Huskers 39th in AP poll

[timnsun]

More interesting stuff:

4 - USC
7 - Oklahoma
9 - Wisconsin
11 - Michigan
13 - LSU
15 - Georgia
17 - Florida
18 - Miami
19 - South Florida
21 - Virginia Tech
23 - Texas

What do these 11 schools ranked in the Preseason Top 25 have in common?

This is a silly stat if you ask me... USC, Oklahoma, Michigan, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Miami, and Texas all are in recruiting hotbeds or are established better than Nebraska has been the last 15 years... you would expect them to be ranked even with new coaches, kind of like Nebraska when Solich was hired.

Wisconsin, South Florida and VaTech are the only ones that I believe we should be better than, and even Wisconsin and VaTech have been better than Nebraska the last 15 years...

So if you want to say Nebraska should be where these other teams are, at least acknowledge the situations at these universities and the different situations that these coaches inherited. I would contend Nebraska would automatically take more time to get back than 10 of the 11 universities you listed here.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

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.

Ok so I went and looked at this this morning because a) I had more time and b) living in Texas and working close with some of current high school players, I am pretty familiar with the players Texas recruits.

You put up an average of 5 years at #20 but let's look individually at the last 4. Using Rivals numbers

Texas average star
2014 - 3.17 - 23 recruits
2015 - 3.48 - 29 recruits
2016 - 3.54 - 28 recruits
2017 - 3.33 - 18 recruits

Nebraska average star
2014 - 2.80 - 25 recruits
2015 - 3.14 - 21 recruits
2016 - 3.14 - 21 recruits
2017 - 3.30 - 20 recruits

Just for comparison sake, the top ave star for each of those years

2014 - 3.92
2015 - 4.0
2016 - 3.83
2017 - 4.10

So using average rank is skewed a bit by including the 2017 Texas rank of 31. The 2014-2016 classes averaged 14. Those are the players that will be contributing in 2017. Also in the those 3 recruiting cycles, the average Texas player was 1/3 of a star higher than the Nebraska player. ( 3.17 to 2.8, 3.48 to 3.14 and 3.54 to 3.14).

You also appear to be saying that the reason Texas was ranked high in 2015 and 2016 was because they signed 28 and 29 players, but the reality is those 2 classes had their best average recruit ranking. So not only did they recruit a bunch, they recruited a bunch of very good players, so the higher ranking wasn't attributed to just having a large number of recruits.

With that info, I will stand by my opinion that Texas has recruited pretty well the last 4 years and the level of talent they put on the field has underachieved under Strong and the perception is Herman will get that talent to play at a level more in line with the recruiting ranking.

 

[timnsun]

Ok so I went and looked at this this morning because a) I had more time and b) living in Texas and working close with some of current high school players, I am pretty familiar with the players Texas recruits.

You put up an average of 5 years at #20 but let's look individually at the last 4. Using Rivals numbers

Texas average star
2014 - 3.17 - 23 recruits
2015 - 3.48 - 29 recruits
2016 - 3.54 - 28 recruits
2017 - 3.33 - 18 recruits

Nebraska average star
2014 - 2.80 - 25 recruits
2015 - 3.14 - 21 recruits
2016 - 3.14 - 21 recruits
2017 - 3.30 - 20 recruits

Just for comparison sake, the top ave star for each of those years

2014 - 3.92
2015 - 4.0
2016 - 3.83
2017 - 4.10

So using average rank is skewed a bit by including the 2017 Texas rank of 31. The 2014-2016 classes averaged 14. Those are the players that will be contributing in 2017. Also in the those 3 recruiting cycles, the average Texas player was 1/3 of a star higher than the Nebraska player. ( 3.17 to 2.8, 3.48 to 3.14 and 3.54 to 3.14).

