65 predictions, #15 Big 12 North

Comparing the Big 12 North to the MWC (to defend why I put them here, before I predict the MWC):

The top third (I'm going NU/KU, based on current statuses of the programs): edge goes to MWC. TCU played OU tougher than both Big 12 schools did last year. Utah dominated top 10 Alabama in the Sugar Bowl last year, KU and NU were a combined 0-6 against top 10 teams, none of them close games. While BYU didn't do a whole lot of note last season (besides win 10 games for the third straight year), they have had several big wins over the past few seasons. I'd love to see some head-to-head matchups but the Big 12 North and MWC rarely play each other for some reason (except CU-CSU). Nebraska is better than it has been, but not the team it was in the 90's. KU is better right now than it has ever been as a program, but so are BYU, TCU, and Utah.

The middle third (Mizzou and CU): edge to the Big 12 North. Not much of a contest here. Air Force is solid, but continually chokes in the 4th quarter against high-quality competition. CSU is on the rise, but they'll still lose to CU this year. UNLV seems to have gotten out of its post-John Robinson funk where 10 losses a year was a possibility, but they are still no Missouri. The MWC teams have some impressive wins recently, but also some head-scratchers. CU is moving slowly upward under Dan Hawkins and Missouri has had recent success, but is a major question mark this year.

The bottom third (K-State and Iowa State): I gotta go MWC here. You are looking at Wyoming, a team that has recently won at Tennessee and against Virginia, New Mexico who beat Arizona (a bowl team) twice in the non-conference including once on the road, and San Diego State who sucks. K-State has been pretty good the past two years, but really that is beating up on teams the calibre of San Diego State. The win at Texas two years ago WAS impressive. Then you have Iowa State that sucks. They have exactly 4 wins against I-A competition in the last 2 years (all at home, and only 1 against a team with a winning record) AND a loss to a I-AA team. The two Big 12 teams combine for 4 wins over BCS opponents the past two seasons, the same total as the 3 MWC schools, though the MWC schools have done so in fewer opportunities and less money.

Projected order of finish:
1: Nebraska (I think they'll finish with at least 3 Big 12 losses though, possibly even spear-heading a 3 or 4-way tie at the top with 4 losses...)
2: Colorado (they certainly have the most favorable schedule of Big 12 North teams, so I expect them to finish higher than they otherwise would based solely on talent)
3: Kansas (even if they can find a way to win at Tech, they still have OU, at Texas, at Colorado, at K-State, and neutral site against Mizzou. They are not a 4 or 5-loss team, but a lot of teams would lose 6 or more in-conference with this schedule-including EVERY Big East team)
4: Missouri (Tiger fans shouldn't be disappointed at 4th this season, but they will be. They lost a lot talent and some good coaching too. Everyone has to be rebuild at some point, and you weren't that spectacular to begin with)
5: Iowa State (Saturday, October 3rd they beat K-State at home to settle the tie for last)
6: Kansas State (Bill Snyder brought K-State back from the dead in his first stint. I think he's going to send them back this time around. Letting Coach Prince go was a MISTAKE!)

I think the Big 12 North this season highlights the reason why 12-team conferences should be avoided: the best teams don't always finish at the top, because not everybody plays everybody. KU has to play at Texas, at Texas Tech, and against Oklahoma. Colorado has to play at Texas, at OK State, and against A&M. Nebraska gets Tech and Oklahoma at home and travels to Baylor. Not all schedules are created equal in a 12-team conference.