** 2023 Previews: Bill Connelly's Big Ten West Preview **

[Saunders]

Quote

2023 Big Ten West college football preview: Projections, burning questions for each team

Next year, everything changes. College football begins the era of a 12-team playoff and 16-team megaconferences. The Big Ten will be responsible for the most jarring of all changes, the additions of USC and UCLA. Soon we will live in a universe in which UCLA and Rutgers are conference mates. It's going to take a while for that universe to feel like home.

It's almost comforting, then, to take some time to say hello to an old, reliable (and soon outdated) friend: the Big Ten West.

I've been as loud as anyone in advocating for the ditching of divisions in favor of a scheduling structure with permanent rivals and rotated opponents. It will make sure everyone in these huge conferences plays each other more often and will assure that a given conference title game is between its two best teams. But I have to admit, I'm going to miss the Big Ten West. As a competitive entity, it certainly wasn't great. Sometimes it wasn't even good. Its champions have gone 0-9 in the Big Ten championship game, losing by an average score of 37-16. But no division has had such a reliable identity. The rest of the world could try to keep up with the offense-friendly times; the Big Ten West, however, has continued to live the defense-and-power-football life.

Last year alone, West teams ranked first (Iowa), second (Illinois), fifth (Minnesota) and 14th (Wisconsin) in defensive SP+, while Purdue's No. 50 offense was by far the best of the bunch. In this year's SP+ projections, four of the nation's top defenses live in the West. No top 40 offenses do.

You be you, West. Let's preview you one last time.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/37970401/2023-college-football-big-ten-west-wisconsin-iowa-nebraska

 

 

Quote

How long will it take Matt Rhule at Nebraska?

We're many thousands of words into this preview, and Nebraska has barely come up. Considering how much this sport adheres to its historic balance of power -- most of the same blue bloods have run the sport for 100 years, and the club of dominant programs almost never welcomes new members -- it's jarring that the Huskers, just about the nation's best program for 30 years, have become such an afterthought. But that's what happens when a team suffers six losing seasons in seven years and hasn't won a conference title in nearly 25.

Five years ago, Nebraska made the most no-brainer hire imaginable, bringing in Scott Frost, a former national-title winning quarterback for the Huskers who played for legends like Tom Osborne, Bill Walsh, Bill Belichick and Bill Parcells, coached for Chip Kelly and led UCF to an unbeaten season in 2017. You couldn't possibly ask for a better pedigree than that; he went 16-31.

 

Now comes another nearly perfect pedigree. After a three-year sojourn in the NFL, Matt Rhule came back to the college level to take over the Huskers program. In two college head coaching stints, Rhule did exactly what will be required in Lincoln: strip the house down to the studs and build a winner with culture and player development. His first Temple team lost 10 games; his third and fourth each won 10. His first Baylor team lost 11 games; his third won 11.

The transfer portal has sped up rebuilding projects -- you don't necessarily have to strip things down to the foundation anymore -- and Rhule seems to be embracing it. He brought in veterans like Georgia Tech quarterback Jeff Sims, Virginia slot receiver Billy Kemp IV, Georgia tight end Arik Gilbert (who needs a waiver to play in 2023) and Arizona State center Ben Scott, plus a number of young former blue-chippers such as Texas A&M defensive tackle Elijah Jeudy and Florida safety Corey Collier Jr.

Rhule's coordinator hires were not the most exciting in the world. Marcus Satterfield's FBS offenses (including two with Rhule at Temple) have averaged offensive SP+ rankings of 83.0, and Tony White's defenses have averaged rankings of 53.5. While Sims is a fun dual-threat player, and the starting lineup should have more proven talent than it did a year ago, I don't really see the level of talent required to make a surprise challenge for the West or anything. But (a) you have to get back to .500 before you can worry about titles, and (b) while the nonconference slate is soft enough that a fast start could get the Huskers to 6-6, Nebraska hired Rhule for what he does in his third or fourth season, not what he does out of the gate. This marriage seems to have plenty of potential, and I assume it will succeed.

You know, just like I assumed Scott Frost would succeed.

