Would you be ok with NU winning 1-2 "big games" each year, if it meant losing 1-2 games they "shouldn't"

[huskerfan2000]

Why would anyone want a big win for and even bigger lose? That just doesn't even make sense. You don't become champions by losing games like that.. just plain silly!

Because in the scenario pointed out by the OP, the big win has a larger absolute value than the loss does. You beat a top 5 ranked OSU, and then you lose a close game to an Illinois/Maryland, with all the rest of the games on the schedule going the way they 'should' go on paper, that is a net positive gain by a long shot.

Ohio State lost to Virginia Tech in 2014. I'm wondering how in the hell they became champions? If this question were posed to them, without guarantee of the playoffs, what do you think their answer would be? "Would you be okay with losing to sh**ty Virginia Tech but then beating #7 MSU, or #11 Wisc, or #1 Bama, or #2 Oregon, with all the rest of the games going the way they should go?" They'd be pretty stupid to answer the way almost everyone in this thread is answering.

Reality is, unless people have it all, they'll be unhappy with what they do have. Under Pelini we were pissed because we'd get to 9-10 wins against lowly competition, and then sh#t the bed against the top teams. Now under Riley, we've done a 180 of sorts, getting pissed that we're putting up a much better fight and actually being able to knock off some really good teams, but then dropping some we shouldn't.

As far as my answer, I'm okay with anything. I don't lose sleep or become unhappy if we lose a game no matter who it's against. It's entertainment, folks. I'm along for the ride, hoping they win every game, but having a blast cheering for my team either way.

No it doesn't, you are moving the goalposts in your argument. Sure one loss to VA Tech means less when you beat all of those teams, but that wasn't what the original question was.

You are using one loss to multiple good wins, when the original question was, and I quote...

Would you be ok with NU winning 1-2 "big games" each year, if it meant losing 1-2 games they "shouldn't"

equal wins for equal losses.. Hell no we should be ok with that!

Myself, I am a former player and have been competitive since birth, I am not ok with losing, ever! Hell, even during PE in grade school I did not accept second.

 

[Landlord]

You are using one loss to multiple good wins, when the original question was, and I quote...

No i'm not. I was using all of those as individual examples that you could take your pick from. If OSU beats Va Tech but loses any of those big games, they likely don't make the CFP.

2015 Michigan State lost to 3-6 Nebraska. But they beat #2 Ohio State. If they beat Nebraska, but lose to OSU (or replace it with Iowa, if we count postseason), they likely don't make the CFP.

The reality is that a singular big win over a top team has more absolute value than a singular loss to a bad team. This reality is evidenced by tons and tons of examples. 2010 Nebraska wouldn't have felt as good if we lost to #7 Missouri, but still beat unranked Washington in the Holiday Bowl. 2011 Nebraska wouldn't have felt as good if we beat Northwestern, but lose to Michigan State, or conversely, 2011 Nebraska would have felt like a much better team if we lost to Northwestern but ended the season with a win over #9 South Carolina.

I'm also a former player, and also competitive, but winning isn't a god I worship. At the end of the day, if that's the only thing you care about, you're left with arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's.

 

[Husker Psycho]

I would say the 4 loss standard, that was what we set out to overcome first under the new regime no? A division title and hopefully a conference title before 2019, that's kind of my mark they need to hit.

That's the very definition of "settling".

That's all you expect? What's happened to our fan base?

Jeez...

 

[huskerfan2000]

You are using one loss to multiple good wins, when the original question was, and I quote...

No i'm not. I was using all of those as individual examples that you could take your pick from. If OSU beats Va Tech but loses any of those big games, they likely don't make the CFP.

2015 Michigan State lost to 3-6 Nebraska. But they beat #2 Ohio State. If they beat Nebraska, but lose to OSU (or replace it with Iowa, if we count postseason), they likely don't make the CFP.

The reality is that a singular big win over a top team has more absolute value than a singular loss to a bad team. This reality is evidenced by tons and tons of examples. 2010 Nebraska wouldn't have felt as good if we lost to #7 Missouri, but still beat unranked Washington in the Holiday Bowl. 2011 Nebraska wouldn't have felt as good if we beat Northwestern, but lose to Michigan State, or conversely, 2011 Nebraska would have felt like a much better team if we lost to Northwestern but ended the season with a win over #9 South Carolina.

The question was would YOU be ok with, not would we still be mathematically in it.. so yes, you moved the goalposts!

Your "examples" are only taking into account 2 games and saying this wouldn't happen, when in reality the others games played a big part in what did happen. A bad loss does come into play, just like a good win does.. there is no debating that. Show me how the playoff selection weights wins and losses.

I can't seem to find it now.

 

[Husker Psycho]

I'm also a former player, and also competitive, but winning isn't a god I worship. At the end of the day, if that's the only thing you care about, you're left with arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's.

Say what ?

"arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's"...

Are you kidding me?

What planet are you living on ?

Football is a performance sport and a teams performance is earned and judged on wins and losses. Get used to it !

 

[huskerfan2000]

I'm also a former player, and also competitive, but winning isn't a god I worship. At the end of the day, if that's the only thing you care about, you're left with arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's.

Say what ?

"arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's"...

Are you kidding me?

What planet are you living on ?

Football is a performance sport and a teams performance is earned and judged on wins and losses. Get used to it !

You are using one loss to multiple good wins, when the original question was, and I quote...

No i'm not. I was using all of those as individual examples that you could take your pick from. If OSU beats Va Tech but loses any of those big games, they likely don't make the CFP.

