Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

2018 will be special

Future Power Rankings: Outside looking in
Travis Haney, ESPN Staff Writer

There were four newcomers to the 2015 Future Power Rankings, our Insiders’ three-year projection for the best teams in college football. TCU (12), Tennessee (16), Ole Miss (22) and Arizona State (25) all joined the top 25. So there’s room for change from year to year.

Which programs have the best chance to climb into the 2016 edition of the Future Power Rankings? Here are the top contenders to trend upward, beginning with the most likely:


1. Washington Huskies (FPR: 33)

This three-year projection is squarely centered on the track record of Huskies head coach Chris Petersen. Petersen, entering his second season at U-Dub, went a ridiculous 92-12 at Boise State. The competition level is ramped up in the Pac-12, granted, but so is the level of talent Petersen has at hand.

In addition to 92 wins at his previous stop, Petersen won eight games in his first season in Seattle; his predecessor, Steve Sarkisian, won eight games once in his five years (his final season). So, it’s a better start for Petersen than perhaps perceived.

The university resources and the recruiting turf are well above average -- certainly better than the landscape Petersen experienced, and thrived, in at Boise. There are compelling reasons to believe the Huskies will climb by 2017, even in a division that includes Oregon and Stanford. Petersen is No. 1.

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-haney/insider/post?id=4349
«13

Comments

  • MisterEm
    MisterEm Member Posts: 6,685

    Future Power Rankings: Outside looking in
    Travis Haney, ESPN Staff Writer

    There were four newcomers to the 2015 Future Power Rankings, our Insiders’ three-year projection for the best teams in college football. TCU (12), Tennessee (16), Ole Miss (22) and Arizona State (25) all joined the top 25. So there’s room for change from year to year.

    Which programs have the best chance to climb into the 2016 edition of the Future Power Rankings? Here are the top contenders to trend upward, beginning with the most likely:


    1. Washington Huskies (FPR: 33)

    This three-year projection is squarely centered on the track record of Huskies head coach Chris Petersen. Petersen, entering his second season at U-Dub, went a ridiculous 92-12 at Boise State. The competition level is ramped up in the Pac-12, granted, but so is the level of talent Petersen has at hand.

    In addition to 92 wins at his previous stop, Petersen won eight games in his first season in Seattle; his predecessor, Steve Sarkisian, won eight games once in his five years (his final season). So, it’s a better start for Petersen than perhaps perceived.

    The university resources and the recruiting turf are well above average -- certainly better than the landscape Petersen experienced, and thrived, in at Boise. There are compelling reasons to believe the Huskies will climb by 2017, even in a division that includes Oregon and Stanford. Petersen is No. 1.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-haney/insider/post?id=4349

    Disagree. 2021 will be special.

    See thescript.gif
  • whatshouldicareabout
    whatshouldicareabout Member Posts: 13,018

    Future Power Rankings: Outside looking in
    Travis Haney, ESPN Staff Writer

    There were four newcomers to the 2015 Future Power Rankings, our Insiders’ three-year projection for the best teams in college football. TCU (12), Tennessee (16), Ole Miss (22) and Arizona State (25) all joined the top 25. So there’s room for change from year to year.

    Which programs have the best chance to climb into the 2016 edition of the Future Power Rankings? Here are the top contenders to trend upward, beginning with the most likely:


    1. Washington Huskies (FPR: 33)

    This three-year projection is squarely centered on the track record of Huskies head coach Chris Petersen. Petersen, entering his second season at U-Dub, went a ridiculous 92-12 at Boise State. The competition level is ramped up in the Pac-12, granted, but so is the level of talent Petersen has at hand.

    In addition to 92 wins at his previous stop, Petersen won eight games in his first season in Seattle; his predecessor, Steve Sarkisian, won eight games once in his five years (his final season). So, it’s a better start for Petersen than perhaps perceived.

    The university resources and the recruiting turf are well above average -- certainly better than the landscape Petersen experienced, and thrived, in at Boise. There are compelling reasons to believe the Huskies will climb by 2017, even in a division that includes Oregon and Stanford. Petersen is No. 1.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-haney/insider/post?id=4349

    No it isn't.
  • RaccoonHarry
    RaccoonHarry Member Posts: 2,161
    Travis Haney is your source?





    obligatory...
  • ApostleofGrief
    ApostleofGrief Member Posts: 3,904
    But in 2018 the team will be young
  • PurpleJ
    PurpleJ Member Posts: 37,778

    That article illustrates why so many schools have shit schedules. 8 wins!!!1111!!!

    Nobody even looks at how bad the wins were and how many games the team playes

    Everybody does it.
  • HeretoBeatmyChest
    HeretoBeatmyChest Member Posts: 4,295

    That article illustrates why so many schools have shit schedules. 8 wins!!!1111!!!

    Nobody even looks at how bad the wins were and how many games the team playes

    8 wins and #41 in SRS.

    Arkansas was 7-6 but was #12 in SRS...better than every pac-12 school but Oregon.
  • RoadDawg55
    RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,570 Swaye's Wigwam
    edited June 2015

    That article illustrates why so many schools have shit schedules. 8 wins!!!1111!!!

    Nobody even looks at how bad the wins were and how many games the team playes

    8 wins and #41 in SRS.

    Arkansas was 7-6 but was #12 in SRS...better than every pac-12 school but Oregon.
    They were better than UW, but that's ridiculous. They beat one team that finished in the top 25, and that was a free falling Ole Miss that was plungered in their bowl game.

    UCLA beat four teams that finished in the top 25 (#12 ASU, #18 Kansas State, #19 Arizona, #20 USC).
  • SonnyShackelford
    SonnyShackelford Member Posts: 1,020

    That article illustrates why so many schools have shit schedules. 8 wins!!!1111!!!

    Nobody even looks at how bad the wins were and how many games the team playes

    8 wins and #41 in SRS.

    Arkansas was 7-6 but was #12 in SRS...better than every pac-12 school but Oregon.
    They were better than UW, but that's ridiculous. They beat one team that finished in the top 25, and that was a free falling Ole Miss that was plungered in their bowl game.

    UCLA beat four teams that finished in the top 25 (#12 ASU, #18 Kansas State, #19 Arizona, #20 USC).

    Arkansas would have plungered UCLA last year