You also appear to be saying that the reason Texas was ranked high in 2015 and 2016 was because they signed 28 and 29 players, but the reality is those 2 classes had their best average recruit ranking. So not only did they recruit a bunch, they recruited a bunch of very good players, so the higher ranking wasn't attributed to just having a large number of recruits.

With that info, I will stand by my opinion that Texas has recruited pretty well the last 4 years and the level of talent they put on the field has underachieved under Strong and the perception is Herman will get that talent to play at a level more in line with the recruiting ranking.

Can't wait to see the spin from Tom this time...

Oh wait. There's nothing to spin here. Great post, one that Tom won't be able to respond to!

 

[swissticuffs]

Preseason rankings are meaningless.

 

[SnohomishRed]

I am not sure I get you guys - the comment was made that the perception of NU is bad across the media and coaches - well duh how many teams got beat 63 - 3 last year. Of course it is bad and has been getting worse and it did not start with Riley

Why try and deny it and justify a #39 preseason ranking coming off a 9 win season? It is what it is, personally I believe we are under rated but it is clear we are going to have to earn a more positive image. Is it important?why yes it is , higher preseason rankings generate more positive pub and helps recruiting. Right now the media is treating NU as a mid major program or gulp...Iowa

Hopefully it turns in our favor a great season would make a huge difference ( everyone loves the comeback story)

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

I am not sure I get you guys - the comment was made that the perception of NU is bad across the media and coaches - well duh how many teams got beat 63 - 3 last year. Of course it is bad and has been getting worse and it did not start with Riley

Why try and deny it and justify a #39 preseason ranking coming off a 9 win season? It is what it is, personally I believe we are under rated but it is clear we are going to have to earn a more positive image. Is it important?why yes it is , higher preseason rankings generate more positive pub and helps recruiting. Right now the media is treating NU as a mid major program or gulp...Iowa

Hopefully it turns in our favor a great season would make a huge difference ( everyone loves the comeback story)

No, everyone is very much openly discussing the perception of Nebraska. It just seems to hurt your feelings a little more than others. The perception changes with positive results. It isn't changing because we discuss it on a message board. We have no control over the perception.

 

[SnohomishRed]

No, everyone is very much openly discussing the perception of Nebraska. It just seems to hurt your feelings a little more than others. The perception changes with positive results. It isn't changing because we discuss it on a message board. We have no control over the perception.

That is true and in fact nothing posted on the message board is going to have any control over the direction of this program.
Yes I am disappointed in the perception of this program, something tells me I am not alone. In fact for comparison purposes we are thought of at the same level as starting 2008 - with a rookie new coach coming off a horrible losing season in 2007 so yes I do not like it.

Now some on here, including you are trying to blame it on a new QB or that we are not in a recruiting hotbed. My point was this preseason poll was a vote of no - confidence on Mike Riley - not that I agree with it because right now I do not but IMO that is why we are ranked so low not that we are starting a new QB

 

[Truehuskerfan]

That is true and in fact nothing posted on the message board is going to have any control over the direction of this program.
Yes I am disappointed in the perception of this program, something tells me I am not alone. In fact for comparison purposes we are thought of at the same level as starting 2008 - with a rookie new coach coming off a horrible losing season in 2007 so yes I do not like it.

Now some on here, including you are trying to blame it on a new QB or that we are not in a recruiting hotbed. My point was this preseason poll was a vote of no - confidence on Mike Riley - not that I agree with it because right now I do not but IMO that is why we are ranked so low not that we are starting a new QB

I think that's way too simplistic. Does anyone think we'd be ranked preseason if everything else was the same except we had a different coach? I don't. It's voters' view of the program as a whole and how we ended last year and the fact we have little returning offensive production-not Riley specifically. I don't think we'd be ranked if Tom Herman was our coach, because we're not Texas.

