Early W-L prediction for 2015

[McPeachy]

I'm on the opposite side. I realize we aren't that good right now, but neither is, well, virtually anyone not named BSU in the MWC.

For hell's sake, there isn't a nickel's worth of difference between teams outside of the T2 or T3 of the MWC.

I get the rebuild, tempered enthusiasm thing. I get that there will be (or damn sure better be) lots of close games that can go either way. However, even VK teams could have competed in this MWC.

Last year was bad in the MWC. Next year will be worse. This is absolutely the worst the MWC has ever been, by a lot. Some of our "bad" teams in the past would be T3 next year.

Ya...just imagine if the MWC still had bWHYu, TCU, and Utah as members. Our conference isn't close to resembling a MWC line-up like that. But looking at our schedule (conference) I have a hard time seeing more than 2 wins. 3 maybe. Assuming we are basically in the same shoes as last year (considering offensively we may be better - but defensively we are going to struggle)...

New Mexico will be better this year
Air Force will be better this year
Nevada - we have a shot because it is at home
Boise State - no comment
Utah State - will be better this year
CSewe - defensively they will be better this year - if they find a QB lookout
SDSU - they will be better this year
UNLV - we have a shot because it is at home

[J-Rod]

Ya...just imagine if the MWC still had bWHYu, TCU, and Utah as members. Our conference isn't close to resembling a MWC line-up like that. But looking at our schedule (conference) I have a hard time seeing more than 2 wins. 3 maybe. Assuming we are basically in the same shoes as last year (considering offensively we may be better - but defensively we are going to struggle)...

New Mexico will be better this year
Air Force will be better this year
Nevada - we have a shot because it is at home
Boise State - no comment
Utah State - will be better this year
CSewe - defensively they will be better this year - if they find a QB lookout
SDSU - they will be better this year
UNLV - we have a shot because it is at home

Exactly. Wyo did not get the best draw of MW opponents. There is no Hawaii and SJSU this year (both horrible teams Wyo lost to anyway). Wyoming will be the favorite in four of those games at max, 1 at minimum. I get it, the MW is not strong overall. That doesn't mean Wyoming can't lose to the bottom dwellers of the conference, or is somehow above them. Last off-season we heard the same argument, "we'll go bowling because the MW is just so bad"...NOBODY entertained the idea that we'd lose to Hawaii (8 wins in the entire Chow era), and San Jose State at home (1/3 wins for SJSU in 2014, only one on the road). So yes, the MW sucks....but that doesn't = wins. Gun to my head...I think Wyo wins 2-3 conference games. UNLV and one of or both of UNR/CSU.

Wyoming could win a lot of toss ups and finish the regular season with 6-7 wins. They could also lose all those close games and finish with 2 wins. Like most of the last 4 years, it will probably be somewhere in the middle to the tune of 3-5 wins.

[ItSucksToBeACSURam]

I'm on the opposite side. I realize we aren't that good right now, but neither is, well, virtually anyone not named BSU in the MWC.

For hell's sake, there isn't a nickel's worth of difference between teams outside of the T2 or T3 of the MWC.

I get the rebuild, tempered enthusiasm thing. I get that there will be (or damn sure better be) lots of close games that can go either way. However, even VK teams could have competed in this MWC.

Last year was bad in the MWC. Next year will be worse. This is absolutely the worst the MWC has ever been, by a lot. Some of our "bad" teams in the past would be T3 next year.

Ya...just imagine if the MWC still had bWHYu, TCU, and Utah as members. Our conference isn't close to resembling a MWC line-up like that. But looking at our schedule (conference) I have a hard time seeing more than 2 wins. 3 maybe. Assuming we are basically in the same shoes as last year (considering offensively we may be better - but defensively we are going to struggle)...

