Two years ago, it was pretty easy to see what was in store for the Big 12 in football.  Colt McCoy was having a monster RSFr season.  Chase Daniel and Graham Harrell were having monster sophomore seasons.  Stephen McGee and Bobby Reid were young and looked like gamers.  Josh Freeman was a true freshman starter, and while he looked it from time to time, his upside was huge.  Even Bret Meyer and Blake "Blizzle Szyzzle" Szymanski had their moments.

Beyond that, the offensive lines (especially Oklahoma's) were young, as were the RBs and WRs.  Oh yeah, and just about every proven defensive end had run out of eligibility.  While there was still defensive talent throughout the conference, it was clear that the next couple of years were going to see some unprecedented offensive continuity and success in the Big 12.

Sure enough, that's what happened.  And it was an even bigger surge than anybody expected.  Todd Reesing and Zac Robinson outshone their promising counterparts (Dylan Meier and Reid) and thrived.  Jeremy Maclin and Michael Crabtree were All-Americans as redshirt freshmen.  Add to that the fact that half the league's starters are of the "3-year" variety, and this run of offense has just been ridiculous.  Josh Freeman is still talked about as a potential first rounder in the 2009 (or 2010) draft, and he's at best the #8 QB in the conference.

But it all changes in 2009.  Daniel and Harrell?  Gone.  Crabtree and Maclin?  Almost certainly gone.  McCoy, Bradford, Freeman?  Possibly gone.  Chase Coffman, Joe Ganz, Marlon Lucky, Nate Swift, Chris Ogbonnaya, Quan Cosby, Jordan Shipley, Shannon Woods and Eric Morris?  Gone.  Even the J-Train, Jorvorskie Lane, has finally exhausted his eligibility.  So many guys who have become household names in the midwest are leaving.

And that says nothing about William Moore, Brian Orakpo, all of KU's linebackers, Nic Harris, and the potential defensive exodus.  Or even Dave Christensen, Matt Eberflus, Brent Venables, Kevin Wilson, and the potential assistant coaching exodus.

The watchword for '08 was "offensive explosion."  For '09?  "New"  Through the clarity of 2007 and 2008 lies the fog of 2009.  We don't yet know all who will return and who will not, but one thing's for certain: everything changes in 2009.

It's still pretty hard to grasp this yet, as we don't know who will be leaving for the draft, but let's take a super-duper early look at who might be good (or not so good) in 2009.  We'll start with the North Division.  To do this, I'm not going to jump into BTBS numbers.  There will certainly be a time and place for that.  Today, we'll simply go unit-by-unit and make some early rankings.  And I'm not even going to think about redshirts or incoming recruits.  Making predictions about how newcomers are going to fit in and/or thrive can drive you crazy.  Plus, you'll probably be wrong.  Remember how Darrell Scott and Jocques Crawford were supposed to be total studs the moment they walked in the door at CU and KU?

In other words, the projections after the jump are strictly from this year's depth chart.

Continue reading this post »

I was looking back at the first posts made on RMN recently...and it reminded me that last year, along with the BTBS piece, I threw together a unit-by-unit preview of the upcoming game as well.  How's about we try that again?

Oh yeah, and leave your own predictions and/or random comments in the comments below.

QB vs QB

I can honestly say without hesitation that Mizzou would win this category against any team in the country.  This one needs no explanation.  Advantage: Mizzou.

MU RBs vs NU LBs

I'll say this: Cody Glenn has worked out better at LB than I thought he would--you'd figure there would be a one-year transition period, but he's stepped up well and is leading the Huskers in tackles from his weakside LB position.  He's even 3rd on the team in tackles for loss, plus he's broken up three passes and forced a fumble.  Problem is, his counterparts have been underwhelming.  Phillip Dillard is okay, but the strongside LB position has produced next to nothing.  Granted, they'll likely be in a nickel most of Saturday, but regardless, this LB unit is still limited.

Oh yeah, and Derrick Washington is really, really good.  Advantage: Mizzou.

MU WRs/TEs vs NU DBs

NU Secondary = work in progress.  MU receiving corps = best in America.  Advantage: Mizzou.

MU O-line vs NU D-line

This is an interesting matchup; it will probably be where the game is decided.  The starting front four for Nebraska--Zach Potter, Ndamukong Suh, Ty Steinkuhler, and Pierre Allen--has been downright solid for the Huskers.  There are two problems, however.

