McKewon picks West Division winner, (hint) it's not Nebraska

[LukeinNE]

Oh, I'd agree. Our offense has gone into a shell against Iowa. You can somewhat blame weather conditions in 2012, but 2011 and for sure 2013, we should have had more success.

I'd argue Davis is probably the second worst OC in the division, and at least in the bottom 3.

I think you're placing too much weight on his last years at Texas where their success (or lack of) is far more tied to the politics within the program than the actual product on the field. The fact that he did what he did over the decade before that can't be ignored though. I think he's a pretty solid coach, certainly in the top half when you look at some of the OCs in the B1G. Not exactly a notable bunch.

It's still too early to tell how successful he will be at Iowa I think. Give it another year.

We will wait and see to be sure, but I dunno man. Greg Davis' product went straight into the crapper the moment his Heisman candidate quarterback left. If he couldn't make an offense loaded with 4 and 5 star recruits hum without a super star QB anchoring things, I'm not sure how it's going to work with 2's and 3's at Iowa.

 

[TheSker]

Iowa? Iowa? I don't want to be the MSU guy from last year, but Iowa? Iowa?

Wisconsin has recent history of getting the job done and I am not going against that. Then Nebraska has the highest ceiling, but has to get out of their own way. Northwestern has Mark and that is good enough for me. Then there is Iowa. This is just odd to me. I get that they have just about the easiest schedule in the entire world, but come on. Iowa?

Iowa probably has the best QB in the division, good OLs and DLs, as well the most advantageous/easiest schedule out there. It's not a reach to say that we lose to MSU and beat Iowa, yet they win the division. And I'm not chalking up the game in IC as win, not until I see more from both teams.

Iowa also has Greg Davis.

Who has a pretty good track record against Nebraska.

Pelini has a good track record against Michigan State.

 

[Redux]

Iowa will either take advantage of a soft schedule and shoot up the rankings undeservingly (what Im hoping for)

Or, they crumble under a weak schedule and high expectations. (What history says is likely. And apparantely history is all you need when deciding how you think a season is gonna turn out.)

 

[Saunders]

• They lose EVERY SINGLE STARTER on the defensive front 7.

FIFY

 

[NUinID]

I'm picking Wisconsin at this point. Iowa has a laughably favorable schedule, but I think they're going to be the third, if not 4th best team in the West this year. I'll go:

1. Wisconsin 10-2 (7-1)

2. Nebraska 9-3 (5-3)

3. Iowa 8-4 (5-3)

Can I ask why? I don't get why people are thinking Wisconsin isn't going to lay an egg this year.

Sure. Favorable schedule, they're going to have an awesome running game, as usual, and Iowa's not going to win the division.

I'll give you favorable schedule...but...

Remember, Wisconsin was 9-4 last year and here is what they have to replace:

• Wisconsin loses 26 seniors coming into this year.
• They lose EVERY SINGLE STARTER on the defensive line.
• Their leading returning receiver caught 10 passes for 106 yards.
• They're breaking in completely new starters at tight end.
• Their linebackers have experience but rarely started last year...in essence, this is like our offensive line this year. Experience but low starts.
• Their O-line is good to go and their secondary has returning corners...that's about the only areas that haven't seen churn.

So there you go...they have even more questions than the Cornhuskers do. Sure they have a good schedule setup...but I think the light schedule isn't going to do them any favors...they're going to expect everyone to lay down for them and I think they're going to have all kinds of problems with it.

This I agree with completely. Chris Borland is gone, he was the heart and soul of that defense. He will be very hard to replace. I am more inclined to see 8-4 or 7-5 out of Wisconsin next year as to see 10-2.

 

[kchusker_chris]

We will wait and see to be sure, but I dunno man. Greg Davis' product went straight into the crapper the moment his Heisman candidate quarterback left. If he couldn't make an offense loaded with 4 and 5 star recruits hum without a super star QB anchoring things, I'm not sure how it's going to work with 2's and 3's at Iowa.

What about the Heisman candidate QB before that one, or the one before that one? Did he have nothing to do w/ any of that?

I'll remind you, Bo Pelini's product went straight into the crapper the moment his Heisman candidate DT left.

(post Colt McCoy, Texas has had 3 fewer players drafted than Nebraska. I think you can safely say the recruiting services have wiffed on Texas recently - likely skewed because of a decade of domination)

 

[LukeinNE]

I'll give you favorable schedule...but...
Remember, Wisconsin was 9-4 last year and here is what they have to replace:

• Wisconsin loses 26 seniors coming into this year.
• They lose EVERY SINGLE STARTER on the defensive line.
• Their leading returning receiver caught 10 passes for 106 yards.
• They're breaking in completely new starters at tight end.
• Their linebackers have experience but rarely started last year...in essence, this is like our offensive line this year. Experience but low starts.
• Their O-line is good to go and their secondary has returning corners...that's about the only areas that haven't seen churn.

