Way Too Early '24 Predictions

[AVeritas]

start 7-0, finish 7-5, and then whatever happens in the corporate bowl.

 

[TruHusker]

So potentially bad is not so nebulous? I mean everyone can claim that these players will never reach the expected potential. I mean you are saying that this year’s LB core won’t match the play of last year. Even though Bullock, gbayor and wright played significant snaps.

I guess I just grow tired of those that never want to see the positive potential in players. To me it is more about not wanting to get your hopes up than it is about actual potential. People would rather be pleasantly surprised than disappointed, so they lower their expectations in an effort to be surprised.

I predict 3 wins so when they get to 7 I can say they exceeded my artificial expectations.

I get your point but all one needs to do is look at the last, what 10 years? How about last year when everyone was ga ga about the potential of Sims and some of the transfers we had come in as well. Its a lot like the old science of "potential energy", it's there but has not been extracted.

Take a look at Nebraskas offense coming back next year, some proven players on the OL, injuries at RB, young and unproven WRs and likely a freshman QB. So how does one quantity and qualify the potential for that group? The default seems to be that each group will get better or be better than last year, the old addition by subtraction idiom that we often hear.

You kind of commented in your own way on this with your LB comment, naming those guys who played significant snaps meaning what? Maybe they are as good as they are going to be.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

I get your point but all one needs to do is look at the last, what 10 years? How about last year when everyone was ga ga about the potential of Sims and some of the transfers we had come in as well. Its a lot like the old science of "potential energy", it's there but has not been extracted.

Take a look at Nebraskas offense coming back next year, some proven players on the OL, injuries at RB, young and unproven WRs and likely a freshman QB. So how does one quantity and qualify the potential for that group? The default seems to be that each group will get better or be better than last year, the old addition by subtraction idiom that we often hear.

You kind of commented in your own way on this with your LB comment, naming those guys who played significant snaps meaning what? Maybe they are as good as they are going to be.

Nope. Just that perhaps there won’t be the decline in production that you predicted.

Apparently in your world, or way of thinking, no one ever improves year over year. Just that they are what they are.

 

[Trumplestiltskin]

9 at a minimum with semi competent QB play.

First 7, UCLA and Iowa at a minimum. USC is highly beatable…we gotta get Wiscy sometime.

I think the CU game will have an atmosphere similar to 1992.

 

[whatwouldlawrencephillipsdo]

all winnable games. if we die we die.

 

[FrankDux]

6 to 8, so I split at 7… sad state of affairs, but that’s where we are. Brighter days ahead for sure, but I believe it’ll take a little time.

DR could light it up with the right weapons and surprise us all. Hope… it’s all we have at this point. Never thought I’d see it, but HOPE these clowns in charge can get it right.

I literally believe they could’ve put a 3rd grader in charge 10 years ago and he/she would’ve outperformed this shit show.

 

[NebChicago]

I look at this and I think, Wow, there's only 2, maybe 3 teams I'm scared of here.... I have to temper myself because I thought the same thing last year. I can see 8-9 wins so long as "Nebraska doesn't Nebraska" and give shit away... I'm in the camp that with competent QB play that NU would've been an 8+ win team in 2023 so I'm staying the course with 8

I have thought the same thing for 16 years. I don’t trust me no more

 

[TruHusker]

Nope. Just that perhaps there won’t be the decline in production that you predicted.

Apparently in your world, or way of thinking, no one ever improves year over year. Just that they are what they are.

Look at it this way. We have won 4 -5 games for the last few years in this program and each year there was talk about the potential and how it would be better. Thr HS kids had the potential, the transfers had the potential, etc. Eventually, I suppose it has to be right. What happened to all the potential in those 4 and 5 win seasons?

 

[HuskAir]

Start 7-0, break the top 12. Then only win 1 of the final 5. 8-4.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Look at it this way. We have won 4 -5 games for the last few years in this program and each year there was talk about the potential and how it would be better. Thr HS kids had the potential, the transfers had the potential, etc. Eventually, I suppose it has to be right. What happened to all the potential in those 4 and 5 win seasons?

Well considering close to 75% of the 2024 roster will be turned over and will be players recruited by Rhule and staff, the players that weren't recruited by this staff appear to have bought in to the system.

The coaching staff is new. The head coach has turned 2 other programs around and at least has a history of success.

So the potential of those other players and coaches has little to do with the potential of the current players. Basically the same theory that the success of the Osborne teams has little to do with the relative success of the Pelini teams.

 

[TruHusker]

Well considering close to 75% of the 2024 roster will be turned over and will be players recruited by Rhule and staff, the players that weren't recruited by this staff appear to have bought in to the system.

The coaching staff is new. The head coach has turned 2 other programs around and at least has a history of success.

So the potential of those other players and coaches has little to do with the potential of the current players. Basically the same theory that the success of the Osborne teams has little to do with the relative success of the Pelini teams.

The word is overused and a way to validate one's opinion that a person or team will be better. We go through this every year, list position groups and we naturally use the word potential to describe them in the positive. Until this "potential" manifests itself, we will continue down this same road.

Somewhere along this path to turning this program around, this potential has to be realized.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

The word is overused and a way to validate one's opinion that a person or team will be better. We go through this every year, list position groups and we naturally use the word potential to describe them in the positive. Until this "potential" manifests itself, we will continue down this same road.

Somewhere along this path to turning this program around, this potential has to be realized.

