<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Fanblogs.com - Latest Comments in Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://fanblogs.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://fanblogs.disqus.com/playboy_ranks_college_footballs_top_50/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:48:15 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-16364014</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You might want to change years, that one is getting a little stale.....&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">OU_Ron</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:48:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-16354571</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It's funny how 58 out of the 60 coaches voted Florida as the top spot, and the other 2 votes went to Texas, but playboy decided to pick Oklahoma.  &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">toddq</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:34:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-15420628</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You'r book has W Virginia 13 at has them at # 7?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ronmayfield</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:37:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-3139485</link><description>&lt;p&gt;GO JACKETS!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">BOBBY</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 22:30:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-2027261</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I may love Purdue but 7-5 may be giving my Boilers a little too much credit. Hopefully you're right Playboy&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PurdueFan</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 02:29:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1936301</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Teams ranked to high 15-clemson, 18 V. Tech, 19 Arkansas 20 Boise St. 22 Kansas St  24 Oregon St. 30-Central Flor. Teams ranked to low 26 BYU, 32-Penn St. 39 Oregon, 40-Alabama, also where is Wake Forest&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">TheD-man</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 01:35:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1884385</link><description>&lt;p&gt;KSU in the top 25? What a joke. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">conner</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:50:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1812926</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Have you peed you pants yet?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Porcine</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 24 Aug 2008 20:14:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1778676</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;They are the coolest things I have seen.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Seriously? You should get cable. :-)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kevin @ Fanblogs</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:29:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1769512</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Did you see the article in Playboy about Armagnets?  If you are a Gator fan you really should check this web site out.  &lt;a href="http://www.armagnets.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="www.armagnets.com"&gt;www.armagnets.com&lt;/a&gt; !  They are the coolest things I have seen.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gatorbloodrunsgreen</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:21:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1644430</link><description>&lt;p&gt;WAR EAGLE!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Cobia</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:52:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1626887</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The best part of that link was seeing the old photos of former Playboy All American teams. It is nice to see how the sport has become more integrated and changes in the uniforms.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Anonymous IV</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:36:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1606608</link><description>&lt;p&gt;DUDE! Welcome back!!!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Kevin @ Fanblogs</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:06:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1605583</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Who reads Playboy?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">AndrewR</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:22:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1605256</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No love for CMU?&lt;br&gt;The Chips are going to be dominant in the MAC this year, and that'd be good for at least a top 50...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">UofMSnowboarder</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:49:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1603685</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Where are the terps? Maryland is a lock to finish in the top 50, biggest snub by far&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lee</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:35:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1593941</link><description>&lt;p&gt;h.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">aVoiceInSC</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:20:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1582703</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I say the same thing when my team isn't No.1.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">noveds</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:58:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1578707</link><description>&lt;p&gt;A worthless Playboy, Man, don't be so hard on 'em.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Porcine</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:12:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1578291</link><description>&lt;p&gt;What a joke.......I guess circulation in the midwest must be lagging....&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But, it could've been worse...had they featured the "Girls of the Big East", then West Virginia would've been #1...LOL&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">PsiChiPsu</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 18:18:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1570681</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sounds simple in principle.  The question would be, "Who tallies the votes?"&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Zac</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 15:43:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1570654</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ahhhh, trash talking:  It feels like the season has started already.  It almost feels as if OK &amp;amp; TX are rivals in the same conference that play each other every year.  OOPS!!!  Silly me, they are...in the same conference...and all the rest of that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I still think OK has the better road to get there than TX (Sorry, TC), which means the Horns had better win the shoot-out, if they expect to have a chance.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Zac</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 15:41:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1569615</link><description>&lt;p&gt;So how do we do that? Do we all submit our polls and someone tallies the votes?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">aVoiceInSC</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 12:58:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1557360</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You also made a mistake with these comments you just posted! You sound more like you are projecting Texas outcome than Oklahoma's! Cream &amp;amp; Crimson Pride! Book 'em Horns!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lennie Collins</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:36:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Playboy ranks college football's top 50</title><link>http://www.fanblogs.com/ncaa/007678.php#comment-1557353</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Oklahoma WILL WIN more conference games than Texas WILL WIN overall games! Oklahoma will go 13 - 0 with a National Title and Texas will be 6 -7 with a lost to a Big 11 team in the Alamo Bowl. Texas will have more players arrested than actual wins! Book 'em Horns! CRIMSON -N- CREAM TRUE!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lennie Collins</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:34:05 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>