Season Predictions

[teachercd]

If we can finish 10-2 with minimal injuries, 9-3 with standard injuries or 8-4 with "Nebraska standard" injuries/Riley befuddling loss to crap team we should be in pretty good shape moving into 2017. Next season feels like a breakout year.

These are pretty much my minimum expectations for this year. If we hit those records in 2016, next year is the make or break year. But this year is gonna be easier schedule wise.

I think that sounds about right.

8-4 would be the least I could see it being

6 or 7 wins and I think people are going to start digging into Riley's records at OSU a bit more and instead of praising his 5 wins a year they will start dissecting them.

5 wins or less and I can't see how he stays...I really think at that point he basically negotiates a nice retirement package for himself

 

[Sargon]

9 wins.

Betting line is 8.5 I'll give em the benefit of the doubt for fun (I'd go 8 if I was forced to bet money).

Forecasted improvements: coaches/players more in synch. Better rushing offense. 20% reduction in 'really bad' plays from Tommy. Excessive bad luck last year won't repeat. Better pass defense (still not good however). Nothing forecasted to get worse. All that plus schedule should move NU from 5 up to 8 or 9 wins. Luck and uber-winner (can't be beat, won't...be....beat!) attitude could get em to 10 but honestly I don't think this team's starters have the uber-winner attitude (not even close actually).

Endless bickering about NU's recruiting stars is beyond tiresome. Starters matter and third teamers and redshirts mean nothing this year. 4 star juniors are more valuable than freshman. All BIG 1st and 2nd team returning players are more valuable than a 4 star recruiting ranking. Etc etc on and on. So much endless myopic BS on this board re the supposed talent of NU's players. Tiresome. Vegas says 8.5 wins. Vegas is the best predictor, you or me...we aren't. The all-Big teams and the NFL draft will tell us exactly how good NU's starters were this year, like always.

 

[jjamuss]

Homer prediction... DOH!

10 wins, West Champs, beat by OSU in B1G championship. Top 15 finish.

Hunger Games commence!

 

[GBRFAN]

6 wins maybe 7 - huskerboard continues to make excuses. We fade into history like Bama did until we make our return.

Edit: if we ever do in my life time. What is our breaking point when do we say enough is enough? We fired a HC for a done nothing do nothing coach enoy fall. I know I wont.

I hope I am wrong but I wont be. If we win the Big ten this year and are in playoffs that would be great. However we wont and we wont. I would love to eat my words. This is our easiest schedule from last two years. If Riley cant do it this year say good bye.

Not happening

 

[Hooked on Huskers]

I want our Huskers will break Top25 or even Top10 in final polls. Also, finally win CCG trophy. (19 years drought

)

 

[drfish]

Anyone who has ever been a coach can attest that it is hard to win a bunch of games with new OL and DL.

7 wins.

I coached HS football for 21 years, the last 15 at the class A level. Turning over an entire starting 5 on the offensive line was not unheard of and turning over at least 3 every year wa pretty much the norm. Experience is nice and always preferred, but more times than not I have seen Jr's that never played a down of varsity move in and play quite well as Sr's. If the guys are talented, and these guys are, they can step in and surprise you. Nick Gates was arguably the best OL on the starting 5 last year, and he was a RSfreshman. He wasn't good because the right guard was telling him the plays in the huddle. He was good because he was athetic and knew what he was doing.

Give them a chance they might surprise you.

As far as the Dline goes. Freedom, Dzurius, and Maurice played a lot last year. Starting on the Dline is kinda overrated. It would be wonderful to have all 4 of the guys back that left, but then everyone would be talking undefeated. Stoltenberg, the Davis tripletts, and D. Neal are going to play well IMO. You can throw Newell in the group also.

Exactly. Nicely put.

Agreed. IIRC the team that most on this board considers the most dominating in college football history returned 1 starter on O-line (no sacks allowed in the entire season) and 1 on D-line. And yes, those two teams clearly had more depth than the current version, but I fully expect both lines to perform at a higher level due to two factors:

1. Year two of new systems.

2. Year two under Phillip.

 

[RunMickeyRun02]

I know NU's talent isn't amazing, but it still should be good enough to easily win 8 or 9 games this season. If that doesn't happen, it's because of a coaching deficiency, not a talent deficiency.

I just don't like lowering my standards and expectations as a fan to accept anything less.

I believe we have some good players and have a chance to win a bunch of games, even making it to the conf. title game certainly. But, the talent level of the Big Ten teams is, by historic comparisons, fairly even. Ohio State is much more talented that the rest of the conference with most likely Michigan and Wisconsin 2 and 3. After that, arguably Nebraska, Michigan State and Penn State in that order. I know some would put Michigan State above us but I think we have proven in recent games to be pretty comparable. I think I would give us the edge IF we had our D Tackles returning. Maybe our youth will prove up to the task but ?? If we returned our linemen from last year, I think we would be the clear favorite to win the West. We should know by the first Big Ten game what we have. Tommy Armstrong will play his career best football and will be a serious contender for All Conference QB. He might in fact win it IF Huskers win the West.

Wisconsin's recruiting hasn't been that great, along with the rest of the West.

Heres the 2015 composite:

Good breakdown, I'm suprised we're ahead of Wisky.

9 wins.

Betting line is 8.5 I'll give em the benefit of the doubt for fun (I'd go 8 if I was forced to bet money).