And your attempting to validate your opinion that nothing will change under Rhule on the field because potential hasn't been realized by previous staffs?

 

[Landomatic]

if we die we die.

Uh yeah, that mantra kinda fell flat with some of our coaching decisions and play down the stretch last year. Time to put that one out to pasture

 

[Landomatic]

The word is overused and a way to validate one's opinion that a person or team will be better. We go through this every year, list position groups and we naturally use the word potential to describe them in the positive. Until this "potential" manifests itself, we will continue down this same road.

Somewhere along this path to turning this program around, this potential has to be realized.

And your attempting to validate your opinion that nothing will change under Rhule on the field because potential hasn't been realized by previous staffs?

This seems like one of those arguments where both sides are right. Both 100% true statements, but we won't know which way it goes until we see the results.

The "potential" argument gets used all the time in college football, not just at Nebraska. Fill in the blank team had a horrible fill in the blank position group last year, but they were all young and they return everyone. Okay, so were they young with a lot of potential and they're all going to be better this year...or did they all just suck and they'll just be one year older and still suck? Fans tend to cling to the former, but that's certainly not always the reality. The result at the end of the day is probably honestly around a 50/50 mix. Half those guys improve with another year under their belt and half of them were just never very good and still aren't.

 

[Landomatic]

9 at a minimum with semi competent QB play.

First 7, UCLA and Iowa at a minimum. USC is highly beatable…we gotta get Wiscy sometime.

I think the CU game will have an atmosphere similar to 1992.

Agree Wisconsin seems beatable. But did I miss something that makes people think Colorado, UCLA and USC look like wins?

Colorado- Beat us handily, returns all their studs and looks to be adding a lot to improve.
UCLA - Loses a couple studs on defense and their QB (although their QB room looks pretty deep), but they beat a lot of really good teams last year that would have handled us easily.
USC - Did you see their bowl game? They would have killed us last year and will probably be better next year.

Don't know why, but those Pac teams seem to be getting overlooked. The Pac was really good this year. Hope I'm wrong, but I see our path to 6-8 wins going through existing B1G teams (minus Ohio St) and Utep + Northern Iowa, not former Pac teams.

 

[redwine65]

Agree Wisconsin seems beatable. But did I miss something that makes people think Colorado, UCLA and USC look like wins?

Colorado- Beat us handily, returns all their studs and looks to be adding a lot to improve.
UCLA - Loses a couple studs on defense and their QB (although their QB room looks pretty deep), but they beat a lot of really good teams last year that would have handled us easily.
USC - Did you see their bowl game? They would have killed us last year and will probably be better next year.

Don't know why, but those Pac teams seem to be getting overlooked. The Pac was really good this year. Hope I'm wrong, but I see our path to 6-8 wins going through existing B1G teams (minus Ohio St) and Utep + Northern Iowa, not former Pac teams.

simms turned over the ball 1800 times vs cu

 

[ADV1]

Agree Wisconsin seems beatable. But did I miss something that makes people think Colorado, UCLA and USC look like wins?

Colorado- Beat us handily, returns all their studs and looks to be adding a lot to improve.
UCLA - Loses a couple studs on defense and their QB (although their QB room looks pretty deep), but they beat a lot of really good teams last year that would have handled us easily.
USC - Did you see their bowl game? They would have killed us last year and will probably be better next year.

Don't know why, but those Pac teams seem to be getting overlooked. The Pac was really good this year. Hope I'm wrong, but I see our path to 6-8 wins going through existing B1G teams (minus Ohio St) and Utep + Northern Iowa, not former Pac teams.

NU played them really well the first 1.5 qtrs right up until the turnover machine (Sims) started handing things over to them... I honestly thought up to that point NU played strong, had the momentum and had a great shot.

This year, it's at home, this year the honeymoon is over for Deion, We've seen interviews of guys who have left the program and of guys who have decomitted... so yeah, this year is different and I look for DONU to make a statement out of Colorado....

 

[Walleye79]

I voted 9 wins based on nothing but off season hope.

 

[Trumplestiltskin]

Agree Wisconsin seems beatable. But did I miss something that makes people think Colorado, UCLA and USC look like wins?

Colorado- Beat us handily, returns all their studs and looks to be adding a lot to improve.
UCLA - Loses a couple studs on defense and their QB (although their QB room looks pretty deep), but they beat a lot of really good teams last year that would have handled us easily.
USC - Did you see their bowl game? They would have killed us last year and will probably be better next year.

Don't know why, but those Pac teams seem to be getting overlooked. The Pac was really good this year. Hope I'm wrong, but I see our path to 6-8 wins going through existing B1G teams (minus Ohio St) and Utep + Northern Iowa, not former Pac teams.

The CU game we gifted. Halfway competent QB play is the key. The D played well but can only stand so many turnovers before they crack.

CU will again have a whole slew of new players to try to get in harmony with basically a whole new Staff again. The use of “studs” is questionable as they won 4 games.

UCLA really didn’t do anything outstanding at all that would cause a major concern.

USC has had 8 or so 4/5* guys transfer out so something is off there and they don’t play defense as is. Certainly not the Titan of years past.

Limit turnovers to -1 and we will be a tough out. I just didn’t see anything from those 3 that gives a sense of impending doom.

Heck….OSU in the Bowl Game gives me hope.

 

[AVeritas]

a third b10, half sec ...