BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
You gotta love it when someone cherry picks information to make there point. Then, when someone offers up more data, it's dismissed because it doesn't got the agenda.
It Isn't the 90s Anymore - Or Is It?
- Thread starter NUpolo8
- Start date
74Hunter
Banned
No I'm just pointing out the truth.
Sorry that it craps on all of your hyperbole and moving of the goalposts and whatnot.
74Hunter
Banned
Talk to anyone that knows anything about college football, and they'd tell you that winning +70% of your games is successful.
AFhusker
Banned
That depnds on the program and who those wins come against. For a program like Nebraska, 9-4 every year is unacceptable. Esp with those games coming against bad teams in the Big 12 North and B1G West.
I have a question for you and I am not trying to be a smartass about it. Do you think that 2003 was a successful season? We beat no ranked teams (oSu was #24 when we played them in the first game of the season but were not ranked in the final polls as they ended up with four losses) and were dominated by the two ranked teams that we played during the regular season (UT, KSU) and one that ended up unranked by 17 points. So does 10 wins over 10 unranked teams mean anything other than playing a bad schedule? Not to mention our offense under that dufus Barney Cotton was statistically worse than it was under Frank in 2002.
If Nebraska was a team like Kansas, Iowa State, Minnesota, or Iowa then I could see that as being successful.
NUpolo8
Banned
I think that's kind of my point. 03 wasn't all that great. If that happened this year it would be worse because there would likely be a loss to a pretty embarrassing team.
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
I think a little expectation management is healthy, not the sign of the apocalypse.
In the last 20 years there are more teams demanding higher performance from a recruiting pool that is imperfect and probably shrinking.
Oh yeah, they also invented these Superconferences for financial reasons, and they have greatly increased the likelihood of 2 loss conference champions. I don't know any NCAA legacy team that could look at their schedule and either expect or demand the team run the table. Nebraska is in a better position than most, but the Rutgers, Northwesterns and Minnesotas no longer feel obliged to roll over to the Nebraskas because they went out and got good coaches and solid recruits and established programs and reputations of their own.
The problem for me is that Bo Pelini teams seem to play down to this expectation. In the course of 7 seasons we should have logged an upset against a better team because every other team gets to enjoy an upset now and then. We get our little runs going, the corner seems to be turned, but facing the moment when we have the chance to be relevant, we don't look like we belong on the same field as our peers. Four losses are only as good/bad as the quality of wins that go with them. I'm willing to give style points for losses and we don't earn many of those.
For once I'd like us to go out there and play like the #15 team in the country.
Come on! Who's with me?
In the last 20 years there are more teams demanding higher performance from a recruiting pool that is imperfect and probably shrinking.
Oh yeah, they also invented these Superconferences for financial reasons, and they have greatly increased the likelihood of 2 loss conference champions. I don't know any NCAA legacy team that could look at their schedule and either expect or demand the team run the table. Nebraska is in a better position than most, but the Rutgers, Northwesterns and Minnesotas no longer feel obliged to roll over to the Nebraskas because they went out and got good coaches and solid recruits and established programs and reputations of their own.
The problem for me is that Bo Pelini teams seem to play down to this expectation. In the course of 7 seasons we should have logged an upset against a better team because every other team gets to enjoy an upset now and then. We get our little runs going, the corner seems to be turned, but facing the moment when we have the chance to be relevant, we don't look like we belong on the same field as our peers. Four losses are only as good/bad as the quality of wins that go with them. I'm willing to give style points for losses and we don't earn many of those.
For once I'd like us to go out there and play like the #15 team in the country.
Come on! Who's with me?
That may not have been a wildly successful year, but it certainly wasn't an unsuccessful year. That 2003 defense led the nation in turnovers IIRC, or was damn near the top of the list.
Nobody wants to go 9-4 every year, but I think two of the biggest reasons we've failed to take the next step during the last six years is line play and turnovers. Many of the truly great teams have really good offensive and/or defensive lines, something we haven't had a lot of, especially offensive lines. And for turnovers, we struggle to hang onto the ball at times and create turnovers. I think defenses now-a-days have reached a point where total defense doesn't matter as much as creating turnovers does, and turning those takeaways into points. Offenses are still very ahead of defenses and the best way to stop a good offense is to take the ball away from them. (Defense is still important so don't get me wrong, I'm just saying more takeaways and less turnovers on our part would certainly help us)
Honestly, though, I'm curious how much longer Bo gets. 10 years as a coach at Nebraska without a conference title or BCS bowl berth is pretty bad, if we gave him that long. I'm not calling for his head and I think firing a coach can backfire on you just as quickly as it can help you (i.e. Michigan).
Count 'Bility
Banned
The thing about 2003 the folks forget in saying it wasnt that great, is that is was still a significant improvement from the previous year and the ending of the year before that. Coming off a 7-9 stretch, revamp the staff and go 10-3? Was it great? Probably not. But in terms of the situation at that time? yeah, it could be deemed as successful.