 

 

 

Quote

2023 projections

TEAM	SP+ RK	OFF.	DEF.	AVG. W	CONF. W
Wisconsin	15.8 (19)	31.4 (41)	15.6 (7)	8.8	6.1
Iowa	13.2 (29)	23.2 (81)	10.1 (1)	8.1	5.6
Minnesota	12.0 (31)	27.7 (63)	15.7 (9)	6.8	4.6
Illinois	7.0 (44)	22.7 (86)	15.7 (8)	6.5	4.3
Purdue	5.7 (48)	30.6 (45)	24.9 (52)	5.6	3.6
Nebraska	5.3 (49)	27.3 (65)	22.0 (35)	6.2	3.6
Northwestern	-6.7 (83)	14.6 (126)	21.3 (28)	3.7	1.7

 

 

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

This is a pretty good assessment! Although I think fans expectations should be for Rhule to do well in year 4 instead of year 3. Year 4 will likely tell us if the Rhule tenure is working or not.

 

 

[JJ Husker]

7 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

This is a pretty good assessment! Although I think fans expectations should be for Rhule to do well in year 4 instead of year 3. Year 4 will likely tell us if the Rhule tenure is working or not.

 

 

If it takes 4 years, the answer won’t be good. We should start getting an idea in years 1 & 2 and better know in year 3. I’m not saying winning the conference or making the playoffs necessarily but if the writing isn’t on the wall by year 3, I have no idea what you would be waiting to see in year 4.

 

Right or wrong, nobody gets 4 years to show if they’ll be the right coach going forward, especially with the portal. Sure it may take 4-5-6 years to get where we really want to be but there damn sure better be some signs and incremental improvement in the run up.

[runningblind]

6 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

If it takes 4 years, the answer won’t be good. We should start getting an idea in years 1 & 2 and better know in year 3. I’m not saying winning the conference or making the playoffs necessarily but if the writing isn’t on the wall by year 3, I have no idea what you would be waiting to see in year 4.

 

Right or wrong, nobody gets 4 years to show if they’ll be the right coach going forward, especially with the portal. Sure it may take 4-5-6 years to get where we really want to be but there damn sure better be some signs and incremental improvement in the run up.

You know by year 2. Coaches either have it and show progress, or they don't.  I still can't believe people thought Frost would magically figure it out in year FIVE. 5!

[Dr. Strangelove]

41 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

If it takes 4 years, the answer won’t be good. We should start getting an idea in years 1 & 2 and better know in year 3. I’m not saying winning the conference or making the playoffs necessarily but if the writing isn’t on the wall by year 3, I have no idea what you would be waiting to see in year 4.

 

Right or wrong, nobody gets 4 years to show if they’ll be the right coach going forward, especially with the portal. Sure it may take 4-5-6 years to get where we really want to be but there damn sure better be some signs and incremental improvement in the run up.

I think it has less to do with whatever Rhule's coaching ability is and has a lot more to do with Nebraska likely breaking in a new QB against an extremely difficult schedule. 

 

35 minutes ago, runningblind said:

You know by year 2. Coaches either have it and show progress, or they don't.  I still can't believe people thought Frost would magically figure it out in year FIVE. 5!

I think Rhule could have a very successful year 2! 8-4 or so given the schedule. However year 3 is daunting, so I think an accurate judge of Rhules program building will be year 4.

[thexyz]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think it has less to do with whatever Rhule's coaching ability is and has a lot more to do with Nebraska likely breaking in a new QB against an extremely difficult schedule. 

 

I think Rhule could have a very successful year 2! 8-4 or so given the schedule. However year 3 is daunting, so I think an accurate judge of Rhules program building will be year 4.

 

 It's difficult to judge success simply on wins taking into consideration strength of schedule and, other factors...

 

Let's say year 1 is good, a decent improvement. We get to a bowl or, nearly. 5-6 wins. More than we have for some time. Year 2, go 8-4. Year 3, 6-7 wins. The progress doesn't seem to be there although, the competition was considerably tougher. Much of the competition was pretty fierce yet we fair pretty well. Some bad showings and others that were fairly impressive given what we were up against. You've got to be beating most if not all the opponents you should be winning against. 