 

[SnohomishRed]

I think that's way too simplistic. Does anyone think we'd be ranked preseason if everything else was the same except we had a different coach? I don't. It's voters' view of the program as a whole and how we ended last year and the fact we have little returning offensive production-not Riley specifically. I don't think we'd be ranked if Tom Herman was our coach, because we're not Texas.

a 9 win team with arguably the hottest coach in CFB yes we would have been ranked

 

[Toms Wife]

Can't wait to see the spin from Tom this time...

Oh wait. There's nothing to spin here. Great post, one that Tom won't be able to respond to!

I didn't cherry pick years. I took everyone eligible. Plus, talk to Texas fans. They are not happy with recruiting over the last five years. An average of #20 is not to their liking.

If Tuco is correct and a team with an average ranking of #20 is killing us in terms of athletes, then our recruiting simply isn't very good.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

That is true and in fact nothing posted on the message board is going to have any control over the direction of this program.
Yes I am disappointed in the perception of this program, something tells me I am not alone. In fact for comparison purposes we are thought of at the same level as starting 2008 - with a rookie new coach coming off a horrible losing season in 2007 so yes I do not like it.

Now some on here, including you are trying to blame it on a new QB or that we are not in a recruiting hotbed. My point was this preseason poll was a vote of no - confidence on Mike Riley - not that I agree with it because right now I do not but IMO that is why we are ranked so low not that we are starting a new QB

The fact that computer models have estimated the win totals between 6 and 8 isn't because of any sort of perception. Those win totals are based on returning production, schedule, etc. Now that computer model does aid In the national perception. As has been stated before, the writers are regionally biased, the coaches have their SIDs vote for them. The research they do to determine who they think will be good is based on what the Vegas model and the ESPN FPI say and other low hanging fruit that is out there for them to use. I doubt anyone is looking at game film of 2012 Tulane or 2014 UConn to get an idea on where to rank Nebraska. They don't have time to do that for 130 FBS teams

After that initial "research" they will look at previous years or coach reputation etc. then will vote. This is where you will see the "benefit of the doubt" votes in preseason rankings. This is also why you see 6 or 7 teams that were preseason top 25 in 2016 end up with losing records.

I agree it is what it is, but it isn't what you are making it out to be. If Nebraska ends up at 9-3 or 10-2, and Lee is successful and returns the perception for 2018 is totally different. Why? Because the writers and the SIDs will look at the FPI and the Vegas computers, and those ratings will indicate Nebraska is returning huge amounts of offensive production, which will equate to a higher number of estimated wins.

 

[Truehuskerfan]

a 9 win team with arguably the hottest coach in CFB yes we would have been ranked

Everything else being the same? No. I totally disagree. You're looking for an easy scapegoat to blame our national perception on. You as I recall were never that enamored with Riley anyway-you can try to explain that away by saying you don't agree with that perception right now, but come on-you want our perception to be blamed on him.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

I didn't cherry pick years. I took everyone eligible. Plus, talk to Texas fans. They are not happy with recruiting over the last five years. An average of #20 is not to their liking.

If Tuco is correct and a team with an average ranking of #20 is killing us in terms of athletes, then our recruiting simply isn't very good.

That's the old YPC is an indication of the level of defense.

Ten 10-yard rushes for 100 yards is 10 ypc

Nine 1-yard rushes and one 91 yard rush is 10 ypc

But they tell a completely different story.

But you hang on to that average recruiting ranking based on a 5 year average, where one year skews the entirety of the roster.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

a 9 win team with arguably the hottest coach in CFB yes we would have been ranked

Maybe, but that just shows how fickle perception is.

 

[timnsun]

I didn't cherry pick years. I took everyone eligible. Plus, talk to Texas fans. They are not happy with recruiting over the last five years. An average of #20 is not to their liking.

If Tuco is correct and a team with an average ranking of #20 is killing us in terms of athletes, then our recruiting simply isn't very good.

Instead of responding to me, why don't you respond to Tuco? Is it because your argument doesn't hold water?

I think so...

