2019 Pundit Predictions

[everybody knows my name]

Picking Minnesota to finish better than Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Iowa is just beyond stupid.

Because Wisconsin's 37-15 loss to Minnesota proved that they're better than the Gophers, Iowa is the West version of Ohio State, and Nebraska is obviously the only team that can improve from year to year.  Beyond stupid.

 

[Saunders]

When i hear the rationale behind picking Minnesota, it's mostly due to the schedule. But the biggest thing I'm seeing is that there's virtually no separation between 1-6. The winner is going to be 10-2 or 9-3, and the difference between 1st and 6th place is 1 game and a tiebreaker.

 

[Undone]

The winner is going to be 10-2 or 9-3

If the winner is 10-2 then it will definitely not be Wisconsin or Minnesota, I can say that much. Wisconsin's schedule is too brutal for 10-2; they're actually fairly likely to go 8-4.

As you say, Minnesota's only real boost is their weak cross-divisional schedule: At Rutgers, Maryland at home, Penn State at home. I predict they'll lose to both Maryland at Penn State and go 7-5. 

 

[WyoHusker56]

Because Wisconsin's 37-15 loss to Minnesota proved that they're better than the Gophers, Iowa is the West version of Ohio State, and Nebraska is obviously the only team that can improve from year to year.  Beyond stupid.

True :thumbs

 

[Husker in WI]

I believe in Minnesota less than Iowa or Wisconsin as well, but it's a reasonable pick. Really just depends on how much you believe in the defensive improvements. Their offense will be good, although I don't think great unless on of the QBs takes a huge step forward. But they easily have more skill position talent than Iowa, and better receivers than Wisconsin.

 

[Scarlet Overkill]

Because Wisconsin's 37-15 loss to Minnesota proved that they're better than the Gophers, Iowa is the West version of Ohio State, and Nebraska is obviously the only team that can improve from year to year.  Beyond stupid.

Now you're getting it.  Finally!

 

[HuskerNation1]

Some more predictions.  The first talks about Nebraska being relevant again under "Forst" and the second has us in the Citrus bowl against A&M.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thebiglead.com/2019/07/29/college-fooball-bold-predictions/amp/

https://247sports.com/LongFormArticle/College-football-bowl-projections-preseason-Top-25-rankings-Alabama-Crimson-Tide-Texas-Longhorns-2019-134005116/Amp/

 

[HuskerNation1]

While this is not a prediction, it is a nice article about fan bases. Guess who is number 1?

https://fbschedules.com/college-football-programs-that-did-the-best-worst-job-of-filling-their-seats-in-2018/amp/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&__twitter_impression=true

 

[brophog]

When i hear the rationale behind picking Minnesota, it's mostly due to the schedule. But the biggest thing I'm seeing is that there's virtually no separation between 1-6. The winner is going to be 10-2 or 9-3, and the difference between 1st and 6th place is 1 game and a tiebreaker.

It’s schedule, experience and returning production. Which is what makes a comparison to Iowa so interesting. As much as we all say 1-6 is pretty even, the predictions are pretty static. Iowa is almost universally 1 or 2 (generally swapping with Nebraska) while Minnesota is almost universally 5 or 6 (generally swapping with Purdue).

Yet, Iowa doesn’t have a favor schedule, having to travel to what’s generally the top 3 teams by these predictions, doesn’t return much experience, and outside of Stanley doesn’t return much production. 

 

[runningblind]

Because Wisconsin's 37-15 loss to Minnesota proved that they're better than the Gophers, Iowa is the West version of Ohio State, and Nebraska is obviously the only team that can improve from year to year.  Beyond stupid.

I'm picking the Gophers to be top 2 in the west.  I can see progress there. 

 

[Husker from Kansas]

We need Minnesota to continue to progress. It will go along way for the BIG if the west becomes more competitive. Maybe one day we will have two teams in the playoffs

 

[Blackshirt316]

I'm picking the Gophers to be top 2 in the west.  I can see progress there. 

The problem with the Gophers is they have the worst coach in the division not named Lovie Smith.

 

[Husker in WI]

The problem with the Gophers is they have the worst coach in the division not named Lovie Smith.

That's a pretty bold claim. Most annoying sure, but outside of Lovie I don't know how to rank them. Frost is very unproven, even if we believe he's the best coach.

Fleck has a similar but less impressive resume - took a terrible-P5 team to an undefeated regular season, just took a a little longer. Rebuilding Western Michigan was definitely a bigger task than UCF though - prior to UCFs winless season they were good, there was some talent. WMU was not good.

Chryst was mediocre at Pittsburgh (understandable), and has been good at Wisconsin but no conference titles and had his worst year last year, when it's finally a team he built.

Fitz gets a lot of love because no one thinks you can win at NW, but it's tough to call him the best coach without winning a conference title in 13 years. I get that it's Northwestern, but I don't feel like he has a stronger argument than anyone else.

Ferentz and Dantonio both seem good but not great. They're definitely proven with actual conference titles. Iowa's was a long time ago though, and Dantonio followed up his 3 in 7 years by going 20-18 since then.

If you're going purely on resume, it's probably Dantonio - Ferentz - Fitzgerald - Frost/Fleck - Lovie. To be clear I don't think that's accurate, but ranking it any other way is subjective to some degree. It's really more incomplete grades for Frost and Fleck (and Lovie technically, but it seems pretty clear he's not good), they just don't have the time at P5 schools to know for sure. It's too early to tell, but I see nothing about Fitz/Ferentz/Chryst that makes me think they are definitely better coaches than Fleck.

 

[Nebfanatic]

That's a pretty bold claim. Most annoying sure, but outside of Lovie I don't know how to rank them. Frost is very unproven, even if we believe he's the best coach.

Fleck has a similar but less impressive resume - took a terrible-P5 team to an undefeated regular season, just took a a little longer. Rebuilding Western Michigan was definitely a bigger task than UCF though - prior to UCFs winless season they were good, there was some talent. WMU was not good.

Chryst was mediocre at Pittsburgh (understandable), and has been good at Wisconsin but no conference titles and had his worst year last year, when it's finally a team he built.

Fitz gets a lot of love because no one thinks you can win at NW, but it's tough to call him the best coach without winning a conference title in 13 years. I get that it's Northwestern, but I don't feel like he has a stronger argument than anyone else.

Ferentz and Dantonio both seem good but not great. They're definitely proven with actual conference titles. Iowa's was a long time ago though, and Dantonio followed up his 3 in 7 years by going 20-18 since then.

If you're going purely on resume, it's probably Dantonio - Ferentz - Fitzgerald - Frost/Fleck - Lovie. To be clear I don't think that's accurate, but ranking it any other way is subjective to some degree. It's really more incomplete grades for Frost and Fleck (and Lovie technically, but it seems pretty clear he's not good), they just don't have the time at P5 schools to know for sure. It's too early to tell, but I see nothing about Fitz/Ferentz/Chryst that makes me think they are definitely better coaches than Fleck.

Dantonio isn't in our division.

 

[Husker in WI]

Dantonio isn't in our division.

Good point, swapped them and Purdue in my head for some reason. Brohm is really an incomplete too - looks like he'll be good, but he's only had two years in the Big Ten.