And as I said before, the perception changes if and when Nebraska wins games. Just like last year. Unranked to 6th. In 6 or 7 weeks.
Huskers 39th in AP poll
- Thread starter suhnami_rivals
- Start date
And as I said before, the perception changes if and when Nebraska wins games. Just like last year. Unranked to 6th. In 6 or 7 weeks.
ehh - maybe but I would think a nine win team with a recently hired DC guru - decent amount of starters and head coach and OC who are supposed to be QB whisperers would have gotten a bit more love - even if none of them had ever heard of Lee, they did realize we had a highly recruited QB on the roster. according to this article other coaches know of him https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor.../19/tanner-lee-nebraska-premier-qb/492704001/
A quarterback who did little on the field to draw attention with the Green Wave is now — according to quarterback gurus and current Football Bowl Subdivision coaches who spoke with USA TODAY Sports — one of the nation’s premier quarterback talents?
Last edited:
A QB that did little on the field to draw attention, and 2 freshmen QBs that have never played a down of college football. Equals questions at QB.
Sno, what makes me chuckle about this is the number of Husker fans not buying in to what you are selling. I totally agree with you on the QB talent, but MANY on this board have pointed to his lack of success at Tulane and said, "believe it when I see it."
But no matter how good Diaco is, there are going to potentially be some growing pains. The offensive line last year was not good... will they be good enough this year for a successful season? We will see... another question mark.
I still think we go at least 9-3 this year, but if the other coaches don't think so, that doesn't mean it's time for panic. I know you aren't panicking, but I agree with Tuco that it isn't worth it to get too worked up about a preseason poll. And Ellobo's post about all of the top 25 teams from last year that sucked is pretty enlightening as well...
I think the way we got hammered by OSU, Iowa and Tennessee also has a lot to do with our lack of respect this year. Those three games made us look like complete frauds.
I think the argument about the AP poll was over in Tuco's favor when Sno couldn't identify who would vote in said poll.
People around here like to quote how in the good old days "respect was earned, not given".
Those same folks come on blue blood message boards, almost demanding the reverse though.
Agreed. You can't get completely curb stomped by most of the good teams you played and then just expect to be handed respect as a gift based on something your team did 20 years ago.
And I think Riley was disgusted by those three games too. I think those games are why Banker got **** canned.
Pundits and prognosticators dislike new QB's and new coordinators (with some exception). They also remember the end of the season previous and assign it too much weight.
I bet 90% of the AP voters did not know our starting quarterback was a former player at Tulane. These writers often write about more than football and the football they do write about has to do with a myopic focus upon one or two teams. While we know Lee is being touted by gurus as one of the best qbs in the land and a first round pick, you can't expect a guy from Washington to know anything about this.
Also, Bob Diaco probably isn't known as a defensive guru by a lot of sports writers. If he is known, it is a bat-crap crazy head coach at UCONN whose team was in the toilet.
Could they find out about the wonders of Diaco and Lee by doing a bit of research? Sure. But there are probably 50 other teams they would need to do the same thing with. They don't get paid to do that research. They get paid to write stories about their area's sports teams.
So #39 stinks. But it simply is ignorance that brings about this rating.
Also, Bob Diaco probably isn't known as a defensive guru by a lot of sports writers. If he is known, it is a bat-crap crazy head coach at UCONN whose team was in the toilet.
Could they find out about the wonders of Diaco and Lee by doing a bit of research? Sure. But there are probably 50 other teams they would need to do the same thing with. They don't get paid to do that research. They get paid to write stories about their area's sports teams.
So #39 stinks. But it simply is ignorance that brings about this rating.
I am not worked up over it, I was simply commenting on that the perception of NU has become pretty bad. We did win 9 games last year so its not like we had a losing record, but the embarrassing beat downs from the Bo years and now so far in the Riley years has taken a big toll on our rep. I hope that perception starts changing this year
You raise a very good point. The beat-down losses go beyond last year to all of the Pelini years as well. And we won't even mention 2007. Oops.
We have been on the receiving end of some big stage humiliations for many years now. Writers get tired of giving us the benefit of the doubt only to watch us get killed.
