I think we roll the rest of the schedule..

[bolshoifish]

I have been extremely disappointed by the defense, but I think we are extremely undervalued right now. The espn BIG blog has us at 5th.. that is laughable. Who has Michigan and Michigan St beat? (The Michigan win over ND is an oddity of nature, so I am discounting it). As far as Illinois is concerned, if you think getting Pinkeled is bad.. then you really don't want to be Zook'led. Maybe his new assistants have changed things, but historically.. Zook will lose (badly).

The only team that has any offense on the rest of the schedule is Michigan (just view the Iowa vs. Penn St. game). The rest of the schedule has our strength (offense) pitted against the other teams strength (defense) and our weakness (defense) pitted against their weakness (offense). In the end, I think our defense is better than their offenses (again, short of Michigan).

I think the hardest games on our schedule are over.. Michigan is a house of cards.. people around here don't have the stomach for Marteniz.. Robinson is much more prone to mistakes. He just throws the ball up and hopes it is caught by his teammates (even more so than Mart.)

I'm really not much of a kool-aid drinker.. if we were still in the B12 I would have a different opinion. There is only one team to fear in the B1G, and we already played them.

Having NU as 5th in the conference is not laughable --- we were, generally, more often about 4th or 5th in the Big 12 each season upon the completion of the regular season. Not that that factors in here except to say that recently (last decade or so) NU has been a #4/#5 type major conference team. To this season, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan undoubtedly are above us --- legitimately so... no cogent argument can be posited against that. To have Michigan Stae above is is not unreasonable.

You ask who Michigan and Michigan State have beated? Well... who has NU beaten?

4th in conference right now is a legit and defensible ranking for NU. 5th in conference is also a legit and defensible ranking for NU as well.

Again, I would posit that NU has been a #4 or #5 in the conference type team for a decade --- why is surprising that NU is again at that level?

We play Michigan State and Michigan in the not-too-distant future --- I think you will see then that they will be formidable foes for NU.

This is not the 1970's, the 1980's or the 1990's anymore --- the days where it was unthinkable to be mid/upper mid-conference level are long past for NU. Since 2000, mid/upper mid-conference level has been the norm for NU. Why the surprise?

Your right, I do see us 5th in B12 (maybe even 6th), but this is not the B12. Michigan and Michigan State got flat out dominated by Notre Dame (until the last 2 minutes), maybe I'm living in a world were strength of schedule matters, but if you have 2 5-1 teams with one losing to #4 and playing some decent competition (Washington is a good football team) and the other losing to an unranked team... and playing nobody (MSU)... then the former team gets higher rank (which is exactly the way the AP and Coaches view it). Further, MSU's lofty defense has played the absolute worst offenses in college football. The one good offense they played, they lost badly.

For Michigan, they needed a comeback win against NW.. so its not like they've played so much better than us. The only reason they don't have a loss is because they've played the bottom dwellers in the conference. I guarantee you that if we swap schedules, they have at least one loss and we have 2 wins.

I put us 3rd, right behind Illini (even though they are overratted, they have beat decent competition. I still think Washington is better than ASU though). The concept of rating teams solely on win-loss is just baffling to me.

 

[robsker]

I have been extremely disappointed by the defense, but I think we are extremely undervalued right now. The espn BIG blog has us at 5th.. that is laughable. Who has Michigan and Michigan St beat? (The Michigan win over ND is an oddity of nature, so I am discounting it). As far as Illinois is concerned, if you think getting Pinkeled is bad.. then you really don't want to be Zook'led. Maybe his new assistants have changed things, but historically.. Zook will lose (badly).

The only team that has any offense on the rest of the schedule is Michigan (just view the Iowa vs. Penn St. game). The rest of the schedule has our strength (offense) pitted against the other teams strength (defense) and our weakness (defense) pitted against their weakness (offense). In the end, I think our defense is better than their offenses (again, short of Michigan).

I think the hardest games on our schedule are over.. Michigan is a house of cards.. people around here don't have the stomach for Marteniz.. Robinson is much more prone to mistakes. He just throws the ball up and hopes it is caught by his teammates (even more so than Mart.)

I'm really not much of a kool-aid drinker.. if we were still in the B12 I would have a different opinion. There is only one team to fear in the B1G, and we already played them.

