Andy Staples' early, early, early, early pre-season Top 25

[Guy Chamberlin]

15th is right where I think the Huskers should be. We still haven't beat a team ranked in the top 15 in years. Until we do that, I really don't think we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

i respectfully disagree. the ranking is based on next year's team and next years expectations, not what we have or haven't done "in years".

 

True enough. But if you're a voter and you keep giving Nebraska the benefit of the doubt and the Huskers keep failing to live up to their ranking, you start using a bit more caution. Still, a marginal Husker team will always be ranked higher than an up and coming Rutgers or Kentucky or Central Florida team because the legacy carries weight.

 

However we might dish the pollsters and the ESPN pundits, they all want Nebraska to be relevant again.

[Enhance]

15th is right where I think the Huskers should be. We still haven't beat a team ranked in the top 15 in years. Until we do that, I really don't think we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

i respectfully disagree. the ranking is based on next year's team and next years expectations, not what we have or haven't done "in years".

 

True enough. But if you're a voter and you keep giving Nebraska the benefit of the doubt and the Huskers keep failing to live up to their ranking, you start using a bit more caution. Still, a marginal Husker team will always be ranked higher than an up and coming Rutgers or Kentucky or Central Florida team because the legacy carries weight.

 

However we might dish the pollsters and the ESPN pundits, they all want Nebraska to be relevant again.

Unless your name is Mark May.

 

 

[knapplc]

True enough. But if you're a voter and you keep giving Nebraska the benefit of the doubt and the Huskers keep failing to live up to their ranking, you start using a bit more caution. Still, a marginal Husker team will always be ranked higher than an up and coming Rutgers or Kentucky or Central Florida team because the legacy carries weight.

 

However we might dish the pollsters and the ESPN pundits, they all want Nebraska to be relevant again.

Unless you're Notre Dame.

[junior4949]

To me, it matters little to none where we start the season ranked. What matters is where we are ranked when we finish the season. If we take care of our business in the Big 12 and win the Big 12 Championship, there's a high probability we get to play for all the marbles. Even if we don't play for a NC, we more than likely end in the top 10 with a BCS bowl win.

[Blackshirtsguru]

15th is right where I think the Huskers should be. We still haven't beat a team ranked in the top 15 in years. Until we do that, I really don't think we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

i respectfully disagree. the ranking is based on next year's team and next years expectations, not what we have or haven't done "in years".

 

And yet we still have no clue how our offense is going to be. No way we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

[RedDenver]

15th is right where I think the Huskers should be. We still haven't beat a team ranked in the top 15 in years. Until we do that, I really don't think we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

i respectfully disagree. the ranking is based on next year's team and next years expectations, not what we have or haven't done "in years".

 

And yet we still have no clue how our offense is going to be. No way we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

Preseason polls aren't about how "deserving" a team has been, they're about how much "potential" a team will have.

[knapplc]

15th is right where I think the Huskers should be. We still haven't beat a team ranked in the top 15 in years. Until we do that, I really don't think we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

i respectfully disagree. the ranking is based on next year's team and next years expectations, not what we have or haven't done "in years".

 

And yet we still have no clue how our offense is going to be. No way we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

Preseason polls aren't about how "deserving" a team has been, they're about how much "potential" a team will have.

That's a good response, Denver, and to guru I would ask - which teams are more deserving? The problem that I see is that the talent on these teams is so diluted now that it's hard to say one is better than another. Preseason polls will always exist, right or not. You've got to pit teams against each other, and right or not, the fact that we return 10 starters on offense is really catching some people's eyes.

[melscott62]

way to early to say with injuries an all of that stuff.... but I would be very surprised if we finish 2010 ranked lower than we finish 2009.

[sd'sker]

15th is right where I think the Huskers should be. We still haven't beat a team ranked in the top 15 in years. Until we do that, I really don't think we deserve to be ranked higher until otherwise.

i respectfully disagree. the ranking is based on next year's team and next years expectations, not what we have or haven't done "in years".

 

True enough. But if you're a voter and you keep giving Nebraska the benefit of the doubt and the Huskers keep failing to live up to their ranking, you start using a bit more caution. Still, a marginal Husker team will always be ranked higher than an up and coming Rutgers or Kentucky or Central Florida team because the legacy carries weight.

 

However we might dish the pollsters and the ESPN pundits, they all want Nebraska to be relevant again.

you are right, there is the benefit of the doubt, or our name affords us the advantage that people automatically think we will be good.

 

i honestly believe it all has to do with BO, pundit and pollsters believe in him and what he has done. i mean NU was a joke 3 years ago, and we were 1 (controversial) second from winning the big XII, we were one marginally (if we had the 6th best offense in the Big XII) competent offense from winning the Big XII.

[papersun87]

Unless you're Notre Dame.

Urgh. Simply because of the new coach, they'll be preseason top 10 next year.

[sd'sker]

Unless you're Notre Dame.

Urgh. Simply because of the new coach, they'll be preseason top 10 next year.

i heard they have already been invited to a bcs game.

[walksalone]

That's a pretty fair assessment, but I'm just not a fan of preseason polls. So much can happen between now and the first game of the season (recruits, injuries, etc)

[Overland Park Husker]

Missouri 25???? really!?!?!

I can buy Mizzou at #25. What I don't buy is OU at #12

[bshirt]

What worries me the most is that our offense can improve a "lot" next year and still be downright miserable. When you're 102nd in the nation.....wow....you could make huge gains offensively and still sit in the 60s or 70s.

 

Would that be enough for a top 10 rating?? It would take yet another incredible defense to hack that. Even for Bo, that might be tough...

 

Yeah, everybody makes a thousand excuses for SW but when you look at all the miserable offenses he ran at sCUm he looks to me like a COZ clone on the other side of the ball.

 

Bo is the best DC in the land imo but our offense needs some very serious help.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

Missouri 25???? really!?!?!

I can buy Mizzou at #25. What I don't buy is OU at #12

I don't either actually. I thought I read somewhere they're losing 4 or 5 underclassmen who have declared early for the NFL draft. That has to hurt their depth.