Lots of people wondering how Banker will do with our players. Just a few reference frames:
2011 - OSU lost to Wisconsin 35-0, OSU gave up 397 yards - OSU finished 3-9 with 5 blowout losses
2011 - Nebraska lost to Wisconsin 48-17, Neb gave up 486 yards - Neb finished 9-4 with 3 blowout losses
2012 - OSU best Wisconsin 10-7, OSU gave up 207 yards - OSU finished 9-4, 3 losses were by a combined 11 points.
2012 - Nebraska beat Wisconsin 30-27, Nebraska gave up 295 yards - Neb finished 10-4 with 3 blowout losses
2012 - Wisconsin beat Nebraska 70-31, Nebraska gave up 640 yards
From 2008-2012:
OSU signed 0-five stars, 7-four stars, 66-three stars, 33-two stars
Neb signed 1-five star, 32-four stars, 63-three stars, 11-two stars
Now of course stars aren't everything, but it would be hard to argue that Bo and staff did a LOT less, at least in the scenarios above, with a lot more than Banker did at OSU. At least to Wisconsin, OSU gave up approximately 90 less yards in each game, with lesser talent. Banker was able to hold Wisconsin to 89 less yards with a 3-9 team in 2011.
From 2011 to 2015:
Neb signed 0-five stars, 31-four stars, 63-three stars, 9-two stars
It's really hard to believe, with the apparent talent upgrade, that these coaches won't do better than Bo and company. When your playing in a Power 5 conference with 33% of your recruited players at the two-star level and you have no walk-on program to speak of, you are always on the edge of disaster depth wise and you're forced to put players out there that are just not that physically gifted (the thing that Rivals can assess).
That's why you see fluctuations between 3-9 to 9-4. With the talent Bo had, we should have seen fluctuations between 9-3 and 12-1, but we were always stuck at 9 to10 and had blowouts that were clearly coaching issues (as evidenced by mid-majors who played some of the teams that blew us out way better than we did).
The misnomer is that while 9-3 is 300% better than 3-9, the difference in the quality of a 3-9 verses a 9-3 team may be as little as 10%. Look at our wins in 2012 against PSU, NW, and MSU. If the wind blows any differently in these games, we end up 7-7 instead of 10-4.
In any event, it's really hard to believe that these guys won't be much better than than the last crew. But even if they're 50% better, it might only result in 1-2 more wins. When you get to over 10 wins, luck and momentum starts to come in.
2011 - OSU lost to Wisconsin 35-0, OSU gave up 397 yards - OSU finished 3-9 with 5 blowout losses
2011 - Nebraska lost to Wisconsin 48-17, Neb gave up 486 yards - Neb finished 9-4 with 3 blowout losses
2012 - OSU best Wisconsin 10-7, OSU gave up 207 yards - OSU finished 9-4, 3 losses were by a combined 11 points.
2012 - Nebraska beat Wisconsin 30-27, Nebraska gave up 295 yards - Neb finished 10-4 with 3 blowout losses
2012 - Wisconsin beat Nebraska 70-31, Nebraska gave up 640 yards
From 2008-2012:
OSU signed 0-five stars, 7-four stars, 66-three stars, 33-two stars
Neb signed 1-five star, 32-four stars, 63-three stars, 11-two stars
Now of course stars aren't everything, but it would be hard to argue that Bo and staff did a LOT less, at least in the scenarios above, with a lot more than Banker did at OSU. At least to Wisconsin, OSU gave up approximately 90 less yards in each game, with lesser talent. Banker was able to hold Wisconsin to 89 less yards with a 3-9 team in 2011.
From 2011 to 2015:
Neb signed 0-five stars, 31-four stars, 63-three stars, 9-two stars
It's really hard to believe, with the apparent talent upgrade, that these coaches won't do better than Bo and company. When your playing in a Power 5 conference with 33% of your recruited players at the two-star level and you have no walk-on program to speak of, you are always on the edge of disaster depth wise and you're forced to put players out there that are just not that physically gifted (the thing that Rivals can assess).
That's why you see fluctuations between 3-9 to 9-4. With the talent Bo had, we should have seen fluctuations between 9-3 and 12-1, but we were always stuck at 9 to10 and had blowouts that were clearly coaching issues (as evidenced by mid-majors who played some of the teams that blew us out way better than we did).
The misnomer is that while 9-3 is 300% better than 3-9, the difference in the quality of a 3-9 verses a 9-3 team may be as little as 10%. Look at our wins in 2012 against PSU, NW, and MSU. If the wind blows any differently in these games, we end up 7-7 instead of 10-4.
In any event, it's really hard to believe that these guys won't be much better than than the last crew. But even if they're 50% better, it might only result in 1-2 more wins. When you get to over 10 wins, luck and momentum starts to come in.