 

[SnohomishRed]

Everything else being the same? No. I totally disagree. You're looking for an easy scapegoat to blame our national perception on. You as I recall were never that enamored with Riley anyway-you can try to explain that away by saying you don't agree with that perception right now, but come on-you want our perception to be blamed on him.

No I am just not burying my head in the sand and thinking all is great - Once again I like Riley - I did not like his choice for assistant coaches especially Read and Banker - He has fixed that so I am very encouraged. I think this team is much better this year but yes the perception is not good Here is an article on Athlon where coaches talk about other programs https://athlonsports.com/college-fo...s-talk-anonymously-about-conference-foes-2017

here is what one of them said about our defense

When Notre Dame could put top-level talent out there he could play the mind games and be all rah-rah, but this isn’t that kind of environment. Some players might buy in, but they’re simply not good right now. Against really strong offenses, they fell apart fast and lost their technique, almost like they played down to better talent — and that’s coaching."

 

[timnsun]

No I am just not burying my head in the sand and thinking all is great - Once again I like Riley - I did not like his choice for assistant coaches especially Read and Banker - He has fixed that so I am very encouraged. I think this team is much better this year but yes the perception is not good Here is an article on Athlon where coaches talk about other programs https://athlonsports.com/college-fo...s-talk-anonymously-about-conference-foes-2017

here is what one of them said about our defense

When Notre Dame could put top-level talent out there he could play the mind games and be all rah-rah, but this isn’t that kind of environment. Some players might buy in, but they’re simply not good right now. Against really strong offenses, they fell apart fast and lost their technique, almost like they played down to better talent — and that’s coaching."

That comment is a funny one... The knock was against last year's coaches. Coaching is going to be completely different on the defensive side of the ball... If the issue was coaching, this year should be much improved, at least, that is my hope, along with many others...

 

[Toms Wife]

Instead of responding to me, why don't you respond to Tuco? Is it because your argument doesn't hold water?

I think so...

Fine. You and Tuco win. The #20 team or #16 team or the team that hasn't been in the Top 10 in terms of recruiting over the last five years by every statistical measure is far more talented than us.

We better start recruiting far better.

 

[timnsun]

Fine. You and Tuco win. The #20 team or #16 team or the team that hasn't been in the Top 10 in terms of recruiting over the last five years by every statistical measure is far more talented than us.

We better start recruiting far better.

Just like Tom...

Just try to be objective... Tuco laid out a clear analysis of the three years that would be playing right now, and there is no comparison, average stars or otherwise.

Tuco isn't saying Texas is top 10 recruiting, but they have recruiting players who are, on average, rated much higher, and with greater numbers, than Nebraska those three years that are playing right now. 3.5 vs 3.1 is a huge difference in terms of star rating, as is 3.2 vs 2.8... They also recruited 85 those 3 years vs 67 for Nebraska.

But you're right, Nebraska has recruited just as well as Texas.

Just man up, or woman up, or whatever, and admit that you were wrong.

 

[Toms Wife]

Just like Tom...

Just try to be objective... Tuco laid out a clear analysis of the three years that would be playing right now, and there is no comparison, average stars or otherwise.

Tuco isn't saying Texas is top 10 recruiting, but they have recruiting players who are, on average, rated much higher, and with greater numbers, than Nebraska those three years that are playing right now. 3.5 vs 3.1 is a huge difference in terms of star rating, as is 3.2 vs 2.8... They also recruited 85 those 3 years vs 67 for Nebraska.

But you're right, Nebraska has recruited just as well as Texas.

Just man up, or woman up, or whatever, and admit that you were wrong.

OK...I was wrong. There is a huge difference in the players Texas has been recruiting recently and the ones we have been recruiting.

So why is that?

 

[timnsun]

OK...I was wrong. There is a huge difference in the players Texas has been recruiting recently and the ones we have been recruiting.

So why is that?

Texas recruiting own back yard for starters... that's a huge one. And Texas is an appealing place to play football.