New Mexico will be better this year
Air Force will be better this year
Nevada - we have a shot because it is at home
Boise State - no comment
Utah State - will be better this year
CSewe - defensively they will be better this year - if they find a QB lookout
SDSU - they will be better this year
UNLV - we have a shot because it is at home

UW is the only team in the conference that won't improve from last year? All these teams are suddenly untouchable? The only team on this list that scares me and is legitimately a for sure loss is BSU. Every year we hear UNM is going to be so much better...blah blah blah. They just changed positions of their #1 QB....Lets see how they look on the field. CSU lost everyone but the RB (spacing his name). They fell off a cliff. New coach, new regime, I am holding my judgment of them. I think we have a legit chance in most of these games, not just because were at home.

[fromolwyoming]

Actually the sheep lost their QB and RB. Otherwise, they return quite a bit on offense.

[McPeachy]

I'm on the opposite side. I realize we aren't that good right now, but neither is, well, virtually anyone not named BSU in the MWC.

For hell's sake, there isn't a nickel's worth of difference between teams outside of the T2 or T3 of the MWC.

I get the rebuild, tempered enthusiasm thing. I get that there will be (or damn sure better be) lots of close games that can go either way. However, even VK teams could have competed in this MWC.

Last year was bad in the MWC. Next year will be worse. This is absolutely the worst the MWC has ever been, by a lot. Some of our "bad" teams in the past would be T3 next year.

Ya...just imagine if the MWC still had bWHYu, TCU, and Utah as members. Our conference isn't close to resembling a MWC line-up like that. But looking at our schedule (conference) I have a hard time seeing more than 2 wins. 3 maybe. Assuming we are basically in the same shoes as last year (considering offensively we may be better - but defensively we are going to struggle)...

New Mexico will be better this year
Air Force will be better this year
Nevada - we have a shot because it is at home
Boise State - no comment
Utah State - will be better this year
CSewe - defensively they will be better this year - if they find a QB lookout
SDSU - they will be better this year
UNLV - we have a shot because it is at home

UW is the only team in the conference that won't improve from last year? All these teams are suddenly untouchable? The only team on this list that scares me and is legitimately a for sure loss is BSU. Every year we hear UNM is going to be so much better...blah blah blah. They just changed positions of their #1 QB....Lets see how they look on the field. CSU lost everyone but the RB (spacing his name). They fell off a cliff. New coach, new regime, I am holding my judgment of them. I think we have a legit chance in most of these games, not just because were at home.

Just my opinion of course, but yes, offensively we will be improved...even with the O line defections and lack of talent to begin with at that position. Defensively, we are going to suck.

And no, our conference opponents aren't untouchable (even BSU isn't untouchable), but I don't see us dominating anyone on our schedule...again, my opinion. CSU returns like 7 on offense and 9 on defense...from a team that kicked the living poop out of us. As I said, if they find a QB (they can easily replace Dee Hart I believe) - they will be in the hunt for a championship. And yes, of course it sucks to be a CSU Ram!

[ragtimejoe1]

I get it, the MW is not strong overall. That doesn't mean Wyoming can't lose to the bottom dwellers of the conference, or is somehow above them. Last off-season we heard the same argument, "we'll go bowling because the MW is just so bad

Yes, and we had a bunch of "squeaker" games. We won 3 of them and lost 2 or 3 (depending on how you define squeaker).

This year will be the same. A bunch of games that could go either way because both teams are so bad. Like I said above, anywhere from 2 to 8 wins won't surprise me.

However, we will be competitive in this MWC...just as we were last year.

[ragtimejoe1]

Just my opinion of course, but yes, offensively we will be improved...even with the O line defections and lack of talent to begin with at that position. Defensively, we are going to suck.

And no, our conference opponents aren't untouchable (even BSU isn't untouchable), but I don't see us dominating anyone on our schedule...again, my opinion. CSU returns like 7 on offense and 9 on defense...from a team that kicked the living poop out of us. As I said, if they find a QB (they can easily replace Dee Hart I believe) - they will be in the hunt for a championship. And yes, of course it sucks to be a CSU Ram!

I do think a team or two will be markedly improved. BSU will obviously be good. Outside of the T2 or T3 in the MWC, I think the conference will be even worse next year. I could be wrong, but just a guess.

[J-Rod]

Yes, and we had a bunch of "squeaker" games. We won 3 of them and lost 2 or 3 (depending on how you define squeaker).