 

Then on year 4, there's a record of 9-3 or 10-2 as your QB gains experience,  there's solid depth, a group of real play-makers on the team and other considerations. There are a variety of scenarios that would be positive or negative indicators.

 

Year 2 will have a lot to do with the success of years 3, 4 and beyond. Coach Rhule knows this. I'm confident in year 2. Year 1 is going to be real challenging yet though there will be indications for being encouraged. I don't see the progression being much like Temple and Baylor was. The improvement should come sooner though a bit more gradual and varying. 

[brophog]

1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think it has less to do with whatever Rhule's coaching ability is and has a lot more to do with Nebraska likely breaking in a new QB against an extremely difficult schedule. 

 

There is a theory out there that's gaining some traction that QBs are like buying new cars. Why spend all of those resources on getting a new one when you can just buy someone else's used one. There are a ton in the portal and some very, very good ones.

 

Even though Rhule wants to develop prep talent, there is certainly a scenario where he may think he has a championship contending team and decides to try the portal rather than break in an inexperienced one. Its on of those scenarios we don't know, because he's yet to stay anywhere long enough to need a second generation QB.

 

It's certainly one of the biggest questions I have from Rhule. To date, he's shown he can build things, but he's done it through leveraging that first season and then using those guys he developed early to win in years 3 and 4.

[Dr. Strangelove]

2 hours ago, M.A. said:

 

 It's difficult to judge success simply on wins taking into consideration strength of schedule and, other factors...

 

Let's say year 1 is good, a decent improvement. We get to a bowl or, nearly. 5-6 wins. More than we have for some time. Year 2, go 8-4. Year 3, 6-7 wins. The progress doesn't seem to be there although, the competition was considerably tougher. Much of the competition was pretty fierce yet we fair pretty well. Some bad showings and others that were fairly impressive given what we were up against. You've got to be beating most if not all the opponents you should be winning against. 

 

Then on year 4, there's a record of 9-3 or 10-2 as your QB gains experience,  there's solid depth, a group of real play-makers on the team and other considerations. There are a variety of scenarios that would be positive or negative indicators.

 

Year 2 will have a lot to do with the success of years 3, 4 and beyond. Coach Rhule knows this. I'm confident in year 2. Year 1 is going to be real challenging yet though there will be indications for being encouraged. I don't see the progression being much like Temple and Baylor was. The improvement should come sooner though a bit more gradual and varying. 

I think this is really fair. If Rhule goes 8-4 in year 2, 6-6 in year 3, and year 4 is 8-4 again, that's a major success in my opinion. 

 

I personally think it'll take time to get to a point where Nebraska is contending for a 10 win season. 

[JJ Husker]

2 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think it has less to do with whatever Rhule's coaching ability is and has a lot more to do with Nebraska likely breaking in a new QB against an extremely difficult schedule. 

 

I think Rhule could have a very successful year 2! 8-4 or so given the schedule. However year 3 is daunting, so I think an accurate judge of Rhules program building will be year 4.

Obviously scheduling has an effect on Ws & Ls but there will be things we can see, not involving scheduling and results, long before year 4. I guess that was my only point. But yes, it may be more than 3 years before the W-L really comes around. I would think your posited 8-4 in year 2 would be a very good indication things were trending in the right direction. A brutal 3rd year schedule doesn’t really change that.

[JJ Husker]

3 hours ago, runningblind said:

You know by year 2. Coaches either have it and show progress, or they don't.  I still can't believe people thought Frost would magically figure it out in year FIVE. 5!

Well there is “thought” and there is “hope”. Have to expect a bit of delusion (hope) to take over at that point.

[thexyz]

42 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I think this is really fair. If Rhule goes 8-4 in year 2, 6-6 in year 3, and year 4 is 8-4 again, that's a major success in my opinion. 

 

I personally think it'll take time to get to a point where Nebraska is contending for a 10 win season. 

 

Yeah...It'll take time. Got to keep on raising the bar again and again and again over. One practice, one game, one season at a time! 

[Lorewarn]

4 hours ago, runningblind said:

You know by year 2. Coaches either have it and show progress, or they don't.  I still can't believe people thought Frost would magically figure it out in year FIVE. 5!