These coaches have done a pretty outstanding job getting talent to come and visit... something that was hard to do with the previous staff at times... and it is showing as the recruiting numbers seem to be improving.

It seems as though things are starting to be more comparable to Texas with 2017 and so far for 2018, because of a well developed and far reaching recruiting strategy, and the genuineness of the coaching staff in their conversations with recruits.

 

[HuskerO]

This is a silly stat if you ask me... USC, Oklahoma, Michigan, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Miami, and Texas all are in recruiting hotbeds or are established better than Nebraska has been the last 15 years

Plus the new coaches at those schools are joining said programs in much better shape than Riley inherited at Nebraska.

 

[HuskerO]

OK...I was wrong.

Quick, someone go over to Tom's house and check on him. Someone has broken in and posting under his account. ;-)

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Quick, someone go over to Tom's house and check on him. Someone has broken in and posting under his account. ;-)

His wife did it.

 

[Truehuskerfan]

No I am just not burying my head in the sand and thinking all is great - Once again I like Riley - I did not like his choice for assistant coaches especially Read and Banker - He has fixed that so I am very encouraged. I think this team is much better this year but yes the perception is not good Here is an article on Athlon where coaches talk about other programs https://athlonsports.com/college-fo...s-talk-anonymously-about-conference-foes-2017

here is what one of them said about our defense

When Notre Dame could put top-level talent out there he could play the mind games and be all rah-rah, but this isn’t that kind of environment. Some players might buy in, but they’re simply not good right now. Against really strong offenses, they fell apart fast and lost their technique, almost like they played down to better talent — and that’s coaching."

And none of that really proves that people think that it's solely Riley that is keeping us down-as if people think we'd be better if we just had a different head coach. Again, you are using him as an easy scapegoat for problems with our national perception, because you want to.

 

[RedMyMind]

Some of you act like your individual manhood is challenged if the football SIDs don't vote for your team. ITS A PRESEASON POLL. the same poll that Nebraska was just receiving votes in last year before climbing all the way to 6th and 7th.

But MAAAA

 

[huskerbaseball13]

That's the old YPC is an indication of the level of defense.

Ten 10-yard rushes for 100 yards is 10 ypc

Nine 1-yard rushes and one 91 yard rush is 10 ypc

But they tell a completely different story.

But you hang on to that average recruiting ranking based on a 5 year average, where one year skews the entirety of the roster.

You have to remember that this is the same guy who used Bo's 2003 Alamo win to say Bo averaged closer to 10 wins per year rather than 9.

 

[Toms Wife]

You have to remember that this is the same guy who used Bo's 2003 Alamo win to say Bo averaged closer to 10 wins per year rather than 9.

Tom is a doofus on a lot of things. For example, I still have bright hope for Riley.

But whether you like it or not Bo won 67 games at Nebraska in seven full seasons. That averages out to 10 wins per season. Tom and I like accuracy but you are free to say what you want. (Shoot you can say he averaged 8 wins a year because he only won one game his first year. 67/8=8. That makes just as much sense as saying he won 9 games a year. No skin off my teeth.)

Now let's hope that Riley averages 11 or 12 per year!

 

[oldjar07]

For all of those saying preseason polls don't matter, that's nonsense. Preseason polls are probably the most important polls there is because it's one of the most talked about things before the season starts. They're used as a way to establish bragging rights when playing other teams. Just look at how many posts are in this thread and a lot of times there's more than 1 thread on the topic. When the season's over, people don't care about the polls and where you finish in the polls doesn't really matter unless your #1.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

For all of those saying preseason polls don't matter, that's nonsense. Preseason polls are probably the most important polls there is because it's one of the most talked about things before the season starts. They're used as a way to establish bragging rights when playing other teams. Just look at how many posts are in this thread and a lot of times there's more than 1 thread on the topic. When the season's over, people don't care about the polls and where you finish in the polls doesn't really matter unless your #1.

