ESPN Power Index says Nebraska is favorite to win the West.

Blackshirts BLVD said:
like an egregiously blatant pass interference call that was "missed" at the end of the Neb/Wisc game. TBF, Wisc probably would have one, but it would have given Neb one more play to tie the game and take it to OT.
Click to expand...
The difference between a bad team and a mediocre team is a bad team blames themselves, not the refs.
 
Blackshirts BLVD said:
like an egregiously blatant pass interference call that was "missed" at the end of the Neb/Wisc game. TBF, Wisc probably would have one, but it would have given Neb one more play to tie the game and take it to OT.
Click to expand...

We had a lot of those games, especially during the Derek Dooley and Butch Jones era. (Pruitt era was pretty bad, we were just getting blown out most games. This is why I think he was the worse of the three despite having a better overall record than Derek Dooley).

It takes a lot of bad luck to struggle as well.

A classic example that makes me think people were too hard on Dooley was the fact that most of our SEC West draws were rough. During the Derek Dooley era where we went 5-7, most of our opponents were in the top 10-25 rankings. We had the bad luck of catching Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Miss State during times when they were at their height. For example, we played Miss State when they had Dak Prescott and went 11-2 and with the exception of Dooley's first year, we captured Ole Miss when they were in the top 10. South Carolina during that era had Steve Spurrier and was having their best run while Missouri had Gary Pinkel and Vanderbilt had James Franklin.

There were a lot of games that came down to turnovers, missed FGs, bad calls etc.

Even this past season, the Pittsburgh and Purdue game had several bad calls or no calls at the end that impacting the game while a TD in the Ole Miss game was called back incorrectly.

2015 was a classic season for Tennessee that could have gone very differently. A couple of bad calls and some bad luck plus grit by Oklahoma allowed them to comeback and win in OT in Knoxville despite being down 2 TDs late in 4th quarter. We had a hail mary play against Florida that depended a lot on luck (and blown coverage), the Alabama game was also very close that year. Change 3 plays and Tennessee is likely 11-1 and a playoff contender in 2015.

I see the same situation with Nebraska last year where a lot of games could have gone the other way so perhaps Nebraska isn't as far off as people think.
 
Kburjr said:
The difference between a bad team and a mediocre team is a bad team blames themselves, not the refs.
Click to expand...
don't gimme that bullshit. Go watch the last play and say that isn't a blatant call that should have been the easiest call ever. The fucking announcers said the same thing. The refs have one job, to call the game accurately. Not to get it over with so they can get out of there. Miss me with this bullshit.
 
Volbound1700 said:
We had a lot of those games, especially during the Derek Dooley and Butch Jones era. (Pruitt era was pretty bad, we were just getting blown out most games. This is why I think he was the worse of the three despite having a better overall record than Derek Dooley).

It takes a lot of bad luck to struggle as well.

A classic example that makes me think people were too hard on Dooley was the fact that most of our SEC West draws were rough. During the Derek Dooley era where we went 5-7, most of our opponents were in the top 10-25 rankings. We had the bad luck of catching Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Miss State during times when they were at their height. For example, we played Miss State when they had Dak Prescott and went 11-2 and with the exception of Dooley's first year, we captured Ole Miss when they were in the top 10. South Carolina during that era had Steve Spurrier and was having their best run while Missouri had Gary Pinkel and Vanderbilt had James Franklin.

There were a lot of games that came down to turnovers, missed FGs, bad calls etc.

Even this past season, the Pittsburgh and Purdue game had several bad calls or no calls at the end that impacting the game while a TD in the Ole Miss game was called back incorrectly.

2015 was a classic season for Tennessee that could have gone very differently. A couple of bad calls and some bad luck plus grit by Oklahoma allowed them to comeback and win in OT in Knoxville despite being down 2 TDs late in 4th quarter. We had a hail mary play against Florida that depended a lot on luck (and blown coverage), the Alabama game was also very close that year. Change 3 plays and Tennessee is likely 11-1 and a playoff contender in 2015.

