NUance Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 We beat #3 Texas in the 2009 CCG down in Arlington. That is, unless you count that :01 do-over the refs gave to the Whorns. 1 Quote Link to comment
Paul in WI Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 ESPN just loves cherry picking to pile on. We'll be constantly reminded of the dark years just like we're reminded of Lawrence Phillips to this day. It won't matter if we win the next ten straight against Top Ten teams, they'll just manipulate the data to make it look however they want it to look. Does what happened two coaches ago reflect on how the current team will perform? It is all just asinine nonsense. Quote Link to comment
MadisonBadger Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I agree with Paul in WI; What happened two coaches ago with losses does not reflect one bit on how the current team will perform tomorrow. To be consistent, past national championships (dating back to the last century) don't mean a hill of beans either. None of these players were out of grade school the last time that happened. Tomorrow's game will be decided by the players on the field, not by some legacy of past successes, or failures. We don't care, and our players don't care if Nebraska hasn't had a lot of road success lately against top ten teams, nor do we care if they had five national chamionships in the past. Those players won't be on the field tomorrow. Nobody is going to be thinking about previous teams come 7:00 p.m. Quote Link to comment
GoBigRed66 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Thats the first thing that I have heard all week long from Wisconsin fans that actually makes some sort of sense. Its gonna be a hell of a game and I think Vegas is clueless too....10 points seems almost crazy! Quote Link to comment
irafreak Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 It's not just nebraska. They always scew stats to make the storyline more interesting. Gasp. Nebraska hasn't beaten Wisconsin since 1973! (but we only played them one more time in 74) Let's spin it the other way... Nebraska leads the series 3-2 Nebraska is 8-1 in the last 9 games against B1G teams See we should win right? Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 In 2009 Nebraska beat #2 Texas in Arlington, Texas. 2 Quote Link to comment
BigAppleBucky Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 ESPN just loves cherry picking to pile on. We'll be constantly reminded of the dark years just like we're reminded of Lawrence Phillips to this day. It won't matter if we win the next ten straight against Top Ten teams, they'll just manipulate the data to make it look however they want it to look. Does what happened two coaches ago reflect on how the current team will perform? It is all just asinine nonsense. Last year, when Wisconsin beat Ohio State which was ranked #1 at the time, they made a big deal about how the Badgers hadn't defeated a #1 team since 1981. True. But how many #1 teams did Wisconsin face in that time? Michigan in 1997, Ohio State in 2002, and probably one or two others, tops. We didn't play Penn State in 1994 and Ohio State was about #3 when we beat them in 2003, even though they hadn't lost since 2001. It's not like you face a #1 team every season and, of course, you're usually not going to win because they're good. Quote Link to comment
PaulCrewe Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 As has been said this fact has no relevence on tomorrow's game. We haven't won(shared, for those in disbelief in Ann Arbor) a National Title since 97. Oh but that would put Nu in the top 20% of college football teams out there and a hell of a lot closer than Wisconson so my stat is more relevent in the big picture that ESPN's. So, of course NU will win because of that fact. Quote Link to comment
GMoose Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 This stat would irk me more if the vast majority of those losses didn't fall exactly in the worst Husker era since the 50s Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 This stat would irk me more if the vast majority of those losses didn't fall exactly in the worst Husker era since the 50s we probably (i say 'probably' because i don't want to do the research) beat more top ten teams in the 90's than we lost to in the 2000's. either way, it's not a big deal stat. how many teams would be in a similar boat? how many top ten teams have we played on the road in that period? Quote Link to comment
redblooded Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 They do this to everyone. If someone is playing the #1 team its, "They haven't beaten a #1 team since... or they haven't beaten a #1 team on the road since/ever..." whatever the worst looking stat-line they can find, they'll hype it. They just fill air time with idiots blowing hot air for 22 hours, and really its just the same garbage repeated for 21 of those. Watching ESPN outside of the actual games is basically like watching the weather channel for hours on end, back when it was actually weather. Quote Link to comment
kansas husker Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 This stat would irk me more if the vast majority of those losses didn't fall exactly in the worst Husker era since the 50s we probably (i say 'probably' because i don't want to do the research) beat more top ten teams in the 90's than we lost to in the 2000's. either way, it's not a big deal stat. how many teams would be in a similar boat? how many top ten teams have we played on the road in that period? I took on the challenge of doing the research. In the 90's we won 14 games against top ten teams (counting home, away, and neutral) posting a total record of 14-9 against top ten teams. 200-2009 we lost 14 posting a total record of 2-14. To answer the questions 14 wins in the 90s vs 14 loses in the 2000s as for the number of top 10 road games since 97 it was 8. (not counting neutral site games) So it is an eight game lossing steak. Quote Link to comment
notgoodatmath Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 actually we won the 2001 MNC because miami is a bunch of cheaters and will have to vacate 1 Quote Link to comment
sd'sker Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 This stat would irk me more if the vast majority of those losses didn't fall exactly in the worst Husker era since the 50s we probably (i say 'probably' because i don't want to do the research) beat more top ten teams in the 90's than we lost to in the 2000's. either way, it's not a big deal stat. how many teams would be in a similar boat? how many top ten teams have we played on the road in that period? I took on the challenge of doing the research. In the 90's we won 14 games against top ten teams (counting home, away, and neutral) posting a total record of 14-9 against top ten teams. 200-2009 we lost 14 posting a total record of 2-14. To answer the questions 14 wins in the 90s vs 14 loses in the 2000s as for the number of top 10 road games since 97 it was 8. (not counting neutral site games) So it is an eight game lossing steak. well done, i am shocked by those numbers. NU needs to step up, apparently they have had plenty of opportunities. let's start today. 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.