Although our schedule was better than theirs, we didn't beat anyone all that significant last year. Our best win may have been against a mediocre team from a significantly down B1G, and the two elite teams we played crushed us. I think the game in the Dome from two years ago should be completely ignored. Neither team is even similar to the two that played that game in regards to coaching staff or personnel. My guess, not being a retruitnik, is that Louisville's talent is better than ours right now, at least based on the recruiting services ratings, because Strong recruited well the whole time he was there, whereas we have yet to have a class as good as any of his. It sounds like the last class may have been the best move in that direction, but they haven't even been on the field yet.
Really, nobody knows how good either team is going to be. It's not as if we had a breakout star last year ala McNabb, Graves, Ismail, Harrison, Reyes or Spotwood. We return a number of players that we hope can make a jump next year but certainly aren't assured to. Hunt has a year of experience under his belt, but does that mean he becomes a more dynamic passer or does he just become a more consistent version of what we saw last year, which would be solid but not great? Does Estime become a consistent big play threat or is he a guy that makes a big play and then disappears for 3 games? Does the light turn on for Broyld or is he just the player we've already seen? Has McDonald figured out how to run an offense or does he leave us scratching our head with playcalling like he did so much last year?
Louisville has a whole new coaching staff but one that has a history of winning in a big time way. Do they pick up where the other one left off or is there a learning curve? They lost a number of impact players, including what may be the best quarterback we've seen in a while, but they've done a good job of keeping the cupboard stocked the last few years, so do they drop off or reload? :noidea:
We haven't combined beating an opponent of national significance with having a a good regular season record in a very long time, so why would we get anything more than mediocre recognition from the media, which is what 55 is. 55 versus 40 is splitting hairs, really. Like someone else said, you could take a huge group of teams outside of the top 25, throw them in a hat, and pick them out and have it be as accurate as any list someone is going to come up with.