So there you go...they have even more questions than the Cornhuskers do. Sure they have a good schedule setup...but I think the light schedule isn't going to do them any favors...they're going to expect everyone to lay down for them and I think they're going to have all kinds of problems with it.

I have to admit I didn't realize the graduation damage was that extensive. This really makes it an "Indy or Bust" year for Pelini, I think.

What about the Heisman candidate QB before that one, or the one before that one? Did he have nothing to do w/ any of that?

If you think deep inside Jake Rudock is another budding Vince Young, just waiting to be unleashed by Greg Davis's magical coaching ways, then more power to you.

I'll remind you, Bo Pelini's product went straight into the crapper the moment his Heisman candidate DT left.

The Suh-less 2010 defense finished 11th nationally in yards allowed and 10th in points allowed.

 

[RedDenver]

• They lose EVERY SINGLE STARTER on the defensive front 7.

FIFY

I think Wisky has 1 LB coming back.

 

[Saunders]

• They lose EVERY SINGLE STARTER on the defensive front 7.

FIFY

I think Wisky has 1 LB coming back.

Nah, they only return 3 guys on Defense, all 3 in the secondary.

 

[Abdullah the Butcher]

• They lose EVERY SINGLE STARTER on the defensive front 7.

FIFY

I think Wisky has 1 LB coming back.

Nah, they only return 3 guys on Defense, all 3 in the secondary.

• Melvin Gordon and Derek Landisch are the leaders: Gordon, the All-Big Ten running back who turned down the NFL for another year at Wisconsin, not only is the team's best player, but much more of a leader. He talked openly this spring about elevating Wisconsin to elite status and the initial College Football Playoff. Landisch, the only returning starter in the defensive front seven, is the undisputed leader of the defense and takes the torch from Chris Borland.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/99596/wisconsin-spring-wrap-5

 

[Saunders]

Landisch was a backup behind Conor O'Neill. He only has 3 career starts.

http://thebiglead.com/2014/01/23/phil-steele-returning-2014-starters-tennessee-has-zero-starting-linemen-back/

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/most-important-badgers-no-8-derek-landisch-061114

So, you can put your picture away.

 

[Abdullah the Butcher]

Landisch was a backup behind Conor O'Neill. He only has 3 career starts.

http://thebiglead.com/2014/01/23/phil-steele-returning-2014-starters-tennessee-has-zero-starting-linemen-back/

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/most-important-badgers-no-8-derek-landisch-061114

So he is a returning starter....on the official Wisconsin depth chart it was listed as Landisch or O'Neill, they were basically co-starters.

There isn't a single defensive player on Wisconsin's roster with more game experience than Landisch, who has played in 38 career games with three starts. Landisch is one of the names you'll hear pop up in discussions among the team's coaches for his leadership skills and toughness.

Those traits are often intangible, so here's something tangible: 33 tackles, two quarterback hurries, one sack, one forced fumble and one fumble recovery. Those are the numbers Landisch put up last season while he split time with Conor O'Neill. Now that O'Neill is gone, Landisch has a starting inside linebacker position all to himself.

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/most-important-badgers-no-8-derek-landisch-061114

 

[Saunders]

So, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. Ok then.

 

[Hooked on Huskers]

I pick Purdue. Right now, Boilermakers tied for first place in the West.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Landisch was a backup behind Conor O'Neill. He only has 3 career starts.

http://thebiglead.com/2014/01/23/phil-steele-returning-2014-starters-tennessee-has-zero-starting-linemen-back/

http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/most-important-badgers-no-8-derek-landisch-061114

So he is a returning starter....on the official Wisconsin depth chart it was listed as Landisch or O'Neill, they were basically co-starters.

Media usually considers a returning starter a player who started 50% of, or the last 6 of the games in prior season. Just because you started a couple games as a freshman, then were benched for 2 seasons before returning for your senior year doesn't mean you are a "returning starter". There are some exceptions to this for things like the nickel back, etc - but for the most part someone that started 3 random games the prior year would never be considered a returning starter.

Obviously the school pumps up returning starters by adding in the placeholder, the kickers, the long snapper, etc. But the media is pretty consistent when labeling "returning starters" - and Landish is certainly not one.