BlogPoll Question #3

Which unheralded player on your team will be the hardest to replace?

Burl Toler, III was a former walk-on wideout and the son of Cal lineman Burl Toler Jr. and grandson of University of San Francisco star Burl Toler. Not much production, given the presence of Lyman and MacArthur in the same class, but a genuinely good guy, with solid hands. The coaches and other players regarded him as an inspiration for his work ethic and drive: this is the kind of guy it's hard to replace. The stars of a team are just that, and you win with your stars, but it's the cracks in between the stars where teams lose games.

I might have said Geoff MacArthur here (Cal career receptions leader), but he wasn't very unheralded (well, not in the Bay Area; since no one in the rest of the country can name any players who aren't called McCleskey or Philip or Lynch, heraldment isn't very useful), or Ryan Riddle (Pac-10 single season sack record), except that Riddle was drafted, so someone knew who he was. But really, if we're talking about a guy who nobody outside of Berkeley ever heard mentioned, it's Toler.

Which seemingly inconsequential player could make the biggest impact?

The most seemingly inconsequential and yet deeply significant player on most teams is the fullback, but it's a position for which I have a great fondness (it was so nice to see Manning throw his record-breaking TD to a fullback). Our starting fullback this year, Chris Mandarino, is a senior three-year starter, and an integral part of the running game. If Mandarino does his job, you should never even hear his name, and the running back behind him should have 2500 yards and 30 touchdowns (Marshawn Lynch, of course).

Which regular-season game that won’t feature your team would you pay the most money to see this season? Why?

This season, Ohio State-Texas (see BlogPoll Question #2). Any season, Ohio State-Michigan or Alabama-Tennesee. I have clear (if ludicrous and without any rational basis) allegiances in both of these games, so it would be fun to watch them in all their historic and historionic glory.

And finally, because I want it, you want it, and the American people want it: If your team were a rapper, who would it be and why?

I don't listen to rap, but I'm sure someone who does could come up with an artist that is a perpetual underachiever — perhaps with a single hit to their name — and who hides behind their intellectualism rather than actually do anything productive.

BlogPoll Question #2

1. What's the critical game of the season on the national scene?

For the last few years, Oklahoma-Texas has had a major impact on the national scene, and this year should prove no different, although by all accounts from the other side: Texas has mroe to lose than Oklahoma at this stage. Florida-Tennesse might have implications for the top of the polls, depending on how quickly each teams quarterbacks come to the field and display all they have learned.

However, for reasons that have little to do with national championship implications for 2005 (although this is game should be a consideration), the most critical game for the next five or ten years of college football is Texas-Ohio State. Without any movement toward a playoff system, and with the BCS in continual disarray, the prospect of two top-five teams from different conferences playing each other in a regular season game may be the only thing that holds college football together in the immediate future. The real implications of this game are on scheduling: if this proves a success (and regardless of outcome, how could it not?), we might see January-style match-ups in September for a good long while. The addition of a 12th game means that there are two options: another I-AA warm-up patsy on the schedule, or a real test after only a few weeks of game-time. I would prefer the latter, and I'm sure so would the networks.

2.What's the most critical matchup for your team?

The same game that's been so entertaining and important the last several years: USC. It's at the end of the season this year, and only a week removed from our bye (we play Oregon in between). It is not impossible to imagine that this game might have national championship implications (most likely for USC, but spoiler is not a bad role to play).

Of course, if I were to sunscribe to the Tedford method of football, the most critical matchup at the this moment is Sacramento State. They are the best team we are playing at this moment. Then, the week after that, the most critical matchup is Washington, and so on. He might be right: if things don't start off on the right foot, sometimes it's hard to get going again.

3. What's your wingnut upset prediction of year?

Oklahoma-UCLA and Georgia-Boise State have already been picked as wingnuts by a number of people. So I'm going to go with something less predictable: a I-AA team over a major conference I-A team. It has happened, in the past, and will happen again in the future; this is less wingy than a certainty. (Which I-AA and I-A? I have no idea. Not Sacramento State, that's for sure.)

BlogPoll Question #1

Based on this compilation of the top 25 as Internet pundits and preseason rags see it, who looks flagrantly overrated? Why?

There are four things that people rate on in the offseason, usually in this order: last year's record, the coaching staff, developing players, and recruiting. Of these four, the first and the last are mostly immaterial for next season: the new kids probably won't make much of an immediate impact, and last year was last year. The middle two are very important: good coaching of the middlingly talented will get you everywhere, while poor coaching of the very talented will ruin them; and the development of previously good players into next year's superstars is what college football depends on.

That said, there are a few teams that may be initially overrated, although not flagrantly so: USC (as per point 2, the staff has turned over significantly, and this should have some impact, although the extent of which is inderterminable), Texas (again, the coaches have not yet proven that they can overcome their own problems, and are thus passing them onto their players), and Tennessee (while always very good, there have been off-season problems in developing some players, and the new recruits won't make an immediate impact).

The most flagrantly overrated (off by 10 or more spots) team of the entire 37 offered? At this point, Oklahoma, which has no business being in anyone's top 10 after the losing everyone and then some, and imploding spectacularly at the end of the season in each of the last umpteen years.

Who looks underrated?

Well, Cal, obviously.

Those teams who seem presently underrated include Oklahoma (despite what I said above, and because of a staff who has proven to be exemplary, and who have— well, no, it's mostly the staff and that sophmore guy at running back), Louisville, (great coaching, some fantastic young players who were brought along slowly last year and are this year ready to play), Iowa (see Oklahoma re: staff, plus recovery from injury), and Boise State (good team, great coaching, bad conference).

The most underrated (again off by 10 spots) is probably Utah. While they did lose (all) their best assets,%

taking one for the team.

When MGoBlog posted the recent list of participants in the 2005 BlogPoll, the first thing I noticed was the lack of overt female presence. Perhaps there are a few bloggers in the poll who are women and simply aren't telling (or I didn't notice), but I doubt it. Of course, I have to post for a month before I get in, but the Cal bandwagon seems a little underwhelmed at the moment, to it probably won't be an issue.

[Also, only 4 Pac-10 voters? and 3 of them are SC fans? Goodness gracious, that's a little unbalanced.]

So here I am, ready and willing to participate in what promises to be an interesting experiment in democratic arguing.