This year will be the same. A bunch of games that could go either way because both teams are so bad. Like I said above, anywhere from 2 to 8 wins won't surprise me.

However, we will be competitive in this MWC...just as we were last year.

Then we are in agreement. I think like 2012, 2013, 2014...it will be a mix of both. There will be some good (like wins over Fresno/Air Force in 2014), mixed in with some bad (Hawaii, SJSU, almost FAU 2014). If you tell me Wyoming will beat San Diego State, but lose horribly to Appalachian State, I wouldn't write it off. The 2014 season had some bizarre results, and Wyo's youth in 2015 will probably invite more odd results. Again, anywhere between 2-7 wins wouldn't shock me.

[BeaverPoke]

Actually the sheep lost their QB and RB. Otherwise, they return quite a bit on offense.

Yeah but according to everyone on here their QB and RB weren't good, so they should be improved

[Wyo2dal]

What's realistic with no bias!?

4-8 or 5-7, Extremely worried about LB depth and from the CB videos if the HC is worried about LB depth we should all be more worried about it. It's not going to be an easy year but somewhat reverse of last year.

More proficient QB receiving corp not as athletic but still capable, RB is by far our best position. I think we will stop plays better unless an LB gets hurt and then we are completely screwed when it happens. The QB will be able to hit targets it's going to be interesting to see who steps up and makes themselves known as the offense threat.

[LanderPoke]

What's realistic with no bias!?

4-8 or 5-7, Extremely worried about LB depth and from the CB videos if the HC is worried about LB depth we should all be more worried about it. It's not going to be an easy year but somewhat reverse of last year.

More proficient QB receiving corp not as athletic but still capable, RB is by far our best position. I think we will stop plays better unless an LB gets hurt and then we are completely screwed when it happens. The QB will be able to hit targets it's going to be interesting to see who steps up and makes themselves known as the offense threat.

What are you talking about?

[Wyo2dal]

What's realistic with no bias!?

4-8 or 5-7, Extremely worried about LB depth and from the CB videos if the HC is worried about LB depth we should all be more worried about it. It's not going to be an easy year but somewhat reverse of last year.

More proficient QB receiving corp not as athletic but still capable, RB is by far our best position. I think we will stop plays better unless an LB gets hurt and then we are completely screwed when it happens. The QB will be able to hit targets it's going to be interesting to see who steps up and makes themselves known as the offense threat.

What are you talking about?

Why don't you name all these receivers that are so athletic and what college games you have seen them play?

[LanderPoke]

What's realistic with no bias!?

4-8 or 5-7, Extremely worried about LB depth and from the CB videos if the HC is worried about LB depth we should all be more worried about it. It's not going to be an easy year but somewhat reverse of last year.

More proficient QB receiving corp not as athletic but still capable, RB is by far our best position. I think we will stop plays better unless an LB gets hurt and then we are completely screwed when it happens. The QB will be able to hit targets it's going to be interesting to see who steps up and makes themselves known as the offense threat.

What are you talking about?

Why don't you name all these receivers that are so athletic and what college games you have seen them play?

You are arguing that the receiving corps will be less athletic this year? It can't get worse than last year. Who did we lose that was so athletic? Rufran got run down over 70 yds vs FAU with a 15 yard head start and he was considered to be the most athletic we had. We have two receivers (two of our highest rated recruits of the last decade) coming in that will probably contribute as true freshmen. There's Joe Parker, too, who's already here that can run sub 11 in the 100m. Athleticism is definitely up overall among the receiving corps.

[JimmyDimes]

I think the receiving corp will be fine now that they will have a proven QB to toss them the ball. Last year we had the same guys, but not the same QB and the production went down significantly.

[LanderPoke]

I think the receiving corp will be fine now that they will have a proven QB to toss them the ball. Last year we had the same guys, but not the same QB and the production went down significantly.

We were missing Herron, an NFL player with true speed. We'll get some speed back with the incoming freshmen.

[J-Rod]

Gentry is a decent WR. I expect both C.J. Johnson and Justice Murphy to play, and for Johnson to be a starter by the end of the season. I don't see any obvious WR1 potential out of the other WRs.

