[personal] RE: [Husker] Huh? Bad Decision?

[Steve Schmadeke]

One thing a resurgent Nebraska would have going for them is that they  
are scheduled to play four of the current top eight teams next year  
(though I would expect the loser of the Orange Bowl to drop down in  
the final poll), so they will get a chance to prove themselves against  
some well-respected opponents.

While I expect that Nebraska will not have any votes in the preseason  
polls, they do still have a lot of cachet with the media.  The  
coverage of the coaching search at Nebraska was easily the most  
significant non-BCS story of the past month.  None of the other  
coaching vacancies, including Michigan's, has generated near as much  
national coverage.  If Nebraska turns it around, I believe they will  
get the benefit of the doubt that Hawaii didn't.  Given an excuse, the  
voters will blame this past year's failures on the old coaches and not  
hold them too strongly against next year's team.  (In such a scenario,  
it is probably to Nebraska's benefit that Virginia Tech beat Kansas in  
the Orange Bowl because we play them earlier next year and Nebraska  
needs Missouri, another early opponent, to not stub its toe against  
Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl after losing out in the BCS numbers game.)

Even without those benefits, the winner of Kansas-Missouri did get  
moved to #1 this year, so I think that an undefeated Nebraska would  
have a pretty strong shot at the BCS title game.  It would take two  
undefeated teams out of a fairly short list (USC, Ohio State, etc.) to  
shut them out.  I don't know if an undefeated Rutgers or Clemson, for  
example, would shut them out even if they start ranked where Nebraska  
does not.

But, alas, this is only a theoretical discussion.  While I think there  
is a lot of upside potential for the team next year, I don't see them  
completely closing the gap with the top four teams on the schedule  
along with trips to Texas Tech, Kansas State and even Iowa State.   
Getting to the Alamo/Holiday Bowl level will represent significant  
progress next year.  Personally, I think that when the Sooners come to  
Lincoln in 2009 is the first chance for Nebraska to be involved in a  
matchup between two Top Ten teams since the 2001 season.

--Steve Schmadeke

On Dec 4, 2007, at 1:35 PM, Kaufsss at aol.com wrote:

> You forget the main reason why Hawaii is not higher - they started the
> season lower ranked than any of these teams.  Let's say a team like  
> Georgia  played
> the same schedule Hawaii did and went undefeated.  Because Georgia   
> was a
> tradional powerhouse - started the season with some expectations and  
> a  high
> ranking - they would be number 1.  Look at Boise State - after last   
> year - they
> gained a little respect in the polls at the start of this  year.  If  
> they would
> have gone undefeated - this year - with their 'easy'  schedule, they  
> would
> have been #1.  I think Hawaii has the same opportunity  next year.   
> Take the
> reverse - I think NE has a hard time rising to the top  next year.   
> One loss will
> blow much of their chances - depending of course  on where they  
> start, and if
> the upsets continue like they did this year.<snip>