Week 1 is worthless.

[Chris Flanagan]

So SBNation did a preview article on Stanford-Washington State stating "Week 1 is worthless":

Week 1 is basically the preseason, a week that resides completely outside of the flow of the college football season. Teams have had an abnormal amount of time to prepare for one opponent, freshmen are seeing the field for the first time, the depth chart is wet concrete and procedural penalties are abound. The results count, but they are often inexplicable, defied by everything we see thereafter.

Here are some Week 1 results from this season:

• South Carolina 17, North Carolina 13. The Tar Heels haven't lost since and have beaten at least two teams that are, on paper, quite a bit better than the Gamecocks.
• Auburn 31, Louisville 24. The sixth-ranked Tigers wobbled but held steady against a pretty strong Cardinals team. Two promising teams ... who have since gone 6-6.
• Texas A&M 38, Arizona State 17. A fun, back-and-forth game between two top-20 caliber teams expected to contend in their respective divisions. The two are unranked and a combined 4-4 in conference play.

Et cetera. Because we are starved for football and so desperate to get answers to all the questions we asked in the offseason, we overreact to every shred of evidence Week 1 provides us. And then the next 13 weeks overrule almost everything we saw.

Thoughts? I happen to agree with this because Texas is a better team than what they were in South Bend. And next year, they could beat Notre Dame and finish under .500. 

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/10/29/9634182/stanford-washington-state-preview-pac-12-north-week-1-is-worthless

 

[streettopeschel]

Texas was a worse team in week 5 than in week one.

 

[Chris Flanagan]

Texas was a worse team in week 5 than in week one.

Fair but the game of football changes week to week. I just don't like the broad generalizations about college football after week 1.

 

[MikeV73]

Week 1 pretty much sums up the Horn's season thus far.