Rank the difficulty of each 2010 game

[bshirt]

I agree. Plus they finished their year on a sour note by losing to Mississippi in the Cotton Bowl. Luckily for them, the Big 12 South I think will not be as tough in years past. Texas has to replace Colt McCoy, and if it's Garrett Gilbert, I think there could be some problems for them. Shipley is also out, so they lose their two biggest offensive play makers. Nevertheless, they are Texas, and will always find a way to reload.

One would have to think that all the off-field problems at Texas Tech might have a negative impact on them as well. I think the door is wide open for a team like Texas A&M to stun some people and take the South.

 

Explain? For being a FR in the MNC game, I thought he looked fine against Bama....

 

Give him a full season under center, without the headlights/"Oh crap I have to play", he will be fine. Not the same offense as with McCoy, but they'll probably be more balanced which makes them better overall.

 

I can't agree with that. How many teams have a better offense with a true sophomore quarterback replacing a multi-year Heisman trophy candidate? They might be more balanced but I doubt they will be better. (especially considering McCoy was statistically one of the best quarterbacks in college football history.)

 

100% agreed.

 

The odds of Texas' offense being "better" next year without McCoy and Shipley are a mathematical and statistical zero.

[carlfense]

I agree. Plus they finished their year on a sour note by losing to Mississippi in the Cotton Bowl. Luckily for them, the Big 12 South I think will not be as tough in years past. Texas has to replace Colt McCoy, and if it's Garrett Gilbert, I think there could be some problems for them. Shipley is also out, so they lose their two biggest offensive play makers. Nevertheless, they are Texas, and will always find a way to reload.

One would have to think that all the off-field problems at Texas Tech might have a negative impact on them as well. I think the door is wide open for a team like Texas A&M to stun some people and take the South.

 

Explain? For being a FR in the MNC game, I thought he looked fine against Bama....

 

Give him a full season under center, without the headlights/"Oh crap I have to play", he will be fine. Not the same offense as with McCoy, but they'll probably be more balanced which makes them better overall.

 

I can't agree with that. How many teams have a better offense with a true sophomore quarterback replacing a multi-year Heisman trophy candidate? They might be more balanced but I doubt they will be better. (especially considering McCoy was statistically one of the best quarterbacks in college football history.)

 

He was their offense though. When we played, they ran the RBs 21 times for 38 yards. That's less than .5 yards per carry. Against Bama they ran 28 times for 81 yards. Not much better. We/they knew they were going to throw. McCoy was great, bu this last season their offense was missing a running game.

 

Maybe the word "better" was the wrong one. I meant tougher to defend from a DC's standpoint.

 

I think with McCoy gone and Gilbert more of a drop back passer, they'll get away from the spread a little bit more, and their running game will get better. As many 5* RBs and OL as they have, there's no excuse for them to have an awful running game, and they shouldn't. If you have to respect the run, the pass is tougher to guard.

 

With our DL that may not be the case as no one was good at running on us, but against all competition, the balance I think they'll start to get back will make them harder to guard, possibly better as an offense.

I agree with 90% of what you said here. However, the loss of your passing game doesn't necessarily indicate that your running game will be better. In fact the opposite could be true. If Texas is less of a threat through the air teams can stack the box against the run.

 

Texas is the perfect example of why recruiting rankings aren't always correct. On paper . . . they should be amazing across the board: defense/passing/rushing etc.

[mnhusker]

1. Texas

2. Texas A&M (a team on the rise--may catch the Huskers off guard)

3. Washington

4. Oklahoma State

5. Missouri

6. Kansas State

7. Kansas

8. Colorado

9. Iowa State

10. Idaho

11. WKU

12. South Dakota State

[chamrocck]

I really have concern on the @Washington and @Okla State games as games we can get beat in the opponent's house. Texas is going to be huge. We have to win 2 out of 3 of these games if we want to make BCS. Mizzou will also be another good game.

[Schoeny]

I agree. Plus they finished their year on a sour note by losing to Mississippi in the Cotton Bowl. Luckily for them, the Big 12 South I think will not be as tough in years past. Texas has to replace Colt McCoy, and if it's Garrett Gilbert, I think there could be some problems for them. Shipley is also out, so they lose their two biggest offensive play makers. Nevertheless, they are Texas, and will always find a way to reload.

One would have to think that all the off-field problems at Texas Tech might have a negative impact on them as well. I think the door is wide open for a team like Texas A&M to stun some people and take the South.

