast bias. The WAC is not as good as the Big East and never has been.

Oregon is ranked, UCLA was ranked before they got blasted, Arizona State is ranked, Hawaii is ranked, Cal is ranked and USC is #1. You have 5 teams ranked that are West Coast teams, that's 20% of all ranked teams. There are, by my quick count, 25 West Coast teams (10 in the Pac 10, 8 in the WAC and 7 in the MWC). So 21% of all teams are West Coast teams. So that seems about right.

WVU may have had interest in the ACC but really did not even force the issue as they did not feel it was a good fit for them - ACC fans on Tobacco Road actually wanted WVU over VT - but VT cried like a bitch and got the gov to threaten UVA to let them in.....

Anyone who watched the Sugar Bowl knows that VT was dominated - a couple of late scores made the score a lot closer but VT was manhandled on the field. Auburn took their foot off the gas in the late stages of the game - that is it....

As for my point with the 15-25 range - apparently I must be surrounded by VT idiots because they honestly believe that VT is a top 10 program - my point is - no way in hell!

I think you are a bit more sensible in your approach to the situation and I agree with you on the ranking and the last point as well.