Normally a Blue blood program gets the benefit of doubt - look at Texas this year in the preseason rankings - however only Minnesota is ranked preseason below us as a team who won 9 games or more the year before. then on top of that there are a number of teams who won less, now I really cant believe we are the only team replacing their QB in these groups
The perception of NU football by the rest of the country is at a pretty low point
perception within the fan base is that Nebraska is a blue blood, not sure that is the perception outside the program.
Texas has been recruiting well for many years and they have a perception of a team that was under-coached, so a perceived upgrade in coaching affords them the benefit of the doubt. Nebraska has not been at the top of the recruiting rankings, there is a perception of a subpar record against ranked teams the past 10 years, along with blowout losses. Thus the opposite national perception.
Texas has been recruiting well for many years and they have a perception of a team that was under-coached, so a perceived upgrade in coaching affords them the benefit of the doubt. Nebraska has not been at the top of the recruiting rankings, there is a perception of a subpar record against ranked teams the past 10 years, along with blowout losses. Thus the opposite national perception.
I think rankings do count. Especially if you're finishing in the top 10. Normally it does work itself out, but if you start with a low ranking, you have to jump much more. Say we start out 40th. Wisconsin starts at 15 and we beat them. We aren't jumping 20+ spots.
The crazy thing that also counts is the recruiting rankings. These recruiting rankings pretty much determine where teams start and half the time they are based on an over inflated report from a high school coach.
Case in point.... check the SEC. If teams that are ranked higher than they should be based on recruiting rankings and they just beat each other up. Are they legit teams beating each other up? Or are the mediocre teams beating each other up?
The crazy thing that also counts is the recruiting rankings. These recruiting rankings pretty much determine where teams start and half the time they are based on an over inflated report from a high school coach.
Case in point.... check the SEC. If teams that are ranked higher than they should be based on recruiting rankings and they just beat each other up. Are they legit teams beating each other up? Or are the mediocre teams beating each other up?
Bama never got the benefit of the doubt before Saban. Neither did Texas before Herman. Or OU in the 90's before Stoops.
All of those schools are generally going to get a little more benefit of the doubt than we will because they are generally considered easier to get talent to.
Remember, a big part of the mythos of Tom Osborne was him taking a bunch of misfits and also rans and putting them through a machine to roll more traditionally built programs (hence the rumors of roids among other reasons). Sprinkle with a 5* here, and a high 4* there, and boom, National Title team. (Remember that these are football writers who generally don't follow all things NU).
No one across the country never thought we built a program in the mold of Bama or USC. We were more like extended lightning in a bottle.
55+ comments 1200+ views including yours. Not on topic and a little hateful... but you're still here.
In the last five years Texas has averaged #20 in the team rankings. Last year they were #31.
P.S. The two years they were in the teens they brought in 28/29 guys. Before that their recruiting was better but all those Mack Brown classes are gone from school now.
So you would take nebraska's talent over texas' talent?
Don't get it twisted. I am confident in Lee. I was giving an example of what the SIDs and the media folks are using as a basis.
They are probably about even according to the rankings. However, I think the true Texas fans would heartily disagree with the assessment, "Texas has recruited well for many years."
Very true. I think Tuco and company have a point. While it simply isn't true, Texas still carries the perception of being a recent recruiting powerhouse and some writers may factor this perception into their voting.
However, in my opinion the pink elephant in the difference ranking is coaching. The perception is that Herman is a great coach who will get Texas towards the top...Riley not so much. With that said, just like some think Texas has supposedly been recruiting well as of late, the perception of the two coaches may be very wrong. Herman may just be the hot thing right now and Riley is building the program "brick by brick."
Tell you what, when the depth charts come out, go player by player and tell me who is more talented. Not based on recruiting rankings necessarily but based on skill level. I bet dollars to donuts Texas has more players you want on your team. The linebackers alone are incredible. But to each his own.
Sadly, since I do my best to keep up with the home state teams, I am forced to watch Texas a lot. I remember the OSU game last year quite well. Those linebackers were terrible that game. OSU threw the ball across the middle time after time after time and those backers stood there flat footed. Rudolph threw for almost 400 yards and OSU's freshman running back out of Tulsa ran for 150. OSU does not recruit great but they completely out "athleted" UT.
With the exception of the oline, I think we compare quite well.