Irrelevant when determining champions. Good only for discussion purposes only.

 

[timnsun]

For all of those saying preseason polls don't matter, that's nonsense. Preseason polls are probably the most important polls there is because it's one of the most talked about things before the season starts. They're used as a way to establish bragging rights when playing other teams. Just look at how many posts are in this thread and a lot of times there's more than 1 thread on the topic. When the season's over, people don't care about the polls and where you finish in the polls doesn't really matter unless your #1.

Huh?

So if I am understanding you, starting in the top 25 is better than finishing in the top 25 because no one cares where you finish unless it's #1...

I am so pissed we are unranked now, even if we finish top ten somehow, that will suck because we started this season unranked.

 

[oldjar07]

Irrelevant when determining champions. Good only for discussion purposes only.

Yeah, polls are good for discussion purposes and there's a lot more discussion before and during the season than after the season. People pay attention to the polls more before and during the season than they do after.

 

[Truehuskerfan]

Yeah, polls are good for discussion purposes and there's a lot more discussion before and during the season than after the season. People pay attention to the polls more before and during the season than they do after.

So you would start the season ranked than finish the season ranked? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. That's essentially saying that your actual record is less important than the preseason hype. Look at Notre Dame last year. They were preseason ranked in the top 10, but finished 4-8. So I guess their fans should have been thrilled with last year, because they were preseason top 10 and that's what really counts. The fact they finished 4-8 is just an irrelevancy. I guess we've already lost this season then-because it doesn't matter what we do during the season, we weren't preseason ranked, and that's really counts, right?

 

[Toms Wife]

So you would start the season ranked than finish the season ranked? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. That's essentially saying that your actual record is less important than the preseason hype. Look at Notre Dame last year. They were preseason ranked in the top 10, but finished 4-8. So I guess their fans should have been thrilled with last year, because they were preseason top 10 and that's what really counts. The fact they finished 4-8 is just an irrelevancy. I guess we've already lost this season then-because it doesn't matter what we do during the season, we weren't preseason ranked, and that's really counts, right?

Oldjar never said anything close to that. He said polls were good for discussion purposes. IFTHATISTRUE then he is right...there is way more discussion before the season and during it. It's an after thought after the season.

 

[timnsun]

Oldjar never said anything close to that. He said polls were good for discussion purposes. IFTHATISTRUE then he is right...there is way more discussion before the season and during it. It's an after thought after the season.

What? Then what is this?

For all of those saying preseason polls don't matter, that's nonsense. Preseason polls are probably the most important polls there is because it's one of the most talked about things before the season starts. They're used as a way to establish bragging rights when playing other teams. Just look at how many posts are in this thread and a lot of times there's more than 1 thread on the topic. When the season's over, people don't care about the polls and where you finish in the polls doesn't really matter unless your #1.

How do you explain these two bolder points from Oldjar?

He clearly states only preseason polls matter, and end of year polls are pointless unless you finish first.

Come on, Tom...

 

[Toms Wife]

They are important, he says, because they are the most talked about. Then he reiterates that point by saying these polls are simply good for discussion purposes.

Why is this hard for you to understand?

 

[huskerfan1414]

I wish there was no poll until at least week five. I get they sell papers but at least no ap or coaches poll til league games have all started.

 

[Toms Wife]

I wish there was no poll until at least week five. I get they sell papers but at least no ap or coaches poll til league games have all started.

You answered your own question. It's the AP. The AP Poll consists of sportswriters. Sportswriters want something to write about to sell papers. Sportswriters thus have preseason polls. People buy papers and read what sportswriters think of the preseason poll.

P.s. I wish the same thing but it ain't ever changing.

 

[huskerfan1414]

I didnt ask a question Tom.

 

[timnsun]

I didnt ask a question Tom.

His next post will say that you did.

He won't let you off that easy when he can argue with you about it.