 

Explain? For being a FR in the MNC game, I thought he looked fine against Bama....

 

Give him a full season under center, without the headlights/"Oh crap I have to play", he will be fine. Not the same offense as with McCoy, but they'll probably be more balanced which makes them better overall.

 

I can't agree with that. How many teams have a better offense with a true sophomore quarterback replacing a multi-year Heisman trophy candidate? They might be more balanced but I doubt they will be better. (especially considering McCoy was statistically one of the best quarterbacks in college football history.)

 

He was their offense though. When we played, they ran the RBs 21 times for 38 yards. That's less than .5 yards per carry. Against Bama they ran 28 times for 81 yards. Not much better. We/they knew they were going to throw. McCoy was great, bu this last season their offense was missing a running game.

 

Maybe the word "better" was the wrong one. I meant tougher to defend from a DC's standpoint.

 

I think with McCoy gone and Gilbert more of a drop back passer, they'll get away from the spread a little bit more, and their running game will get better. As many 5* RBs and OL as they have, there's no excuse for them to have an awful running game, and they shouldn't. If you have to respect the run, the pass is tougher to guard.

 

With our DL that may not be the case as no one was good at running on us, but against all competition, the balance I think they'll start to get back will make them harder to guard, possibly better as an offense.

I agree with 90% of what you said here. However, the loss of your passing game doesn't necessarily indicate that your running game will be better. In fact the opposite could be true. If Texas is less of a threat through the air teams can stack the box against the run.

 

Texas is the perfect example of why recruiting rankings aren't always correct. On paper . . . they should be amazing across the board: defense/passing/rushing etc.

 

Gotta throw one more punch in here, while agreeing with you.

 

The only thing I have left to add in my argument's defense is this... How much do you think Texas practiced running the ball last season, in relation to the passing game? They were more "West Coast" than Cally ever was, because they always used the short passing game. If they think they are going ot have problems throwing, they are going to focus on running. When you have McCoy, they are fine-tuning the passing, and hoping it opens up the run game, much like I'd expect KSU practices running more than passing and hopes it opens up the less polished pass.

 

The example I'll use is two seasons ago with Ganz at QB. We tried the power run game at the beginning of the season. We failed with it. When we went more spread the offense opened up and our rushing was much more effective, and our passing game improved because of it. Texas now HAS to sit down and take a hard look at it like Watson did, and figure out why theirs isn't working, because they don't have a golden arm/hands to get them down the field (McCoy/Shipley). I can't imagine if Watson can figure it out, that Texas can't

 

But, I could be 100% wrong and they always focused on the run game knowing that McCoy would have the passing game down pat and it still sucked. You never know. It's one of those interesting twists next season will take in the BIG XII.

[husker rob]

1. Washington (on the road)

2. Texas AM (on the road)

3. Texas (seems to have NU's number over the years)

 

the rest fall in where ever until

 

10. Colorado

11. WKU

12. SDSU

[carlfense]

 

Gotta throw one more punch in here, while agreeing with you.

 

The only thing I have left to add in my argument's defense is this... How much do you think Texas practiced running the ball last season, in relation to the passing game? They were more "West Coast" than Cally ever was, because they always used the short passing game. If they think they are going ot have problems throwing, they are going to focus on running. When you have McCoy, they are fine-tuning the passing, and hoping it opens up the run game, much like I'd expect KSU practices running more than passing and hopes it opens up the less polished pass.

 

The example I'll use is two seasons ago with Ganz at QB. We tried the power run game at the beginning of the season. We failed with it. When we went more spread the offense opened up and our rushing was much more effective, and our passing game improved because of it. Texas now HAS to sit down and take a hard look at it like Watson did, and figure out why theirs isn't working, because they don't have a golden arm/hands to get them down the field (McCoy/Shipley). I can't imagine if Watson can figure it out, that Texas can't

 

But, I could be 100% wrong and they always focused on the run game knowing that McCoy would have the passing game down pat and it still sucked. You never know. It's one of those interesting twists next season will take in the BIG XII.

+1 for the good post. You make good points.

[Redmusky]

1. Texas

2. OK St

3. Washington

4. Missouri

5. A&M

6. K St

7. ISU

8. Kansas

9. Colorado

10. Idaho

11. South Dakota St

12. WKU

OSU and Washington on the road T&M would be the 3rd hardest game on the road then KSU. Looking at the top six games we could lose 3 games if we still have QB problems. The blackshirts are going to have to save us if we are going to win 10 to 11 games next year.

