Too soon to talk football? [predict the season(s)]
- Thread starter alaskanseminole
- Start date
I don't see Nebraska and Penn State doing much of anything. Maybe I'm in the minority but I'm not sold on James Franklin.
The rest of the Big 10 is a joke.
Did you go to the MJ school for replying on message boards?? Why do you continue to put words in my mouth?? I never said the last two years were "poor". I said the SEC dominance is pretty much over and it is. The SEC will never come close to winning 7 in a row again with the playoff system. That's what I'm saying. That level of dominance is over. Too many good teams out there that can flat out whip those SEC teams. Those are facts.
Michi didn't say today. He said in the future. After the SEC IMO the Big 10 does have the best college football tradition football programs. Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Nebraska is a pretty good top 4. The problem with the Big 10 is the rest of the conference is just awful (Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland). Some pretty bad football programs.
You're right. He did say in the future but....today is an indicator of future success. Cliche? Yes. True? Yes.
-Nebraska just fired a coach that won 9+ games a season and replaced him with a guy that I highly doubt could replicate even that.
-As I mentioned before, I'm not sold on Franklin. Yeah, he's picking up 4 stars from Jersey and PA but, as someone else mentioned, Michigan and Ohio State will cut into that. They'll cannibalize each other since their talent pools up north aren't as strong as they are in the South and West.
-Wisconsin lost a great coach and replaced him with one that fits the dinosaur thinking of the Big 10.
-Dantonio just lost Narduzzi whom I think was a big part of their success.
Basically, you're left with Michigan and Ohio State. Ohio State has what is probably the best talent pool of the northern states to draw from and they can compete nationally for elite recruits. Michigan has the name and the coach to compete nationally for elite talent.
What it comes down to is that for now the Big 10 is a one trick pony but, if/when Harbaugh gets Michigan rolling, the conference will be a 2 trick pony. They're not going to be a conference that has depth like the SEC does. They just don't have the talent pool to draw from up north and those schools not named Michigan or Ohio State are going to have a hell of a time competing for recruits in the South and West.
No conference has depth like the SEC does. It is becoming a battle for who can compete with the SEC between the Big 10, Pac 12 and Big 12. Nebraska has the tradition. I think they should have never gotten away from Triple option football. If I was at Nebraska that is the type of offense I would go back too, especially with how good of athletes these QBs are nowadays.
Paco, I agree. Illinois fired Zook, who had them at their peak in the last 20 years. I also agree the Big 10 will never be nearly as deep as the SEC. But I do think Michigan St will be good for a while. This is going to be there beat recruiting class, ever.
Penn St sells itself and the NCAA lifted sanctions early. Franklin will do well there, IMO
Always been very pro style, BUT he would be dangerous with South Florida athletes.
That said, I am not sure he wants to leave Arizona, dude goes 9-3 and gets all kinda of love and raises. Thats a good gig
The ACC typically sucks, so teams have to go outside the conference looking for "tougher match-ups." The SEC doesn't typically go OOC looking for its tougher opponents. After last year's "constant shifting of who's the SEC power" due to beating up on each other, the SEC may have to change how it schedules and start playing more p5 teams. Right now they play the least of any conference.
FSU was not that good last year because of slow starts and a crappy defense post Pruitt. I don't know if it was players (losses) or scheme, but we were NOT good on that side of the ball, period. Without Winston we lose at least 3 games last year and don't even see Oregon.
Well, in dan's defense, the SEC would have to play more P5 schools for us to know for sure.
So saying other teams in the country can beat SEC teams is trolling?? Lmao!!
Because an SEC team didn't win a NC, which is how our conference is measured now by the other conferences. Yeah, according to the FSU posters the SEC is in deep trouble, but of course, we have to watch out for USF and Boston College,LOL
With the right coach tradition can win you ball games, because you can sell "tradition" to recruits, etc. Nebraska is much like Alabama. They care about their football program and not much else. IMO if Nebraska went back to the triple option they could be dangerous again.
Yeah, that's exactly what I said. The SEC is in "deep trouble". Smh. You and MJ have got to be the same person. Your shtick is exactly the same.
I disagree on the Nebraska and Alabama comparison. Personally, I don't think Nebraska is in Bama's league in that department but that's just me. To each their own.
You can certainly sell tradition but Nebraska tradition isn't in the same wheelhouse as Michigan, Notre Dame or Alabama. If they have a coach that can sell that as well as recruit his ass off, then they might get somewhere. Personally, I don't think Mike Reilly is the guy to do that.
I believe Nebraska has more national titles than Michigan and from 1980s up until now Nebraska has performed better on the field than Michigan. You may want to take a look at the run Nebraska had from the 80s through the 90s. I agree Mike Riley isn't the answer for Nebraska.
Nah it's trolling to to say there are 'too many' teams out there who can flat out whip SEC teams, c'mon now. Like I said earlier, the top teams in each conference for the most part are all the same. But your statement implies numerous schools across conferences can whip the top SEC teams, that's just crazy. And the bowl results don't bare that out either. Even if a down year last year I believe the SEC was second in bowl wins.
And I don't think Nebraska moving to the triple option would help them. That scheme just puts you at a major disadvantage recruiting the skill guys necessary to win. My alma mater Southern ran the triple option for decades and ditched it day 1 in D-1 because of that. I do agree they have a nice tradition though. There issue is that they really dominated when Oklahoma and Texas was down because they got the best talent in the region. I don't think it's a coincidence they slipped when OU and Texas got good again. And now with other programs like TCU, Baylor, Oklahoma St., A&M, etc. taking the best leftovers from that region, their talent base is being squeezed. They should have stayed in the Big 12 too. Why would kids in Texas want to go play their games in the Big 10?
