Final HP Top Ten

I’ll have thoughts on the BCS title game tomorrow.  For now, here is my final top 10 teams.  Before I give my final top 10, I think it is noteworthy to recognize that my two top preseason teams were Oklahoma and Florida.  Here we go:

1.  Florida

2.  Oklahoma

3.  USC

4.  Texas

5.  Utah

6.  Alabama

7.  Penn State

8.  Ohio State

9.  TCU

10.  Oregon

On the cusp: Ole Miss, Texas Tech, Boise State, Georgia, Virginia Tech

Powered by

About Heismanpundit

Chris Huston, A.K.A. ‘The Heisman Pundit‘, is a Heisman voter and the creator and publisher of, a site dedicated to analysis of the Heisman Trophy and college football. Dubbed “the foremost authority on the Heisman” by Sports Illustrated, HP is regularly quoted or cited during football season in newspapers across the country. He is also a regular contributor on sports talk radio and television.

Follow HP

Find us on Twitter, Facebook and Youtube!

39 Responses to Final HP Top Ten

  1. Hornsgotscrewed January 9, 2009 at 1:25 am #

    HP, how can you still rightfully keep OU ahead of SC, Utah and especially Texas? OU has two losses by double digits. One of those was to Texas on a neutral field. Texas already proved it was the superior team and SC and the Utes showed their mettle in the way they played in their respective bowl games.

  2. Anonymous January 9, 2009 at 9:35 am #

    how is OU #2?

  3. bucknut January 9, 2009 at 12:36 pm #

    Texas should be # 2 they only have one loss. Oklahoma has two losses.

  4. bucknut January 9, 2009 at 4:20 pm #

    The AP poll got it right, except I would have named Utah AP champs.

  5. AUman76 January 9, 2009 at 9:19 pm #

    nice HP, you just showed how idiotic the press and all you talkin heads are. Your poll is exactly what’s wrong with all polls! Utah defeated Oregon State which in turn beat USC and yet you have your Trojans higher? Jusat can’t shake your former employee biases huh? And 2 lose OU ahead of Texas? Did you write this crap just to intice responses or do you actually believe what you typed?
    It’s pathetic when so many people believe the BCBS is a good system. They think any talk even bad is good for the game. That way of thinking is bullshit and most fans are fed up with the powers that be trying to ram illogical thoughts and ideals down their throats. Contrary to the media’s believe us fans know just as much and in many cases more about football than you dick wads do. Now get you head ouuta your ass and re-think you final poll. Give us an unbiased result.

    Bammer (hate em as you know but lost to UF and Utah. Who else has that many so called quality losses?)
    Penn State
    Texas Tech
    Boise State

    Outside lookin in: BYU

  6. bucknut January 9, 2009 at 10:32 pm #

    Alright Mr Auburn you need to quit being a negative nancy.

  7. bucknut January 9, 2009 at 10:34 pm #

    Playoffs anyone?

  8. AUMan76sucks January 10, 2009 at 12:31 am #

    I’ll tell you who else had as many quality losses as Utah…Oklahoma. So there goes that logic.

  9. AUMan76sucks January 10, 2009 at 12:33 am #

    Also-You rank Texas Tech but not Oklahoma? Really? 65-21 anybody? Not to mention that Oklahoma had a more impressive bowl loss then Texas Tech. I’d really like to see your reasoning there.

  10. ursine January 10, 2009 at 8:15 am #

    AUman, as a true college football fan, and I know you are one, you really should know better than to employ your attenuated and twisted connect the dots logic of who beat who.

    For example, by your logic, Tulane, at a dismal 2-10, has a realistic claim to the national championship this year. How is that, you ask? The Green Wave beat Louisiana-Monroe, who beat Troy, who beat Middle Tennessee, who beat Maryland, who beat Wake Forest, who beat Mississippi. Ole Miss, as you may recall, just happened to be the one team that defeated BCS/AP national champion Florida this season. And just for good measure, Ole Miss also handily beat Texas Tech, who beat Texas, who beat Oklahoma.

    So there you go. Tulane are your national champions, AUman.

    Now please give that noise a rest.

  11. bucknut January 10, 2009 at 10:51 am #

    Bottom line you can’t daisy chain games, because teams are starting to become more competitive. If there’s one thing I’ve realized is that you can’t predict sometimes who’s gonna win. It just depends on who shows up. This is why the BCS will crash and burn. Because it leaves us all feeling that the season is unfinished.

  12. Rishi January 10, 2009 at 1:34 pm #

    #1 Utah.

  13. AUman76 January 10, 2009 at 10:03 pm #

    Chokelahoma was a mere oversight. I re-arranged the order of 6 through 10 and simply didn’t re-type the Sooners. They were actually suppose to be #6 and Boise State is also on the outside looking in. Hope that makes y’all a tad happier? lol

  14. AUman76 January 10, 2009 at 10:14 pm #

    nanny? lol bucknut! A great big hell yeah to “PLAYOFFS”.