[clone]

1. Texas

2. Texas A&M

3. Oklahoma State

4. Missouri

5. Kansas State

6. Washington

7. Kansas

8. Iowa State

9. Colorado

10. Idaho

11. WKU

12. South Dakota State

 

 

 

[walksalone]

I think people are giving oSu too much credit. They are losing 8 starters on offense including Russell Okung, Zac Robinson, Keith Tosten and Dez Bryant. They are also losing 7 starters on defense. Personally, I see them struggling to become bowl eligible.

 

I agree. Plus they finished their year on a sour note by losing to Mississippi in the Cotton Bowl. Luckily for them, the Big 12 South I think will not be as tough in years past. Texas has to replace Colt McCoy, and if it's Garrett Gilbert, I think there could be some problems for them. Shipley is also out, so they lose their two biggest offensive play makers. Nevertheless, they are Texas, and will always find a way to reload.

One would have to think that all the off-field problems at Texas Tech might have a negative impact on them as well. I think the door is wide open for a team like Texas A&M to stun some people and take the South.

 

I disagree. This game just screams trouble. I actually feel more confident about beating Texas, than I do Ok St. We'll have UT under the lights satuday night, possibly the primetime game for ABC with a possible visit from Gameday. But the week after, going to stillwater, is the classic trap game. I know they're not going to have the talent of last year, but don't sleep on Ok St.

[GlobalHusker]

I think people are giving oSu too much credit. They are losing 8 starters on offense including Russell Okung, Zac Robinson, Keith Tosten and Dez Bryant. They are also losing 7 starters on defense. Personally, I see them struggling to become bowl eligible.

 

I agree. Plus they finished their year on a sour note by losing to Mississippi in the Cotton Bowl. Luckily for them, the Big 12 South I think will not be as tough in years past. Texas has to replace Colt McCoy, and if it's Garrett Gilbert, I think there could be some problems for them. Shipley is also out, so they lose their two biggest offensive play makers. Nevertheless, they are Texas, and will always find a way to reload.

One would have to think that all the off-field problems at Texas Tech might have a negative impact on them as well. I think the door is wide open for a team like Texas A&M to stun some people and take the South.

 

I disagree. This game just screams trouble. I actually feel more confident about beating Texas, than I do Ok St. We'll have UT under the lights satuday night, possibly the primetime game for ABC with a possible visit from Gameday. But the week after, going to stillwater, is the classic trap game. I know they're not going to have the talent of last year, but don't sleep on Ok St.

 

I became a little nervous about the OK St. game because the OC from Houston is there. They had a terrific offense last season. It might be a transition year, but if the players gel that offense could take off.

[jnkyrdoff6]

1. OU (south champs)

2. Texas

3. Udub

4. Kstate

5. A & M

6. OSU

7. Missouri

8. Colorado

9. Kansas

10. ISU

11. Idaho

12. South Dakota St

13. WKU

 

This is just who I think will play us the toughest, not how I think the conference standings will shake out. For example, I think Mizzou will get second in the north.

[ESPY]

1. OU (south champs)

2. Texas

3. Udub

4. Kstate

5. A & M

6. OSU

7. Missouri

8. Colorado

9. Kansas

10. ISU

11. Idaho

12. South Dakota St

13. WKU

 

This is just who I think will play us the toughest, not how I think the conference standings will shake out. For example, I think Mizzou will get second in the north.

So it's gonna be the Big 12 Title Game of the Century eh? I like the sound of that.

[northtxhusker]

1. Texas

2. A&M

3. Missouri

4. Washington

5. Oklahoma St.

6. Kansas St.

7. Iowa St.

8. Kansas

9. Colorado

10. Idaho

11. SDSU

12. Western Kentucky

[jnkyrdoff6]

1. OU (south champs)

2. Texas

3. Udub

4. Kstate

5. A & M

6. OSU

7. Missouri

8. Colorado

9. Kansas

10. ISU

11. Idaho

12. South Dakota St

13. WKU

 

 

 

This is just who I think will play us the toughest, not how I think the conference standings will shake out. For example, I think Mizzou will get second in the north.

So it's gonna be the Big 12 Title Game of the Century eh? I like the sound of that.

 

I hope so. I just think OU has a good shot at taking the south. They really improved from Bradford's injury to the bowl game.