I think you make some good points, but I will disagree on one thing:
The narrative about difficulty surrounding Nebraska's 2021 schedule is overblown. Oklahoma and Ohio State will be elite, no doubt. They always will be. Wisconsin should rebound as they may not face a ranked team all season.
But Iowa will face their biggest rebuild in 7 seasons. Northwestern is losing the most production and starts in the Power 5. And Michigan has a QB with one career start, a raw offensive line, and they're switching from the 4-3 to the 3-4 with a whole defense recruited to the 4-3.
The Huskers also got a gift with a road game at Michigan State. The Spartans might be the worst team in the East next season.
That doesn't mean Nebraska will avoid shitting down their leg. But the media and our fans are acting Iowa will be Iowa. Northwestern will be another division winner, Michigan is Michigan, and the Spartans will be back.
I think Iowa goes 6-6 or 7-5.
I see Northwestern anywhere from 4-8 to 6-6.
I think Michigan will be lucky to finish 7-5
Michigan State is staring at a 3 - 9 or 4-8 season.
Has Nebraska proven they can lose to bad teams? Absolutely. But that's not my point. The media especially keeps alluding to all the ranked opponents Nebraska will face in 2021. I don't believe that will be the case as the 2021 season progresses.
Some good points here certainly. As I read some of this I can't help but question all the narratives that come and go on this board, not specifically yours.
For me it all comes down to player development both at the other schools versus Nebraska. When one slates these teams to have lost so much and predict lower records based on that and then we struggle to win or even lose then what does that say? That has been the same rhetoric for the past three years. That and we are young, which if you think about it, you have to ask why we were young for three stinking years! I personally do not think we were as "young" as others have stated, yes we played some frosh and some redshirt frosh which is closer to being a sophomore but when a list is compiled, you don't play all frosh WR's or all frosh RBs at the same time. Remind me how many frosh were on D? That was a senior led group.
The media is going to believe what they see. Nebraska is who everyone sees them being, the team that can't even sniff a .500 record for some reason for three years under this staff. To me, that's the narrative the Huskers need to change.
A few more:
You mentioned OU being perennially good which I agree. People hope really good teams fall off the earth - see Bama - when they change coaches, the narrative didn't hold at OU. One could argue they got better.
We weren't going to get a Omaha kid because his parents have ties to Illinois but then the list of possible landing places have nothing to do with Illinois but that is the narrative. These kids want to win and hoping you will win and actually getting it done are two vastly different things.
Having a senior + led D should make a huge difference next year despite how good the other teams are. Frankly, other teams seem to "reload" much like the Huskers of the past did, not rebuild like we have been doing seemingly now for many years.
If those other teams you are predicting to struggle do a better job of player development as they have traditionally done then all bets are off for me. I value little that is on paper, but trust what I see on Saturdays.