Having NU as 5th in the conference is not laughable --- we were, generally, more often about 4th or 5th in the Big 12 each season upon the completion of the regular season. Not that that factors in here except to say that recently (last decade or so) NU has been a #4/#5 type major conference team. To this season, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan undoubtedly are above us --- legitimately so... no cogent argument can be posited against that. To have Michigan Stae above is is not unreasonable.

You ask who Michigan and Michigan State have beated? Well... who has NU beaten?

4th in conference right now is a legit and defensible ranking for NU. 5th in conference is also a legit and defensible ranking for NU as well.

Again, I would posit that NU has been a #4 or #5 in the conference type team for a decade --- why is surprising that NU is again at that level?

We play Michigan State and Michigan in the not-too-distant future --- I think you will see then that they will be formidable foes for NU.

This is not the 1970's, the 1980's or the 1990's anymore --- the days where it was unthinkable to be mid/upper mid-conference level are long past for NU. Since 2000, mid/upper mid-conference level has been the norm for NU. Why the surprise?

Your right, I do see us 5th in B12 (maybe even 6th), but this is not the B12. Michigan and Michigan State got flat out dominated by Notre Dame (until the last 2 minutes), maybe I'm living in a world were strength of schedule matters, but if you have 2 5-1 teams with one losing to #4 and playing some decent competition (Washington is a good football team) and the other losing to an unranked team... and playing nobody (MSU)... then the former team gets higher rank (which is exactly the way the AP and Coaches view it). Further, MSU's lofty defense has played the absolute worst offenses in college football. The one good offense they played, they lost badly.

For Michigan, they needed a comeback win against NW.. so its not like they've played so much better than us. The only reason they don't have a loss is because they've played the bottom dwellers in the conference. I guarantee you that if we swap schedules, they have at least one loss and we have 2 wins.

I put us 3rd, right behind Illini (even though they are overratted, they have beat decent competition. I still think Washington is better than ASU though). The concept of rating teams solely on win-loss is just baffling to me.

Rating teams in the same conference on win/loss is about the only rational way to rank them. SOS is all assumptions and "what ifs" --- actual wins/losses are concrete.

A one-loss Nebraska cannot, under any circumstances, be rated above an undefeated Michigan team or an undefeated Illinois or Wisconsin. That is not to say that we are necessarily lesser a team than Michigan at this point (though I, personally, think that we are) --- but it does mean they took care of business (0 defeats) and NU did not.

So 4th or 5th is about right. If head to head with common opponents means anything (and it may not) --- MSU owned, dominated, and destroyed OSU and we barely won against OSU. So... if anyone can claim a tie-breaker... it is MSU. So...

NU 5th is not only reasonable... it is probably the only reasonable place to rank them.

 

[flatwaterfan]

We are 9th in the b1g in defense. We are losing the turnover battle in most games. The offense is inconsistent. Injury at certain spots would absolutely destroy this team. Not sure I would use the term roll, it could happen but I sure am not going to count on it.

 

[bolshoifish]

I have been extremely disappointed by the defense, but I think we are extremely undervalued right now. The espn BIG blog has us at 5th.. that is laughable. Who has Michigan and Michigan St beat? (The Michigan win over ND is an oddity of nature, so I am discounting it). As far as Illinois is concerned, if you think getting Pinkeled is bad.. then you really don't want to be Zook'led. Maybe his new assistants have changed things, but historically.. Zook will lose (badly).

The only team that has any offense on the rest of the schedule is Michigan (just view the Iowa vs. Penn St. game). The rest of the schedule has our strength (offense) pitted against the other teams strength (defense) and our weakness (defense) pitted against their weakness (offense). In the end, I think our defense is better than their offenses (again, short of Michigan).

I think the hardest games on our schedule are over.. Michigan is a house of cards.. people around here don't have the stomach for Marteniz.. Robinson is much more prone to mistakes. He just throws the ball up and hopes it is caught by his teammates (even more so than Mart.)

I'm really not much of a kool-aid drinker.. if we were still in the B12 I would have a different opinion. There is only one team to fear in the B1G, and we already played them.

Having NU as 5th in the conference is not laughable --- we were, generally, more often about 4th or 5th in the Big 12 each season upon the completion of the regular season. Not that that factors in here except to say that recently (last decade or so) NU has been a #4/#5 type major conference team. To this season, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan undoubtedly are above us --- legitimately so... no cogent argument can be posited against that. To have Michigan Stae above is is not unreasonable.

You ask who Michigan and Michigan State have beated? Well... who has NU beaten?