I see the same situation with Nebraska last year where a lot of games could have gone the other way so perhaps Nebraska isn't as far off as people think.
Click to expand...
Sure, but again, lets not act like the refs don't have a purpose. I already admitted that that call in no way would have won the game, but it absolutely wouldnt have ended it.

They have a job and it isn't ridiculous to call them out when they do a bad job.
 
williewilliejuan said:
That reads like it’s better to blame the refs than take accountability for your own play.
Click to expand...
It's suppose to to. A bad team loses no matter what the refs do. A good team wins despite the refs. A mediocre team is at the mercy of the refs.
 
Blackshirts BLVD said:
don't gimme that bullshit. Go watch the last play and say that isn't a blatant call that should have been the easiest call ever. The fucking announcers said the same thing. The refs have one job, to call the game accurately. Not to get it over with so they can get out of there. Miss me with this bullshit.
Click to expand...
Sad Season 2 GIF by This Is Us
 
I will add that ESPN has Auburn, Pittsburgh, and Texas in their top 10 as well. Perhaps they are seeing something that we do not or...

they are just flat batshit crazy in their predictions.
 
Volbound1700 said:
It is probably based on the fact that Nebraska was in every game last year and barely lost at the end. Sometimes that is bad luck and if the ball bounces the other way, it could be the difference between a 4-8 and 9-3 season.

Interestingly, Football games can sometimes come down to 1-2 plays that totally impact a game and even an entire season.
Click to expand...

Blackshirts BLVD said:
like an egregiously blatant pass interference call that was "missed" at the end of the Neb/Wisc game. TBF, Wisc probably would have one, but it would have given Neb one more play to tie the game and take it to OT.
Click to expand...
Maybe not in Nebraska's case, but sometimes those things turn out to be "best", even when it isn't seen at the time.

I heard Abe Lemons speak one year at coaching school while he was the basketball coach at UT. He said he was voted as Coach of the Year and Texas was balleyhooed for winning the NIT all because of a bad call. In the conference tournament a game was decided on a block/charge call. It went against Texas and film showed it was a bad call. But the call kept them out of the NCAA tourney where he said they wouldn't have won more than a game. They went on to win the NIT and everyone sang their praises.
 
Volbound1700 said:
I will add that ESPN has Auburn, Pittsburgh, and Texas in their top 10 as well. Perhaps they are seeing something that we do not or...

they are just flat batshit crazy in their predictions.
Click to expand...
All of those are mentioned multiple times in this article.

Overrated/underrated, etc
 
Kburjr said:
The difference between a bad team and a mediocre team is a bad team blames themselves, not the refs.
Click to expand...
So if you blame the refs then you are elevated to from bad to mediocre.
 
Is this a way to keep the fan base engaged with the ESPN platform? Considering once games start they won't be in the conversation, so throw em a bone in the pre-season?
 
fordman84 said:
Is this a way to keep the fan base engaged with the ESPN platform? Considering once games start they won't be in the conversation, so throw em a bone in the pre-season?
Click to expand...
it's the same as labeling yourself the "villain"
 
Thiefery said:
it's the same as labeling yourself the "villain"
Click to expand...
I could see that. I was thinking it was like calling yourself the Cinderella in that if you make it then you are the little engine that could, but if you fail who cares? No one expected anything anyways.
 
fordman84 said:
I could see that. I was thinking it was like calling yourself the Cinderella in that if you make it then you are the little engine that could, but if you fail who cares? No one expected anything anyways.
Click to expand...
just to be clear.. we are the fairy god mother.. #HookEm
 
Deep Creek said:
All of those are mentioned multiple times in this article.

Overrated/underrated, etc
Click to expand...

The Pittsburgh situation is very interesting because if you read a lot of the justification, it was the "they will win a lot of games based on their schedule argument" which always creates a conundrum in ranking preseason teams (or teams in general).

Do you rank them based on how they will perform based on their schedule or do you rank them based on how good they are versus the rest of the nation? This is why I am usually hard on some of the mid-majors in my polls on here. I really don't think some of those 10-1 teams would be better than 7-5 in the SEC.