[LanderPoke]

Gentry is a decent WR. I expect both C.J. Johnson and Justice Murphy to play, and for Johnson to be a starter by the end of the season. I don't see any obvious WR1 potential out of the other WRs.

Now we're talking. Murphy and Johnson will eventually be studs for Wyoming. I think Mulhardt showed tiny flashes last year. If he's improved at all he'll be an asset.

[cali2wyo]

While on the subject of wide receivers, I don't see any freshmen redshirting. At least 2 will contribute big time on offense (Murphy and Johnson, maybe doddles too) and then a good chunk of guys helping out on special teams. Our defense is so thin I don't think it would be smart to tire out defensive backs on special teams, we need starters fresh on defense because there's nobody behind them. There's also so many collisions on special teams, we can't put our secondary at risk of injury

[Wyo2dal]

What's realistic with no bias!?

4-8 or 5-7, Extremely worried about LB depth and from the CB videos if the HC is worried about LB depth we should all be more worried about it. It's not going to be an easy year but somewhat reverse of last year.

More proficient QB receiving corp not as athletic but still capable, RB is by far our best position. I think we will stop plays better unless an LB gets hurt and then we are completely screwed when it happens. The QB will be able to hit targets it's going to be interesting to see who steps up and makes themselves known as the offense threat.

What are you talking about?

Why don't you name all these receivers that are so athletic and what college games you have seen them play?

You are arguing that the receiving corps will be less athletic this year? It can't get worse than last year. Who did we lose that was so athletic? Rufran got run down over 70 yds vs FAU with a 15 yard head start and he was considered to be the most athletic we had. We have two receivers (two of our highest rated recruits of the last decade) coming in that will probably contribute as true freshmen. There's Joe Parker, too, who's already here that can run sub 11 in the 100m. Athleticism is definitely up overall among the receiving corps.

You certainly can't say they are more athletic as they have never played so yes right now they are less athletic until they prove otherwise but I suppose if you are after some innocent until proven guilty comparison then you can call them equally athletic.

It also seems to me everyone fails to include Claiborne and why? You might not include him but he made some of the more athletic catches over the last 3 years. He made catches that required extra effort. Rufran might not have had top end elite speed but to say he wasn't athletic just because he wasn't fast is a far stretch.

At this point you have your opinion and you're entitled to it and I don't fault you on it but until they prove themselves on the field they are just recruits that aren't as athletic.

[LanderPoke]

What's realistic with no bias!?

4-8 or 5-7, Extremely worried about LB depth and from the CB videos if the HC is worried about LB depth we should all be more worried about it. It's not going to be an easy year but somewhat reverse of last year.

More proficient QB receiving corp not as athletic but still capable, RB is by far our best position. I think we will stop plays better unless an LB gets hurt and then we are completely screwed when it happens. The QB will be able to hit targets it's going to be interesting to see who steps up and makes themselves known as the offense threat.

What are you talking about?

Why don't you name all these receivers that are so athletic and what college games you have seen them play?

You are arguing that the receiving corps will be less athletic this year? It can't get worse than last year. Who did we lose that was so athletic? Rufran got run down over 70 yds vs FAU with a 15 yard head start and he was considered to be the most athletic we had. We have two receivers (two of our highest rated recruits of the last decade) coming in that will probably contribute as true freshmen. There's Joe Parker, too, who's already here that can run sub 11 in the 100m. Athleticism is definitely up overall among the receiving corps.

You certainly can't say they are more athletic as they have never played so yes right now they are less athletic until they prove otherwise but I suppose if you are after some innocent until proven guilty comparison then you can call them equally athletic.

It also seems to me everyone fails to include Claiborne and why? You might not include him but he made some of the more athletic catches over the last 3 years. He made catches that required extra effort. Rufran might not have had top end elite speed but to say he wasn't athletic just because he wasn't fast is a far stretch.

At this point you have your opinion and you're entitled to it and I don't fault you on it but until they prove themselves on the field they are just recruits that aren't as athletic.

Fair enough. We'll just have to see how it goes