4th in conference right now is a legit and defensible ranking for NU. 5th in conference is also a legit and defensible ranking for NU as well.

Again, I would posit that NU has been a #4 or #5 in the conference type team for a decade --- why is surprising that NU is again at that level?

We play Michigan State and Michigan in the not-too-distant future --- I think you will see then that they will be formidable foes for NU.

This is not the 1970's, the 1980's or the 1990's anymore --- the days where it was unthinkable to be mid/upper mid-conference level are long past for NU. Since 2000, mid/upper mid-conference level has been the norm for NU. Why the surprise?

Your right, I do see us 5th in B12 (maybe even 6th), but this is not the B12. Michigan and Michigan State got flat out dominated by Notre Dame (until the last 2 minutes), maybe I'm living in a world were strength of schedule matters, but if you have 2 5-1 teams with one losing to #4 and playing some decent competition (Washington is a good football team) and the other losing to an unranked team... and playing nobody (MSU)... then the former team gets higher rank (which is exactly the way the AP and Coaches view it). Further, MSU's lofty defense has played the absolute worst offenses in college football. The one good offense they played, they lost badly.

For Michigan, they needed a comeback win against NW.. so its not like they've played so much better than us. The only reason they don't have a loss is because they've played the bottom dwellers in the conference. I guarantee you that if we swap schedules, they have at least one loss and we have 2 wins.

I put us 3rd, right behind Illini (even though they are overratted, they have beat decent competition. I still think Washington is better than ASU though). The concept of rating teams solely on win-loss is just baffling to me.

Rating teams in the same conference on win/loss is about the only rational way to rank them. SOS is all assumptions and "what ifs" --- actual wins/losses are concrete.

A one-loss Nebraska cannot, under any circumstances, be rated above an undefeated Michigan team or an undefeated Illinois or Wisconsin. That is not to say that we are necessarily lesser a team than Michigan at this point (though I, personally, think that we are) --- but it does mean they took care of business (0 defeats) and NU did not.

So 4th or 5th is about right. If head to head with common opponents means anything (and it may not) --- MSU owned, dominated, and destroyed OSU and we barely won against OSU. So... if anyone can claim a tie-breaker... it is MSU. So...

NU 5th is not only reasonable... it is probably the only reasonable place to rank them.

I would also probably agree with your sentiment if the season is over. Let's take your argument to the extreme: if Nebraska played #1, #2, #3, and #4 to start the season off and lost all of them but played well, and MSU won close games in the FCS to open conference play, then your argument is that MSU should be ranked ahead.. even if Neb is was clearly the better team?

If one is just going to be ranking by wins or losses, there is little point of posting it on a national blog (except at the end of the season). It certainly doesn't hint that one has put much thought into it. It also just so happens to be that most of the computer rankings agree with me.

 

[bolshoifish]

Oh, and I wouldn't call a 10-7 win a domination. It is a defensive domination.. but their offense was dominated as well.

 

[bshirt]

I have been extremely disappointed by the defense, but I think we are extremely undervalued right now. The espn BIG blog has us at 5th.. that is laughable. Who has Michigan and Michigan St beat? (The Michigan win over ND is an oddity of nature, so I am discounting it). As far as Illinois is concerned, if you think getting Pinkeled is bad.. then you really don't want to be Zook'led. Maybe his new assistants have changed things, but historically.. Zook will lose (badly).

The only team that has any offense on the rest of the schedule is Michigan (just view the Iowa vs. Penn St. game). The rest of the schedule has our strength (offense) pitted against the other teams strength (defense) and our weakness (defense) pitted against their weakness (offense). In the end, I think our defense is better than their offenses (again, short of Michigan).

I think the hardest games on our schedule are over.. Michigan is a house of cards.. people around here don't have the stomach for Marteniz.. Robinson is much more prone to mistakes. He just throws the ball up and hopes it is caught by his teammates (even more so than Mart.)

I'm really not much of a kool-aid drinker.. if we were still in the B12 I would have a different opinion. There is only one team to fear in the B1G, and we already played them.

Having NU as 5th in the conference is not laughable --- we were, generally, more often about 4th or 5th in the Big 12 each season upon the completion of the regular season. Not that that factors in here except to say that recently (last decade or so) NU has been a #4/#5 type major conference team. To this season, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan undoubtedly are above us --- legitimately so... no cogent argument can be posited against that. To have Michigan Stae above is is not unreasonable.