Keep sipping Haterade, suhnami. You are buying into the 39-ranked preseason AP narrative. While you could be right and we could be wrong, I don't think you fully realize or have done any statistical research of Riley's QBs at Oregon State. From 2004-2014, Riley's pro style offenses passed for an average of 3430 yards. That's over 280 yards passing per game. Last time I checked, we have 3 pro-style QBs on our roster. That bodes well for Riley and Danny Langs and that's why I believe our three QBs are in a great position to be one of the most successful QB rooms in the country. But like I have stated time and time again, I believe the way back to the top is through a stout defense.
There is statistical evidence on that leads me to believe Lee could be a very good QB in Riley's offensive system. You cherry picked a quote from a media source. History shows that when Riley has his QB that he wants, his offense produces. Well, he's got what he wants now at Nebraska. I know he did not have amazing records at Oregon State all of those years, but that's because his defense could not stop the pass and the speed of the PAC 12. Hence, Diaco at Nebraska too. In the meantime, show me a more highly-touted pro-style QB roster in college football.
If you need any specific info on our starting QB's abilities, check in with @TheNewNU who went into specific detail about Tanner Lee last fall.
Which of course goes back to my original point about Texas vs Nebraska. That the perception is Texas was under-coached under Strong.
If you win, you're going to move up. It's that simple. We were in roughly the same spot to start last year and we rose all the way to #7 after starting 7-0. Looking at who was above us, I doubt we would have been much higher, if any higher at all had we started the season ranked.
For what it's worth, McKewon doesn't think NU is a Top 25 team, either.
http://collegepolltracker.com/football/pollster/sam-mckewon/2017/pre-season
But he is the biggest Badger slappy.
http://collegepolltracker.com/football/pollster/sam-mckewon/2017/pre-season
But he is the biggest Badger slappy.
Interesting stuff there at the poll tracker:
1. Out of 61 voters, two have us ranked (#23 and #25).
2. Oregon isn't getting any love either. (They are #33 overall with a high of #22).
3. K-State is getting a lot of love sneaking in the top 20.
4. We play 3 teams in the preseason top 10. I believe it's been a long time since we played three teams in the top 10 at the end of the season. (Only one of those teams will be top 10 at the end.)
5. We are tied with App. State and the University of Tulsa. (We are better than those teams and will end more highly ranked. We also will move up much more quickly than they will. However, this is really about national perception. No matter how you rationalize it, being with those two programs is depressing.)
Only depressing if we finish there with those two teams. After the season plays out, we will truly know where we should have been.
Even last year when we got up to 6, it was way inflated obviously. Let the season play out before you get too depressed.
New coaches over the last couple of years. (But none of them had to follow Bo.) There I said it.
I think this is the most important point to the main topic of the thread. The vast majority of these people voting in the polls, especially for pre-season polls where there is no actual game data to look at, probably mostly know the region/conference they cover and maybe some about the hotter teams outside of that area.
The extent of their knowledge about Nebraska is probably that we are replacing a long-time starter at QB, and maybe a few other things; but they probably don't know much about who is replacing that QB, or the new coaches, or various other things that could be important to how this season will go.
In the end, it's meaningless. If Nebraska plays well, voters will know more about them, and they will be ranked.
On the subject of people in the media who know very little about Nebraska, I thought I would throw this little gem out there. This actually came out two months ago, and I don't remember seeing anything about it on this board; but the discussion in this thread made me think of it. It's a season preview from someone named Scott Bilo. I've never heard of him prior to this, but apparently he's a member of the Football Writers Association and CFB Hall of Fame voter, among other things. Just take a quick gander at his preview for Nebraska, and you'll see how little some know. My personal favorite is the initial assertion (before a ham-fisted update after being called out by some Husker fans) that the starting QB job would be left to Zack Darlington.
http://bilofootball.blogspot.com/2017/06/bilos-2017-college-football-previews_0.html?m=0
No hate, just pointing out facts. And I obviously haven't bought into anything.
You can research rosters yourself, but in just the last 2 seasons Stanford has got the #1 & 2 pro style qb and oklahoma has got the #4 & 5.
These are all coaches hired after Mike Riley, who haven't had to needed to "reboot."
The media narrative for this year is, "This is really Year 1."