2015 Michigan State lost to 3-6 Nebraska. But they beat #2 Ohio State. If they beat Nebraska, but lose to OSU (or replace it with Iowa, if we count postseason), they likely don't make the CFP.

The reality is that a singular big win over a top team has more absolute value than a singular loss to a bad team. This reality is evidenced by tons and tons of examples. 2010 Nebraska wouldn't have felt as good if we lost to #7 Missouri, but still beat unranked Washington in the Holiday Bowl. 2011 Nebraska wouldn't have felt as good if we beat Northwestern, but lose to Michigan State, or conversely, 2011 Nebraska would have felt like a much better team if we lost to Northwestern but ended the season with a win over #9 South Carolina.

I'm also a former player, and also competitive, but winning isn't a god I worship. At the end of the day, if that's the only thing you care about, you're left with arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's.

Who said anything about winning being a god (goalposts moved a bit more with that one)?and no disrespect meant, but I would not want that attitude on my team!

 

[StPaulHusker]

The question presupposes the assumption that every other game on the schedule happening the way it statistically should, aka, being dead on with the line of the game.

By that metric, we'll likely be favored in 9 of 12 regular season games, and the underdog against Oregon, OSU and either Wisconsin/Iowa.

So, would you rather be 9-3 with a loss to Illinois and a win over Ohio State, or be 9-3 beating all the teams we're better than per Vegas/predictions but losing to the three teams better than us?

I'll take the former.

Agreed. You get more buzz nationally if you actually show you can win some big games. The perception is better even if the record is the same and that helps with recruiting.

So you two were happy with Bo Pelini's coaching tenure? Because this is pretty much what he did every season.

When did Bo ever beat the best team on his schedule, let alone in a November primetime game?

I just thought you were talking about finishing around 9-3 and losing a game they were favored and winning one they weren't. I didn't realize you were talking about a specific team.

 

[Redux]

I would say the 4 loss standard, that was what we set out to overcome first under the new regime no? A division title and hopefully a conference title before 2019, that's kind of my mark they need to hit.

That's the very definition of "settling".

That's all you expect? What's happened to our fan base?

Jeez...

I'm making an attainable goal for my expectations, if they are surpassed then it's even better.

But by all means keep pissing all over.

 

[ADS]

Simple answer for the OP. I just want Nebraska to win, and when they lose it sucks. But I'll always root for them.

 

[Landlord]

Say what ?

"arbitrary meaningless numbers assigned to made up W's and L's"...

Are you kidding me?

What planet are you living on ?

Football is a performance sport and a teams performance is earned and judged on wins and losses. Get used to it !

Who said anything about winning being a god (goalposts moved a bit more with that one)?and no disrespect meant, but I would not want that attitude on my team!

This was in response to "I am not ok with losing ever!", and all I mean is this. When I'm on my deathbed looking at my life and legacy, I'm not going to care about going X-X in one season and whether or not I won a game enough. I don't ever try to lose, I don't ever hope to lose, and as a player I worked my a$$ off trying to win and as a fan I of course always hope and cheer my heart out hoping my teams win, but losing still happens. I'm okay with it. Losing can be a valuable experience, and winning isn't where I find worth; it's in the experience of striving to win. Not the victory, but the action.

 

[Bowfin]

So it's an epic failure if we lose to Oregon this year?

Pretty much. The playbook for a Pac-10 team is to punch them in the mouth and then watch them curl into the fetal position while we take our 300 yards rushing and bulldoze over them for a double digit win.

 

[Saunders]

I think the problem is in defining a "big game" to start with. Beating a highly ranked opponent is nice, but IMO, it's not really a "big game" unless there's something on the line. Beating a highly ranked Sparty last year was nice, but it didn't really mean anything. By the time we played them last year we were out of Playoff, conference, and division consideration. Hell, we weren't even projected to make a bowl at that point. However, beating a highly ranked Sparty in the Big Ten CCG is an entirely different thing that actually means you accomplished something.

 

[StPaulHusker]

Championships. It's all about championships. I don't care who we beat or lose to as long as we are in contention for a championship at the end of the year.

 

[Enhance]

I think too many people are defining success by using an undefeated season as the standard. As stated above, I doubt tOSU defines their 2014 run by the loss to VaTech. I also doubt Alabama feels any less accomplished by the fact that during their 2011 Championship season they failed to beat LSU the 1st time and didn't win their division or conference, they still get to claim a BCS championship that year.

So yeah, if a football god offered me an 11-1 record season with a conference title win and a CFP bid I would take it in a heartbeat regardless of who the loss was to. I don't think that makes me crazy or any less of a fan.

I think the biggest problem here is the way college football is set up - it punishes losses more than just about any other major sport in the country, college or professional. Obviously, it's not like baseball or hockey where one loss or even a few losses can ultimately mean nothing. One loss in college football can be a dagger to your title hopes because of the amount of games you play and the way the system is formulated. Timeliness of losses is also more critical than many other sports.

Fortunately, the four team playoff has made winning a title more manageable with a loss, though losing can still really hurts your chances.

The obvious and most reasonable answer here surrounds the ultimate goal - a title. If winning a conference title and pushing for a national title means the team loses a game they probably shouldn't then so be it. It's all about putting yourself in a position to win, and sometimes, good teams just have bad days.

 

[Redux]

I would be happy just being in the discussion and having a realistic shot at a conference title most years. The way this thread has gone is seems like perfection is the only way to measure success.