 

 

Mark Helfrich went to the natty in year 2. Gene Chizik won the natty in year 2. Will Muschamp went 11-2 in year 2 at Florida. Scott Frost went 13-0 in year 2. Dan Mullen went 11-2 in year 2 at Florida. Kiffen went 10-2 and finished #6 in year 2 at USC and was ranked preseason #1 the next year only to end 7-6. Mel Tucker went 11-2 in year 2 and then went 5-7 the next year.

 

Conversely, Dabo didn't elevate to an elite level until year 8. Harbaugh didn't get over the hump until year 4 at Stanford and year 7 at Michigan. Mark Dantonio didn't get MSU to double digit wins until year 4. Chris Petersen didn't get Washington rolling until year 3.  

 

So, no, you don't know by year 2.

[runningblind]

19 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

Mark Helfrich went to the natty in year 2. Gene Chizik won the natty in year 2. Will Muschamp went 11-2 in year 2 at Florida. Scott Frost went 13-0 in year 2. Dan Mullen went 11-2 in year 2 at Florida. Kiffen went 10-2 and finished #6 in year 2 at USC and was ranked preseason #1 the next year only to end 7-6. Mel Tucker went 11-2 in year 2 and then went 5-7 the next year.

 

Conversely, Dabo didn't elevate to an elite level until year 8. Harbaugh didn't get over the hump until year 4 at Stanford and year 7 at Michigan. Mark Dantonio didn't get MSU to double digit wins until year 4. Chris Petersen didn't get Washington rolling until year 3.  

 

So, no, you don't know by year 2.

My point was there must be progress and signs by year 2. All those guys you mentioned check those boxes, or they would have been let go.   I get no two situations are the same,  and that's not to say they won't regress later.  I'm saying it's obvious when a guy is in over his head after 2 full years.  You do know that in year two in 95% of cases.

[lo country]

On 7/7/2023 at 10:11 PM, runningblind said:

You know by year 2. Coaches either have it and show progress, or they don't.  I still can't believe people thought Frost would magically figure it out in year FIVE. 5!

And even in year 5 some thought he deserved more time....Year 3 his seat should've been on fire.

[lo country]

20 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

Mark Helfrich went to the natty in year 2. Gene Chizik won the natty in year 2. Will Muschamp went 11-2 in year 2 at Florida. Scott Frost went 13-0 in year 2. Dan Mullen went 11-2 in year 2 at Florida. Kiffen went 10-2 and finished #6 in year 2 at USC and was ranked preseason #1 the next year only to end 7-6. Mel Tucker went 11-2 in year 2 and then went 5-7 the next year.

 

Conversely, Dabo didn't elevate to an elite level until year 8. Harbaugh didn't get over the hump until year 4 at Stanford and year 7 at Michigan. Mark Dantonio didn't get MSU to double digit wins until year 4. Chris Petersen didn't get Washington rolling until year 3.  

 

So, no, you don't know by year 2.

Dabo won his division in year 2.  HIs first full year.  2011 (his 3rd full year) he never looked back with 10 wins that year.  Clemson is my 2nd team I follow.  Fans knew he had it.  As far as Dantonio, his first 2 years he had winning seasons.  Something we haven't seen in 6 years.  And that was taking over a John Smith squad that had 3 losing seasons in a row.

Stanford was a dumpster fire after Walsh in 1992.  Harbaugh had them winning in year 3 and increased one win from 2007-2008.  He showed improvement.  I think folks knew he would do something.  A lot new that Frost was a Fraud after year 2.  

 

I said in the success or failure thread that winning is success, but there can be improvement without the winning. After seeing the worst P5 football from NU the past 5 years, I feel confident we will know what Rhule and Co are capable of at the end of year 1.  I'm not expecting a phenomenal turnaround like those you mentioned. I'd add Stoops in year 2 with the NC, but the others I'd take.  I'd take Dabo's rise in a heart beat.  (or Pelini's)  Or the others you mentioned.  Again, I think that we will know what we have or not after year 2.  More than likely in year 1.  Frost was that bad of a coach IMHO.  We learned what bad play was and what good play looks like.  At least Frost showed us that.