Take Pitt, they won the ACC last year but were a bad call away from losing to Tennessee. They are clearly not a top 10 team (top 20 yes) but I can definitely see the argument that they could win 10 games and compete for ACC this year so agree with ESPN on that one.

Auburn and Texas just didn't make any sense to me though. Oklahoma State and Baylor are my favorites to win Big12. Heck, I also have Kansas State and Oklahoma (despite its offseason issues) ahead of Texas.

Auburn in same boat, I would put Alabama, Texas A&M, Ole Miss, and Arkansas all ahead of them in the SEC West. LSU and Miss State about even with Auburn. Auburn could be the last place team in the SEC West but ESPN has them in top 10...
 
Volbound1700 said:
The Pittsburgh situation is very interesting because if you read a lot of the justification, it was the "they will win a lot of games based on their schedule argument" which always creates a conundrum in ranking preseason teams (or teams in general).

Do you rank them based on how they will perform based on their schedule or do you rank them based on how good they are versus the rest of the nation? This is why I am usually hard on some of the mid-majors in my polls on here. I really don't think some of those 10-1 teams would be better than 7-5 in the SEC.

Take Pitt, they won the ACC last year but were a bad call away from losing to Tennessee. They are clearly not a top 10 team (top 20 yes) but I can definitely see the argument that they could win 10 games and compete for ACC this year so agree with ESPN on that one.

Auburn and Texas just didn't make any sense to me though. Oklahoma State and Baylor are my favorites to win Big12. Heck, I also have Kansas State and Oklahoma (despite its offseason issues) ahead of Texas.

Auburn in same boat, I would put Alabama, Texas A&M, Ole Miss, and Arkansas all ahead of them in the SEC West. LSU and Miss State about even with Auburn. Auburn could be the last place team in the SEC West but ESPN has them in top 10...
Click to expand...
Pitt is getting a lot of love because of the return of Addison and the addition of Slovis through the portal. Then you add the BC OC that turned around BC a season ago.

Only reason I can think UT is ranked high is because the skill positions have been elevated so far this off season. They grabbed Neyor from Wyoming, Billingsley from Bama and Ewers returned to Texas. There's smoke that Agiye Hall is in after his visit this past weekend. Add those with Bijan and Xavier Worthy.. I can see why the numbers like the offense.

Have no idea what they see in the defense because it, on paper, looks to be weak at LB/DE and at Safety
 
Volbound1700 said:
The Pittsburgh situation is very interesting because if you read a lot of the justification, it was the "they will win a lot of games based on their schedule argument" which always creates a conundrum in ranking preseason teams (or teams in general).

Do you rank them based on how they will perform based on their schedule or do you rank them based on how good they are versus the rest of the nation? This is why I am usually hard on some of the mid-majors in my polls on here. I really don't think some of those 10-1 teams would be better than 7-5 in the SEC.

Take Pitt, they won the ACC last year but were a bad call away from losing to Tennessee. They are clearly not a top 10 team (top 20 yes) but I can definitely see the argument that they could win 10 games and compete for ACC this year so agree with ESPN on that one.

Auburn and Texas just didn't make any sense to me though. Oklahoma State and Baylor are my favorites to win Big12. Heck, I also have Kansas State and Oklahoma (despite its offseason issues) ahead of Texas.

Auburn in same boat, I would put Alabama, Texas A&M, Ole Miss, and Arkansas all ahead of them in the SEC West. LSU and Miss State about even with Auburn. Auburn could be the last place team in the SEC West but ESPN has them in top 10...
Click to expand...
Several of the 12-0, 11-1 and 10-2 G5 teams could very well finish 7-5 if they were in a P5 league...which means they beat the bottom half of such leagues.

But so could a couple of the P5s if they played an SEC schedule...if that schedule wasn't full of the lower level SEC schools. What would Michigan's record have been playing such an SEC schedule last year? What would Baylor's record have been? How about Utah's record?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top