  15. AUman76 January 10, 2009 at 10:21 pm #

    Hey ursine since we were the only team to beat Florida two years ago that means Auburn won the title in 2006 right? Nice try but you went a weeeeee bit to far with your connect the dots. But at least it was in the same season. All the assholes that said USC would beat my Tigers in 2004 based the possible results on the 2002 and 2003 seasons. Guess every year every team is always the same. Yep, the last few Notre Dame teams are the same as all rest they fielded over the years. And suredly Michigan is exactly the same as always. No way a team can actually improve or fall by the way side from one year to the next, huh?

  16. AUman76 January 10, 2009 at 10:26 pm #

    hey swollowman76, What does Utah have to do with loses? they had none. The reference is to bammer. But you are right about Chokelahoma, as stated above I deleted my 6-10 selections and re-arranged em. Simply omitted the sooners by mistake.

  17. ursine January 11, 2009 at 8:11 am #

    AUman, I have no idea what it is you are trying to say there. I have never heard anyone who truly knows anything about college football realistically try to make claims that because x team beat y team z years ago, that that would have any true bearing on what might happen today. My point, once again, was simply that the connect the dots logic that you used to question HP’s rankings is inherently flawed.

    A simpler example might be to look at Penn State. At the beginning of the season, PSU absolutely housed Oregon State. Oregon State went on to upset USC in Pac-10 play. Again using your logic, a simple one-two connect the dots should have meant that PSU would destroy USC then, right? Except not so much. That logic simply doesn’t work.

    So again, I would beseech you to please just give it a rest.

  18. AUman76 January 11, 2009 at 7:41 pm #

    lol, that’s the problem ursine you just don’t get it!

  19. ursine January 12, 2009 at 6:42 am #

    Am I to assume that that is what passes for a zinger in the south?

    Regardless, way to dodge the issue.

  20. bucknut January 12, 2009 at 10:57 pm #


  21. AUman76 January 14, 2009 at 9:00 pm #

    Whew…….. ursine, there for a minute I thought you said “passes for a dinger” lol Uh oh! Another zinger from Dixie.

  22. AUman76 January 14, 2009 at 9:01 pm #

    bucknut….what’s got you “cracked” up. lol

  23. ursine January 15, 2009 at 8:04 am #

    Dyslexia is no laughing matter.

  24. bucknut January 15, 2009 at 11:16 am #

    Or ADHD.

  25. Auman76 January 16, 2009 at 8:53 pm #


  26. Eric January 17, 2009 at 10:27 am #

    I love AUman. He’s just like all the Auburn fans that came to USC and talked all the SEC nonsense right before USC dominated them 2 years in a row.

    All USC does is roll big time teams. UT is the lone exception – and that was the best college football game ever.

    Hard for me to have OU over USC right now. If Florida could avoid 1 team in the country in a ‘final’ game, it would clearly be USC. The majority of Gator fans would admit that.

  27. Auman76 January 17, 2009 at 9:00 pm #

    Eric, if USC could get past the Stanford’s and Oregon States of the world they could earn the right to play Florida or some other SEC team in the BCS-BS-NC Game! Once you can do that again then talk to me about the SEC avoiding the Rubber Boys. One more time for people like you, the 2002 and 2003 seasons had nothing to do with 2004! Hell…..if it did why play the games from one year to next we would already know the outcome. Maybe it would make you leftwing coast types happy if the NC was just awarded to USC before the season starts since it is their to lose every season. At least that’s what y’all think. By the way Penn State from the sorry big11 did a pretty good job of scoring on that so called great defense of SC’s in the second half.

  28. Eric January 18, 2009 at 11:54 am #

    I love your jab at the defense in the 2nd half. You know you’re grasping when…

    I would argue the opposite when it comes to USC over the last 8 years. I think the teams have been very consistent. The same stud recruits, same philosophy both offensively and defensively. Just very similar teams. Arrogance/Pete’s ego seems to be the consistent weakness as well.

    USC has struggled with teams that are used to the mystic that comes with playing USC. Sure, they should win some of those games, but PAC X opponents are more savvy when it comes to playing USC. Period. Auburn, Va Tech, OU, Ohio St., Michigan, Penn St, etc. etc….Those games are very similar over the years. It’s why I’ve made so much money betting on USC in out of conference games. It’s a great bet.

    My question is: What’s the ideal national champion?

    My answer is the team with the highest ceiling. If you agree with that, then you should pay more attention to the games that teams win, rather than lose.

    To me, it is more important to win big games than it is to not lose to average teams.

    USC has done a consistently remarkable job of winning big games under Pete. That’s my only point.

