1_NUFAN Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 Remember when the minimum goal for a regular season was nine wins. There was a time in the history of this program...not that long ago, where this would be a week filled with nine win talk and what a disapointment it would be to finish with eight wins and how Texas is tough and if we lost to Colorado and fell to Texas we wouldn't meet the program standard. Where is this talk now? Nine wins represents a return to consistency and you have to return to consistency before there is much belief that you can take the program where we all want it to go.....ALL THE WAY Who have the Huskers beaten this year that's any good? Nobody that's who. And don't tell me Oklahoma because they stink up the field. The Huskers have NOT beaten 1 Single team in the top 25. NOT 1. That is why 9 wins does not mean Jack. If we where 11-0 you could probably make the same argument because VT fell off the map after beating Miami, TT is terribly inconsistent, and ISU is still ISU. So this argument does not hold water in this discussion. Quote Link to comment
clone Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 9-3 is good. 9-4 is pretty good. 9-5 is ok. having 3 wins over the sunbelt... priceless. seriously. even though LOTS of teams play the creampuffs, a better non-conference schedule would shine up the win/loss a bit. maybe even a lot. JMO. Quote Link to comment
kozzman555 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 i don't know what anyone has to complain about. at least you all get to see the games and occasionally go to them. i live in GA, in the army barracks, without cable cuz im poor, and my car is broken. i could dance for joy for a 9-5 season if i got to see the damn games. imagine having to experience every game through espn's crappy gamecast. yeah, it blows. anyone complaining can go pound sand Quote Link to comment
cscott2win Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 All I know is I sure feel better about the Huskers than I did several years ago. I feel better about them than last year. Personally I feel they have progressed and the future looks better. Quote Link to comment
sarge87 Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Remember when the minimum goal for a regular season was nine wins. There was a time in the history of this program...not that long ago, where this would be a week filled with nine win talk and what a disapointment it would be to finish with eight wins and how Texas is tough and if we lost to Colorado and fell to Texas we wouldn't meet the program standard. Where is this talk now? Nine wins represents a return to consistency and you have to return to consistency before there is much belief that you can take the program where we all want it to go.....ALL THE WAY Of course 9 wins is a great thing for a rebuilding football team. I am not sure when we began playing 12 games in the regular season and of course a Conference championship game was not in the Big 8 days so there was one or two less opportunities to win 9 games. 9 games if you play 11 regular season games, I think in the early TO and Devaney days they only played 10. Big difference in going 9-5 say and going 9-1. But still we'll take 9 wins anyway we can get em. I also am not sure when we (and many other big programs) began paying 3 of four out of conference foes to come to our house rather than having a home and home with them. That too makes it difficult to compare. At any rate this is far too early. We have to go to Boulder and beat Colorado. Then let's talk about how big a deal it is to win 10 games AFTER winning at CCG. Right now quite honestly we have not done that much other than earned the right with a 6-2 or a 5-3 conference record to represent the Big 12 North in the CCG. Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but comparison to the TO era seems overdone. The home/home series games against smaller schools ended because of budget restrictions by the smaller schools. They just can't afford a six figure payout on a shoestring budget, and the way the BCS is structured, these schools just don't get the opportunity to get a big payout for their conference in the postseason. Schools like Nebraska used to help out these schools by paying them to come here, but many times the physical toll on the players wasn't worth the payout. An example here would be the now defunct Pacific U program. They were on their way to a promising season in 1995 after finishing 6-5 their previous year until they showed up in Lincoln. They lost their starting quarterback, hobbled their running back, and injured lineman on both sides of the ball. They went on to lose all but two of their remaining games that year after starting the season off with a big win at Oregon St. They shelved their program at the end of the 95 season citing lack of funding. Quote Link to comment
Malth Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Who have the Huskers beaten this year that's any good? Nobody that's who. And don't tell me Oklahoma because they stink up the field. The Huskers have NOT beaten 1 Single team in the top 25. NOT 1. That is why 9 wins does not mean Jack. You are correct that the Huskers haven't beaten a single team in the Top 25. They've beaten TWO. Side note. How old are you and why am I not surprised that you apparently ride a crotch-rocket? RedGixxer is the biggest idiot troll on this board. Every single post he makes disparaging remarks about the team. He cried weeks ago and said he wasn't going to care about NU football anymore Yes here he still is, posting away. Maybe a mod could give him a few days vacation sometime since he's apparently incapable of doing it himself. Quote Link to comment
BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Of course nine wins are significant. When that is achieved against Colorado then some pressure is off going against Texas. Then its a stepping stone to double digits. Quote Link to comment
RedGixxer Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Remember when the minimum goal for a regular season was nine wins. There was a time in the history of this program...not that long ago, where this would be a week filled with nine win talk and what a disapointment it would be to finish with eight wins and how Texas is tough and if we lost to Colorado and fell to Texas we wouldn't meet the program standard. Where is this talk now? Nine wins represents a return to consistency and you have to return to consistency before there is much belief that you can take the program where we all want it to go.....ALL THE WAY Who have the Huskers beaten this year that's any good? Nobody that's who. And don't tell me Oklahoma because they stink up the field. The Huskers have NOT beaten 1 Single team in the top 25. NOT 1. That is why 9 wins does not mean Jack. Once again you spout off at the mouth without knowing what you are talking about. Both Missery and OU were in the top 25. Why does that matter???? The fact that they are NOT NOW ranked is proof that they are no good and never should have been ranked that high in the first place !!! Where they end up getting ranked at the end of the year tells you how good or worthless these teams are... Quote Link to comment
DualThreat_CantThrow Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 9 wins a benchmark? Osborne said they weren't very pleased with 9-3 seasons back in the day. 11 wins was considered a good season. 10 wins was just average. Quote Link to comment
carlfense Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Remember when the minimum goal for a regular season was nine wins. There was a time in the history of this program...not that long ago, where this would be a week filled with nine win talk and what a disapointment it would be to finish with eight wins and how Texas is tough and if we lost to Colorado and fell to Texas we wouldn't meet the program standard. Where is this talk now? Nine wins represents a return to consistency and you have to return to consistency before there is much belief that you can take the program where we all want it to go.....ALL THE WAY Who have the Huskers beaten this year that's any good? Nobody that's who. And don't tell me Oklahoma because they stink up the field. The Huskers have NOT beaten 1 Single team in the top 25. NOT 1. That is why 9 wins does not mean Jack. Once again you spout off at the mouth without knowing what you are talking about. Both Missery and OU were in the top 25. Why does that matter???? The fact that they are NOT NOW ranked is proof that they are no good and never should have been ranked that high in the first place !!! Where they end up getting ranked at the end of the year tells you how good or worthless these teams are... Part of the reason why they aren't ranked now is because WE beat them. I'm sorry if that is too complicated for you to understand. Quote Link to comment
Back In Black Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Pelini didnt come here to win 9 games Quote Link to comment
REDSTEEL Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 The fact that Nebraska should already have at least 9 wins takes away the luster that this is for the ninth win. I can understand a little where RedGrixxer is coming from with the they beaten nobody but then Nebraska has little to do with how the other teams season turn out. I guess Nebraska sort of like Kansas in their one glory year when they beat everyone except Missou who was the only team that had a winning record durring the regular season. Quote Link to comment
clone Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 another good thing about winning NINE games?? ... it's better than 8. Quote Link to comment
Animal_Mother Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Remember when the minimum goal for a regular season was nine wins. There was a time in the history of this program...not that long ago, where this would be a week filled with nine win talk and what a disappointment it would be to finish with eight wins and how Texas is tough and if we lost to Colorado and fell to Texas we wouldn't meet the program standard. Where is this talk now? Nine wins represents a return to consistency and you have to return to consistency before there is much belief that you can take the program where we all want it to go.....ALL THE WAY I agree, but I also think it speaks to the increasing levels of parity that have come to college football. Sure you have years where a team like Florida, or USC, or Texas or whomever is just loaded with talent...junior/senior talent and they run the table with 11 or 12 wins, but that is just not as common as it once was. I think 9 wins is great given recent history and it bodes well for years 3 and 4 of the Pelini era. Does more parity in college football lead to a playoff system where a tough 9 and something team gets to prove itself in December/January? I don't know, time will tell on that one. Bottom line, we're looking good and the future's bright! GBR! Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.