I really don't think it's much of an argument saying Auburn, Bama, UGA, Ole Miss, and LSU can be beaten by several teams from Power 5 conferences. Alabama is the best team by a mile. The rest are just teams waiting to choke.
UGA and Ole Miss yea but even then I don't know about 'several.' The top teams from other conferences could/would beat them, sure. LSU has played in 2 title games recently, Auburn has been in 2, Bama has been in 3, etc. All those teams recruit a consistent top 5-10 level too.
LSU won in a very weird season when the champ had two losses. No one should be crowned champ after losing to Kentucky! Lol. We beat Auburn for ours. I get what you're saying but other than Bama, nowadays, the SEC isn't very scary to other top teams out there. We'll see on the field. We play Ole Miss next year and I expect us to handle them.
Bingo. It does put you at a disadvantage recruiting the skill guys you need because your traditional recruiting grounds are gone. Nebraska used to recruit Texas heavily which, as you pointed out, was at a time when OU and Texas were both not doing so well. After OU and Texas started rising again, Nebraska started slipping. They should have stayed in the Big 12 because they screwed themselves with exposure to their main recruiting area.
Paco, Nebraska might have more titles than Michigan but you can't honestly tell me Nebraska is a bigger name in the eyes of a recruit versus Michigan.
That is exactly why Nebraska needs to go back to the triple option. You guys are making my point for me. They don't have the resources or the recruiting grounds/areas to recruit top athletes and passing QBs and elite WRs and TEs against the likes of all those schools you just mentioned. Running a pro style or spread offense puts them at a disadvantage right out of the gate because they can't get those top athletes. Nebraska's bread and butter and advantage they had was their ability to get offensive lineman and run the triple option. To get an advantage or level the playing field Nebraska needs to go back to the triple option. What they are doing right now is putting them at a disadvantage before they even play the game. They have tried the spread offenses with Callahan and Pellini and it didn't work and it isn't going to work because of the exact reasons you have mentioned. To run the triple option they already know they can get the corn fed offensive lineman. Then they would just need to recruit some athletic QBs (which their are more now than ever before) and some RBs and a good corn fed FB.
I agree 100% they can't recruit against Michigan, Texas, Ohio State, etc., which is my exact point why you have to do something different schematically.
If Nebraska ever wants to be good/elite again that is what they are going to have to do. They can't recruit well enough to beat everybody else at their own game.
Those are some fair points but even if they get the best athletes possible and throw it into the triple option, they won't be good. Or at least not compete for championships. That scheme is just way too outdated. Athleticism is just too good today among the top teams for that to have any success. Their ceiling will pretty much be 8-9 wins a year and every once in a while maybe 10 or so.
I updated the OP, adding the Coaches Pre-season Top 25. Looks very favorable, SOS-wise, for UF.
I wonder how many teams play 4+ preseason top 15 schools.
Alaska, you obviously have time. How about digging that up?
Alaska, you obviously have time. How about digging that up?
I don't know off the top of my head, but this source doesn't think too highly of UF's SOS. (which I honestly find odd)
LINK: http://www.fbschedules.com/2015/03/2015-college-football-strength-of-schedule-ncaa-method/
2015 SOS Rankings (early preseason)
#3. Miami, FL – 97-58, 62.58%
#40. Florida State – 85-67, 55.92%
#41. Florida – 86-68, 55.84%
Where does Florida's SOS stand in the SEC?
It’s imperfect and based on the 2014 winning percentage of this year’s opponents. But it’s a good starting point for discussion and an interesting exercise nonetheless.
Team Opp. Win-Loss Opp. Win % Bowl Opp.
Arkansas 99-57 .635 10
Alabama 96-58 .623 10
Kentucky 95-58 .621 9
Auburn 92-60 .605 8
Texas A&M 93-61 .604 9
Georgia 93-61 .604 8
South Carolina 89-64 .582 9
Tennessee 89-65 .575 8
Mississippi State 89-66 .574 8
Vanderbilt 87-65 .572 10
Ole Miss 87-67 .565 9
Florida 86-67 .562 8
LSU 87-70 .554 9
Missouri 78-73 .517 8
LINK: http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/2015-strength-of-schedule/
It’s imperfect and based on the 2014 winning percentage of this year’s opponents. But it’s a good starting point for discussion and an interesting exercise nonetheless.
Team Opp. Win-Loss Opp. Win % Bowl Opp.
Arkansas 99-57 .635 10
Alabama 96-58 .623 10
Kentucky 95-58 .621 9
Auburn 92-60 .605 8
Texas A&M 93-61 .604 9
Georgia 93-61 .604 8
South Carolina 89-64 .582 9
Tennessee 89-65 .575 8
Mississippi State 89-66 .574 8
Vanderbilt 87-65 .572 10
Ole Miss 87-67 .565 9
Florida 86-67 .562 8
LSU 87-70 .554 9
Missouri 78-73 .517 8
LINK: http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/2015-strength-of-schedule/
I'm a firm believer that tougher competition makes your team better, otherwise you're simply building a false sense of success that will simply unravel once you meet a quality team. Thoughts?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Basketball LIVE GAME THREAD: FLORIDA VS MISSISSIPPI STATE - CHAT IS OPEN- Latest: KearsedGator42
-
-