Forecasted improvements: coaches/players more in synch. Better rushing offense. 20% reduction in 'really bad' plays from Tommy. Excessive bad luck last year won't repeat. Better pass defense (still not good however). Nothing forecasted to get worse. All that plus schedule should move NU from 5 up to 8 or 9 wins. Luck and uber-winner (can't be beat, won't...be....beat!) attitude could get em to 10 but honestly I don't think this team's starters have the uber-winner attitude (not even close actually).

Endless bickering about NU's recruiting stars is beyond tiresome. Starters matter and third teamers and redshirts mean nothing this year. 4 star juniors are more valuable than freshman. All BIG 1st and 2nd team returning players are more valuable than a 4 star recruiting ranking. Etc etc on and on. So much endless myopic BS on this board re the supposed talent of NU's players. Tiresome. Vegas says 8.5 wins. Vegas is the best predictor, you or me...we aren't. The all-Big teams and the NFL draft will tell us exactly how good NU's starters were this year, like always.

Yeah, I don't know where I would go on that line, it's perfectly placed imo.

I too tire of the recruiting talk but even I have to admit it does matter.

 

[Saunders]

Good breakdown, I'm suprised we're ahead of Wisky.

They haven't consistently recruited well. They've simply had above average coaching, and continuity (for awhile anyway).

 

[cm husker]

Good breakdown, I'm suprised we're ahead of Wisky.

They haven't consistently recruited well. They've simply had above average coaching, and continuity (for awhile anyway).

I think Wisky has also fallen "victim" to the recruiting rankings biases because the upper midwest is not considered a recruiting hotbed, so kids from up there are traditionally ranked lower than kids from a coast or the south.

Since 2008, they've had roughly 33 players draft, including 5 first rounders and 4 second rounders. That's not up there with the powerhouse recruiting schools, but it's definitely at the top of the rest (probably good for 10th to 20th in the nation over that period, taking a guess). Of those top 2 round picks, all were 3-star or lower guys, except Melvin Gordon, who was a .89.. 4 star

It's also helped that they've been particularly talented along the lines, based mainly on homegrown kids. They had arguably as good of a run of local wisconsin talent along the lines as the Huskers with NE talent in the 90s.

 

[Red Five]

15-0 if the coaches call plays that work...

Seriously, I expect a B1G West title. Whatever record gets us to that (9-3?), I'll take it.

I'm not worried about the offense. It will be fine, just like it was last year. The D is what needs to make major improvements.

 

[NUinID]

Good breakdown, I'm suprised we're ahead of Wisky.

They haven't consistently recruited well. They've simply had above average coaching, and continuity (for awhile anyway).

I think Wisky has also fallen "victim" to the recruiting rankings biases because the upper midwest is not considered a recruiting hotbed, so kids from up there are traditionally ranked lower than kids from a coast or the south.

Since 2008, they've had roughly 33 players draft, including 5 first rounders and 4 second rounders. That's not up there with the powerhouse recruiting schools, but it's definitely at the top of the rest (probably good for 10th to 20th in the nation over that period, taking a guess). Of those top 2 round picks, all were 3-star or lower guys, except Melvin Gordon, who was a .89.. 4 star

It's also helped that they've been particularly talented along the lines, based mainly on homegrown kids. They had arguably as good of a run of local wisconsin talent along the lines as the Huskers with NE talent in the 90s.

Most definitely this is the case. Lots of huge Northern European bodies living in upper midwest. OLinemen are the hardest players to project to the D-1 level and Wisconsin does a great job of evaluating and developing talent in that area. They get good RB to come and play, maybe not SEC types but they do a good job of finding a good RB every year. They also have a real good walk on program and move kids around well to fit what they need.

Alvarez very much patterned his program after what Nebraska has done in the past. They get good athletes for the most part, maybe not the elite all the time but solid smart kids, they develop them well, and play fundamentally sound football. This formula is going to win you a lot of games. They often fall short against the really talented teams, but they always play hard. They also have a much bigger pool instate to draw from. Wiscosin's population is about 3x that of Nebraska.

 

[RunMickeyRun02]

15-0 if the coaches call plays that work...

Seriously, I expect a B1G West title. Whatever record gets us to that (9-3?), I'll take it.

I'm not worried about the offense. It will be fine, just like it was last year. The D is what needs to make major improvements.

The 15-0 made me do a double take, guess I'm not used to the playoff thing yet.

 

[Hooked on Huskers]

 

[KazLong]

15-0 if the coaches call plays that work...

Seriously, I expect a B1G West title. Whatever record gets us to that (9-3?), I'll take it.

I'm not worried about the offense. It will be fine, just like it was last year. The D is what needs to make major improvements.

Well lets see what happens in Decemeber. We might win our first two. This is literally the easiest season we have had in a long time, If we get to the B10 champ game and lose again by lets say 50 what do we say then?

 

[Redux]

15-0 if the coaches call plays that work...

Seriously, I expect a B1G West title. Whatever record gets us to that (9-3?), I'll take it.

I'm not worried about the offense. It will be fine, just like it was last year. The D is what needs to make major improvements.

Well lets see what happens in Decemeber. We might win our first two. This is literally the easiest season we have had in a long time, If we get to the B10 champ game and lose again by lets say 50 what do we say then?

Oregon, @NW coming off a 10-3 season, @Wisconsin, @tOSU, @Iowa coming off a 12-0 regular season

^That is the easiest season we have had in a long time? I would disagree.