1) Though we've heard pretty good things about freshman DE Cameron Meredith, there is almost no depth whatsoever with this unit.  Their rotation is small, which means either a) they continue with their small rotation against Missouri and wear down by the third quarter, or b) they open up a big rotation to keep guys fresh, and a lot of guys who are either too inexperienced or not good enough to have earned playing time get a lot of snaps.  Either way, that's a bad thing for Nebraska.

2) Illinois' D-line is likely better than the Husker unit, and Illinois got little to no pressure on Chase Daniel.  Maybe you've heard this once or twice on RMN, ahem, but getting pressure on Chase Daniel with your front four is your only means of survival against the Mizzou offense.  Elvis Fisher and Colin Brown are proving to be a ridiculously good set of bookend tackles.

In other words, Advantage: Mizzou.

NU RBs vs MU LBs

Even though I've never been as high on Marlon Lucky as some, I still always saw him as a solid back, particularly on 3rd down.  He's picking a bad time to not live up to even my expectations.  Granted, there's still a lot of time left in his senior season, but he just hasn't been very dynamic at all.  Sophomore Roy Helu Jr. seems to have passed him in terms of potential and upside, and fellow sophomore Quentin Castille is getting the short-yardage carries.  It's now a three-headed RB attack for Nebraska, and last week's 15-carry, 46-yard performance from the RBs against Virginia Tech didn't exactly fill me with the fear that Nebraska will be able to control the pace and grind out the clock with the running game.  They'll have to rely on the short passing game for that.

Oh yeah, and Brock Christopher and Sean Weatherspoon are freaking fantastic.  Advantage: Mizzou.

Continue reading this post »

We had a bye week, and there's no game for me to review...so let's go ahead and talk about Nebraska, shall we?

So the NCAA.org site from which I get my play-by-plays is screwing me this week, as half their games from last week aren't in the database correctly yet.  That's preventing me from having the up-to-date '+' numbers I was hoping to have for conference play.  Oh well, I guess.  Instead, what you get is one monster BTBS season box score for both Mizzou and Nebraska.  And after the jump, I'll play with projections the way I have been for the other '08 games so far.

If you have any questions about these numbers, please ask them.  At some point I'll get to the new BTBS Glossary I've promised...but it hasn't happened yet.  And if your eyes glaze over looking at numbers, check out the bullets after the box.

Thoughts...

• Nebraska has actually lost the field position battle (Field Position % = plays you've run in your opponent's territory vs plays they've run in your territory) so far this year.  They've come up with some big plays so far, but that's a little bit alarming.  Some teams are really good at the bend-don't-break thing, but it's a dangerous game.
• Less than 1/4 of Missouri's plays are Passing Downs.  Oh yeah, and they're just about the best in the country at converting Passing Downs.
• Nebraska's 46% success rate is pretty solid; Mizzou's 58% success rate (60% in close games) is ridiculous.
• Mizzou's only giving up 2.23 Line Yards per carry.  I thought it would be higher than that, even against relatively weak competition.  That's a stout run defense right there.
• Nebraska's passing game is downright solid, especially considering Joe Ganz only has one 'shows up every game' weapon at his disposal, Nate "Remember Me?" Swift.
• Oh yeah, and Mizzou's 1.275 Passing S&P is unbelievable.
• If you can force Nebraska into passing downs, they're not able to complete them as well as they did last year, back when Marlon Lucky was alive.
• Mizzou is the poster child for why Turnover Points Margin is so much more telling than Turnover Margin.  What happens when you put up 3 INT's for TD in 4 games?  You average a more than 6-point turnover advantage per game.
  
• Nebraska is a Q1/Q3 team.  They gameplan well offensively, and they backslide a smidge once the gameplan runs out and they actually have to adjust.
• Meanwhile, their defense is pretty stout in Q4.  Don't know if that's because of the competition or not, but let's just go ahead and make sure this game is out of reach in Q3, shall we?
  
• Mizzou's offense is disgustingly consistent from Q1 to Q3.  We hear a lot about Mizzou's "fast starts", but a fast start suggests a fall-off.  They start fast and stay fast.  Their Q4 numbers are down, but put little stock in that--they've only played their starters in Q4 in 2 of 4 games.  They weren't wonderful offensively against Illinois in Q4, but that's a quite small sample size, no?
• Mizzou's offense is RIDICULOUS on first downs.  A 1.623 S&P?  Seriously?
• The game could be made or broken on third downs.  Nebraska is -0.062 S&P on third downs (0.642 on offense, 0.708 on defense), while Mizzou is +0.383.  You have to figure that home field advantage is most apparent on third downs, so Mizzou's advantage will shrink because of that...but that's still pretty significant right there.

Alright, projections after the jump...

Continue reading this post »