[Husker] Where are you riding on the bandwagon?

[Pat Gaule]

Bob Beach wrote:

> Pat Gaule wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>     I explained why I feel the way I feel in another post so I am 
>>> not going to repeat myself totally.  I just can't get it through my 
>>> noodle that other teams beside NU, OU, Texas, and USC are not 
>>> playing Division I-A football as well.  As I said, there could be 
>>> 4-6 teams undefeated at the end of the season.  Should that happen 
>>> and NU is one of them is NU automatically in?  As I also have said 
>>> before it could mean that but I don't see it as an absolute lock.  I 
>>> doubt I am going to post to this again for two reasons.  One is I 
>>> have posted a lot already.  The other reason is they aren't going 
>>> undefeated anyway so it more than likely isn't reality.  Some 
>>> prognosticators don't pick them to win the North much less the NC.
>>
>>
>>
>> I normally agree with the stuff you write Bob, but the only thing I 
>> can agree with in the above post is that NU is not going undefeated.  
>> The fact that you think 4-6 Division 1-A teams could go undefeated 
>> this year boggles my mind.  When was the last time that happened?  I 
>> don't know if 6 1-A teams have ever gone undefeated, and I can't even 
>> recall the last time that 4 1-A teams went undefeated.
>
>
>
>     There is a difference between saying there "will be" 4-6 
> undefeated teams and "could be" 4-6 undefeated teams.  If you check 
> above where you quoted me I believe I said the latter.   Six probably 
> is a bit of a stretch but I don't think 4 undefeated teams would be 
> way out of the realm of reasonableness.  It probably won't happen but 
> it could.



Well, that is what I said.  My exact quote was: "The fact that you think 
4-6 Division 1-A teams *could* go undefeated this year boggles my 
mind."  I never claimed you said that 4-6 teams *would* go undefeated.  
There are a lot of things that are statistically possible, but that 
doesn't mean the chances of them happening are very high.  Four 1-A 
teams going undefeated would pretty much be unprescedented, and I would 
bet the farm on it not happening.

>
>     This whole thing got out of hand.  The one and only thing I was 
> trying to say is NU is going to need more than to be undefeated to 
> automatically play for the NC.  I said there are a few other things 
> that need to fall into place.  I still believe that.  I also believe 
> any real discussion on this is moot because the Huskers have as much 
> chance of going undefeated in 2007 as I do of becoming President of 
> the United States in the next election.


Well, it pretty much goes without saying that Nebraska would "need help" 
along the way, but it's also pretty much assumed that these things will 
happen over the course of a long season.  When analysts speak of teams 
needing "help" to move up in the polls, they generally don't talk about 
it before the season even starts.  It can almost be guaranteed that the 
polls will look vastly different by the end of the season than they do 
right now.  Over the long haul, the polls are always going to normalize 
and teams are going to fall into place.  Historically, that's just what 
happens.

>
>>
>> If NU beats USC in week 2, they will most certainly move in to the 
>> top 10.
>
>
>     To my knowledge there are other teams in the polls other than USC 
> and NU.  Again I am not saying it is not possible that NU could jump 
> into the top ten if beating USC.  I am saying it would be one of the 
> largest jumps I have seen in a long time if ever.  It would require 
> the Huskers jump 10 or more spots or there abouts depending on what 
> poll you are using.  To me whether the Huskers get into the top 10 IF 
> (and that is a monumental "IF") they beat USC would also be dependent 
> on what other teams do.
>
>
I don't have time to look it up, but I don't believe jumping 10 or more 
spots in the first couple weeks of the season is all that unheard of.    
It would be extremely uncommon for it to happen later in the season, but 
within the first 3 games it is common to see some pretty big shifts.

>>   The pollsters do shuffle teams around a lot in the early weeks 
>> because quite frankly, the preseason polls do not carry much weight.  
>> Oklahoma began the 2000 season ranked around 20th and they were able 
>> to finish #1, so it can happen (I'm not saying it will happen for 
>> Nebraska this season...I'm speaking purely about moving up in the 
>> polls).
>
>
>
>     Remember I didn't say NU couldn't finish number 1 if going 
> undefeated.  I just said they would need help.  I haven't done 
> research on it but I'll bet Oklahoma had help to accomplish what they 
> did as well.  Now if NU started the season in the top ten I would 
> undoubtedly feel differently.  As far as pollsters shuffling things 
> around it is my opinion there shouldn't be any polls until the third 
> or fourth week of the season anyway.  If that were the case I believe 
> NU could go undefeated and play for the NC without help.


I agree with you completely that the preseason polls should be abolished 
and judgement should be reserved until 3 or 4 games have been played.  
However, I think it goes without saying that teams are going to "get 
help along the way" as the season progresses.  Preseason polls will 
almost always diverge wildly from the final poll.  Over the course of 
the season, it is simply inevitable that if a team keeps winning, the 
number of teams staying in front of them in the polls will diminish.  
With with history suggesting that 4-6 undefeated teams is an extremely 
unlikely scenario, I think an undefetaed Nebraska team has a very good 
shot of getting into the national championship game. 

With all that said, it ain't gonna happen. :)