You ask who Michigan and Michigan State have beated? Well... who has NU beaten?

4th in conference right now is a legit and defensible ranking for NU. 5th in conference is also a legit and defensible ranking for NU as well.

Again, I would posit that NU has been a #4 or #5 in the conference type team for a decade --- why is surprising that NU is again at that level?

We play Michigan State and Michigan in the not-too-distant future --- I think you will see then that they will be formidable foes for NU.

This is not the 1970's, the 1980's or the 1990's anymore --- the days where it was unthinkable to be mid/upper mid-conference level are long past for NU. Since 2000, mid/upper mid-conference level has been the norm for NU. Why the surprise?

Nope.

We're an eyelash blink away from being that good again. Give this offense the defense we had the last two years we're quite possibly undefeated and steamrolling people.

It's funny have everything has changed so far. Seems like just yesterday we'd be playing for all the marbles if we even had an average offense. Wow....not the case this year.

I think the new coaches have this offense going in the right direction and at times looking unstoppable. "If" Bo can right the defense again we're playing anybody even up.

GBR!!

 

[robsker]

I have been extremely disappointed by the defense, but I think we are extremely undervalued right now. The espn BIG blog has us at 5th.. that is laughable. Who has Michigan and Michigan St beat? (The Michigan win over ND is an oddity of nature, so I am discounting it). As far as Illinois is concerned, if you think getting Pinkeled is bad.. then you really don't want to be Zook'led. Maybe his new assistants have changed things, but historically.. Zook will lose (badly).

The only team that has any offense on the rest of the schedule is Michigan (just view the Iowa vs. Penn St. game). The rest of the schedule has our strength (offense) pitted against the other teams strength (defense) and our weakness (defense) pitted against their weakness (offense). In the end, I think our defense is better than their offenses (again, short of Michigan).

I think the hardest games on our schedule are over.. Michigan is a house of cards.. people around here don't have the stomach for Marteniz.. Robinson is much more prone to mistakes. He just throws the ball up and hopes it is caught by his teammates (even more so than Mart.)

I'm really not much of a kool-aid drinker.. if we were still in the B12 I would have a different opinion. There is only one team to fear in the B1G, and we already played them.

Having NU as 5th in the conference is not laughable --- we were, generally, more often about 4th or 5th in the Big 12 each season upon the completion of the regular season. Not that that factors in here except to say that recently (last decade or so) NU has been a #4/#5 type major conference team. To this season, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan undoubtedly are above us --- legitimately so... no cogent argument can be posited against that. To have Michigan Stae above is is not unreasonable.

You ask who Michigan and Michigan State have beated? Well... who has NU beaten?

4th in conference right now is a legit and defensible ranking for NU. 5th in conference is also a legit and defensible ranking for NU as well.

Again, I would posit that NU has been a #4 or #5 in the conference type team for a decade --- why is surprising that NU is again at that level?

We play Michigan State and Michigan in the not-too-distant future --- I think you will see then that they will be formidable foes for NU.

This is not the 1970's, the 1980's or the 1990's anymore --- the days where it was unthinkable to be mid/upper mid-conference level are long past for NU. Since 2000, mid/upper mid-conference level has been the norm for NU. Why the surprise?

Nope.

We're an eyelash blink away from being that good again. Give this offense the defense we had the last two years we're quite possibly undefeated and steamrolling people.

It's funny have everything has changed so far. Seems like just yesterday we'd be playing for all the marbles if we even had an average offense. Wow....not the case this year.

I think the new coaches have this offense going in the right direction and at times looking unstoppable. "If" Bo can right the defense again we're playing anybody even up.

GBR!!

Lots of "ifs" for an eyelash blink away!

The place to start is the intensity and the preparedness of the team --- fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. That is a coaching thing and is fixable. So... lets hope.

 

[knapplc]

I'm not as scared of Persa as some. Since that achilles injury his mobility is gone. We're gashed by mobile QBs, but when it comes to statues, we perform quite well.

I'd love to see EMart get back at DE for this game (unless the EMart at LB was a one-game experiment for the Buckeyes) and just set him loose on Persa for the first quarter.

 

[robsker]

I have been extremely disappointed by the defense, but I think we are extremely undervalued right now. The espn BIG blog has us at 5th.. that is laughable. Who has Michigan and Michigan St beat? (The Michigan win over ND is an oddity of nature, so I am discounting it). As far as Illinois is concerned, if you think getting Pinkeled is bad.. then you really don't want to be Zook'led. Maybe his new assistants have changed things, but historically.. Zook will lose (badly).