    USC vs. Florida would’ve been a pickem game in Vegas. You cannot say that about any other team. Florida is a 7-10 point favorite over Utah and 3-6 pts against everyone else. Those are just the facts. I personally would’ve bet on USC, but 50% of the public would’ve gone the other way.

    I realize you heart the SEC. You think they’re the bestest players in all the whole wide world. Bestest coaches ever….that you just want to love on!!! … and I would agree that there are some great players and teams. But it is foolish to say that USC wouldn’t thrive in that conference. There’s just no evidence to support that assertion.

  29. AUman76 January 18, 2009 at 1:59 pm #

    Eric, great teams, no matter the era, don’t lose to the Standford team USC lost to. They don’t even allow that Oregon State team in the game let alone lose it. Talent is often overrated when it isn’t challenged any more often that USC is in the pac1. The RB that transferred from SC to Florida played very lil this season but at least he has that ring he went to USC to get! The SEC was actually young and admittedly down overall this year. But it was still better than any other conference. Ole Miss proved how you need more than just offense to win against a decent team. Bammer proved what havin your bubble burst in a conference championship came can do to you. That and the loss of their best player. But they weren’t a great team so much as lucky that the teams they played were down at the time they played em. Utah, BYU and or Boise State need to be in the pac12. At least wwe would have a better idea what SC really has on defense yearly.
    The best thing that could happen to D1A, screw the new name noone uses it, is a playoff with at least 16 teams. Contrary to belief 8 Is Not Enough. There’s lil difference between #1 and # 25 these days.

  30. Eric January 18, 2009 at 4:28 pm #

    The one thing in there that I agreed with, let alone understood, was that a playoff with 8 teams is too small. I agree.

    You should pay more attention when teams go on the road. Anyone in college football can win a home game. That’s just a fact proven time and again. Especially when it’s a Thursday, or a night game, and the students are even more liquored up.

    Your (and most arrogant SEC supporters’) main flaw is discrediting everyone’s excuses and then making your own. Your excuse for Alabama is tired.

    The Pac 10 is full of teams that have put together top 15 teams over the last 10 years. I’m not sure why Utah or Boise St. gives more validity to the conference.

    Personally, I think all conferences should be 10 teams so you can play everyone in a 9 game regular season. It annoys me how the Big 12, SEC and Big 11 avoid teams during the regular season. It nullifies logic behind the weak out of conference strategy.

    I like you dismissing talent that goes on to thrive in the NFL just because the Pac 10 has teams that you perceive as weak. It’s fundamentally flawed, but so is most SEC talk.

  31. Anonymous January 20, 2009 at 11:19 am #

    I agree with both of you AUman76 and Eric. I do like how the pac10 is a round robin, everybody plays each other, but I think it’s important that the pac10 and the big11 have a conference championship(SEC,ACC,MAC,Big12) and all the rest. I hate every year how we play Michigan the third week of November and then we’re done. Nothing would make me happier than to play them again, in a conference championship just to whip their ass again.

  32. AUman76 January 20, 2009 at 8:54 pm #

    Eric, I agree about the 10 teams. The reason I suggest going to 12 per conference is because that’s what the NCAA requires to have a conference championship game. Hell…. I miss the old SWC and for all I care they can have Arky back. South Carolina needs to be in the ACC and GT should rejoin the SEC. Notre Dame need to get off their “GOD loves us so we’re special high horse” and join the big11. BC and Penn State need to be in the Big East. That would be a decent conference with those two and the re-emergence of the ‘Cuse. Of course with all that talent USC should be in the NFL right? lol

  33. bucknut January 21, 2009 at 3:18 pm #

    God I would think West Virginia or even Pitt would be a better choice for the big 11 than Notre Dame.

  34. Auman76 January 22, 2009 at 10:33 pm #

    bucky, so far as a quality program yes but when it comes to the almighty dollar? You better invite the Dames from West Bend. lol

  35. bucknut January 23, 2009 at 1:10 pm #

    Pitt would be a good addition because of Penn State. That rivalry would be renewed.

  36. Eric January 23, 2009 at 4:44 pm #

    Man you laugh out loud a lot.

  37. Auman76 January 23, 2009 at 9:16 pm #

    E, that’s what life’s all about. If you can’t have a lil fun why the hell even get outta bed every day? lmao oops lol

  38. Auman76 January 23, 2009 at 9:18 pm #

    Bucky, That would be ok but what about ND? Den thar basturds gotta go sumwere. Hell would be ok with me but they seem to have connections in high places. lol That lol was fer the E.

  39. bucknut January 27, 2009 at 11:22 pm #

    Well I wouldn’t necessarily be against Notre Dame, but that program will go nowhere on Charlie Weiss’s watch. If they win 10 games this year, we’ll never hear the end of how much a genius he is. If you think O-state is over-hyped you should hear all the crap we have to endure in the mid-west over Notre Dame.