The only team that has any offense on the rest of the schedule is Michigan (just view the Iowa vs. Penn St. game). The rest of the schedule has our strength (offense) pitted against the other teams strength (defense) and our weakness (defense) pitted against their weakness (offense). In the end, I think our defense is better than their offenses (again, short of Michigan).

I think the hardest games on our schedule are over.. Michigan is a house of cards.. people around here don't have the stomach for Marteniz.. Robinson is much more prone to mistakes. He just throws the ball up and hopes it is caught by his teammates (even more so than Mart.)

I'm really not much of a kool-aid drinker.. if we were still in the B12 I would have a different opinion. There is only one team to fear in the B1G, and we already played them.

Having NU as 5th in the conference is not laughable --- we were, generally, more often about 4th or 5th in the Big 12 each season upon the completion of the regular season. Not that that factors in here except to say that recently (last decade or so) NU has been a #4/#5 type major conference team. To this season, Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan undoubtedly are above us --- legitimately so... no cogent argument can be posited against that. To have Michigan Stae above is is not unreasonable.

You ask who Michigan and Michigan State have beated? Well... who has NU beaten?

4th in conference right now is a legit and defensible ranking for NU. 5th in conference is also a legit and defensible ranking for NU as well.

Again, I would posit that NU has been a #4 or #5 in the conference type team for a decade --- why is surprising that NU is again at that level?

We play Michigan State and Michigan in the not-too-distant future --- I think you will see then that they will be formidable foes for NU.

This is not the 1970's, the 1980's or the 1990's anymore --- the days where it was unthinkable to be mid/upper mid-conference level are long past for NU. Since 2000, mid/upper mid-conference level has been the norm for NU. Why the surprise?

Your right, I do see us 5th in B12 (maybe even 6th), but this is not the B12. Michigan and Michigan State got flat out dominated by Notre Dame (until the last 2 minutes), maybe I'm living in a world were strength of schedule matters, but if you have 2 5-1 teams with one losing to #4 and playing some decent competition (Washington is a good football team) and the other losing to an unranked team... and playing nobody (MSU)... then the former team gets higher rank (which is exactly the way the AP and Coaches view it). Further, MSU's lofty defense has played the absolute worst offenses in college football. The one good offense they played, they lost badly.

For Michigan, they needed a comeback win against NW.. so its not like they've played so much better than us. The only reason they don't have a loss is because they've played the bottom dwellers in the conference. I guarantee you that if we swap schedules, they have at least one loss and we have 2 wins.

I put us 3rd, right behind Illini (even though they are overratted, they have beat decent competition. I still think Washington is better than ASU though). The concept of rating teams solely on win-loss is just baffling to me.

Rating teams in the same conference on win/loss is about the only rational way to rank them. SOS is all assumptions and "what ifs" --- actual wins/losses are concrete.

A one-loss Nebraska cannot, under any circumstances, be rated above an undefeated Michigan team or an undefeated Illinois or Wisconsin. That is not to say that we are necessarily lesser a team than Michigan at this point (though I, personally, think that we are) --- but it does mean they took care of business (0 defeats) and NU did not.

So 4th or 5th is about right. If head to head with common opponents means anything (and it may not) --- MSU owned, dominated, and destroyed OSU and we barely won against OSU. So... if anyone can claim a tie-breaker... it is MSU. So...

NU 5th is not only reasonable... it is probably the only reasonable place to rank them.

I would also probably agree with your sentiment if the season is over. Let's take your argument to the extreme: if Nebraska played #1, #2, #3, and #4 to start the season off and lost all of them but played well, and MSU won close games in the FCS to open conference play, then your argument is that MSU should be ranked ahead.. even if Neb is was clearly the better team?

If one is just going to be ranking by wins or losses, there is little point of posting it on a national blog (except at the end of the season). It certainly doesn't hint that one has put much thought into it. It also just so happens to be that most of the computer rankings agree with me.

Valid points --- true enough that my premise becomes stronger as the year wears on. I would simply argue that rankings become more reflective of reality as the year wears on.

I am not saying we are the 5th best in the conference at this point --- frankly none of us know at this point just where we stand --- except well behind Wisconsin and pretty much the same as Ohio State (or a tad better). That said, we should, at this juncture be ranked #5.