Wins over ranked teams in the last decade...

[Saunders]

I remember hearing a statistic stating that Taylor Martinez had more wins over ranked teams than our last 7 QB's combined. When I went back to look it up, it was top #20 teams. For conversations sake, I'll go ahead and throw all ranked teams in there. This is every game since the beginning of the 2002 season

 

Summary of ranked wins for Cody Green, Zac Lee, Joe Ganz, Sam Keller, Zac Taylor, Joe Dailey, Jammal Lord.

#24 Missouri (2009)

#24 Oklahoma (2009)

#22 Arizona (2009)

#24 Texas A&M (2006)

#23 Iowa State (2005)

#24 Oklahoma State (2003)

 

Summary of ranked wins for Taylor Martinez.

#12 Penn State (2011)

#9 Michigan State (2011)

#7 Missouri (2010)

#15 Oklahoma State (2010)

 

 

Now, just for the hell of it, let's look at ranked losses.

 

 

Summary of ranked losses for Cody Green, Zac Lee, Joe Ganz, Sam Keller, Zac Taylor, Joe Dailey, Jammal Lord.

#13 Virginia Tech (2009)

#3 Texas* (2009) This was stolen from us.

#4 Missouri (2008)

#10 Texas Tech (2008)

#4 Oklahoma (2008)

#1 USC (2007)

#17 Missouri (2007)

#8 Kansas (2007)

#4 USC (2006)

#5 Texas (2006)

#8 Oklahoma (2006)

#10 Auburn (#2006)

#15 Texas Tech (2005)

#2 Oklahoma (2004)

#16 Texas (2003)

#25 Penn State (2002)

#21 Iowa State (2002)

#7 Texas (2002)

#11 Kansas State (2002)

#13 Colorado (2002)

 

Summary of ranked losses for Taylor Martinez.

#7 Wisconsin (2011)

#9 South Carolina (2011)

#18 Texas A&M (2010)

#10 Oklahoma (2010)

 

 

Take it for what it's worth.

[kchusker_chris]

so he loses 2 a year, looks to be about on pace with Bo's other QBs.

 

This is another one of those statistics the media makes up during the offseason. To throw Cody Green in there is funny (did he even have an opportunity to beat a top 25 team?) And mixing the Callahan years into anything is going to make us look good. We're way ahead of those years when it comes to win/losses - don't need some bizarre stat to tell us that.

[zoogs]

I don't understand the choice of categorization here.

 

It's clear that we really struggled against ranked teams for a while. It was something we rarely accomplished during the Callahan era and fans took note of that. Since 2009, we have seriously turned it around by scoring not just one, but several wins over ranked and even highly ranked opponents. The difference is from 2009 onwards.

 

So I think this is an area that Bo should be lauded. An embarrassing spot for our program that he has conquered.

 

This goes way beyond QBs, but if you really want to compare our past two starters, Taylor is 4-4 and Zac is 3-2* with a capital *. I don't think that says a whole lot, as both are small samples and these guys had very different situations.

[kchusker_chris]

Saw that, Lee almost had 4 wins in a single season (the almost being against a highly ranked team - and we should have beat V. Tech too so that's 5) - but Joe Ganz didn't have any. This is one of those things you could twist in any way you want. IE: Lee should have been starting in 2010, etc.

[The Dude]

Taylor's a very under-appreciated player.

[Saunders]

so he loses 2 a year, looks to be about on pace with Bo's other QBs.

 

This is another one of those statistics the media makes up during the offseason. To throw Cody Green in there is funny (did he even have an opportunity to beat a top 25 team?) And mixing the Callahan years into anything is going to make us look good. We're way ahead of those years when it comes to win/losses - don't need some bizarre stat to tell us that.

Green started against OU in 2009. I believe he started 5 games total during his career here. IIRC, the first time I heard this stat was on CFB live during the bowl season. They were talking about Nebraska being elite, and the last time we were considered "elite," which was 2001.

[Saunders]

Saw that, Lee almost had 4 wins in a single season (the almost being against a highly ranked team - and we should have beat V. Tech too so that's 5) - but Joe Ganz didn't have any. This is one of those things you could twist in any way you want. IE: Lee should have been starting in 2010, etc.

And you could say if TM doesn't get hurt, we beat A&M and OU...

 

I didn't post it as a "what if" scenario, I did it because I wanted to research the statement.

[kchusker_chris]

Saw that, Lee almost had 4 wins in a single season (the almost being against a highly ranked team - and we should have beat V. Tech too so that's 5) - but Joe Ganz didn't have any. This is one of those things you could twist in any way you want. IE: Lee should have been starting in 2010, etc.

And you could say if TM doesn't get hurt, we beat A&M and OU...

 

I didn't post it as a "what if" scenario, I did it because I wanted to research the statement.

I know, i was just responding to your "This was stolen from us." statement...because I'm with you, can't really count that as a loss or a win. There will always be an * by that one in my eyes. But if you look at the V.Tech game, that's almost a * as well w/ that last second - Suh frozen moment. Not on QB.

[Omaha-Husker]

It is interesting the types of teams the wins and losses are against as well.

 

1-5: 0-7

6-10: 2-8

11-15: 2-4

16-20: 0-3

21-25: 6-2

 

Pretty much says Nebraska was 21-25th best program last decade.

 

I also think it should be noted how in Nebraska's worst decade since the 50's how Missouri, Kansas, and Texas had their best in a long long time. Oklahoma also had one of the best in their history. It was a tough time to make a bad hire, the competition was stiff in the 00s.

 

Thanks for the research.

[Saunders]

Saw that, Lee almost had 4 wins in a single season (the almost being against a highly ranked team - and we should have beat V. Tech too so that's 5) - but Joe Ganz didn't have any. This is one of those things you could twist in any way you want. IE: Lee should have been starting in 2010, etc.

And you could say if TM doesn't get hurt, we beat A&M and OU...

 

I didn't post it as a "what if" scenario, I did it because I wanted to research the statement.

I know, i was just responding to your "This was stolen from us." statement...because I'm with you, can't really count that as a loss or a win. There will always be an * by that one in my eyes. But if you look at the V.Tech game, that's almost a * as well w/ that last second - Suh frozen moment. Not on QB.

 

Oh, I see. Yeah, I agree. At least the VT loss was our own fault. The screwjob against Texas was straight robbery.

[carlfense]

Thanks saunders. Good stuff.

[Treand3]

It is interesting the types of teams the wins and losses are against as well.

 

1-5: 0-7

6-10: 2-8

11-15: 2-4

16-20: 0-3

21-25: 6-2

 

Pretty much says Nebraska was 21-25th best program last decade.

 

I also think it should be noted how in Nebraska's worst decade since the 50's how Missouri, Kansas, and Texas had their best in a long long time. Oklahoma also had one of the best in their history. It was a tough time to make a bad hire, the competition was stiff in the 00s.

 

Thanks for the research.

 

Your last paragraph says a lot to me. CFB as a whole started to change since the beginning of the 2000s, I.e. recruiting services and media exposure. I understand that Pedersen was trying to 'keep up with the Jones' and be relevant in the eyes of recruiting and the Media by trying to be the USC of the Midwest(There is no such thing), but got away from a lot of the things that made NU an elite program. Things became horribly imbalanced and set us back.

 

Good thread Saunders.

[HuskerShark]

I don't understand the choice of categorization here.

 

It's clear that we really struggled against ranked teams for a while. It was something we rarely accomplished during the Callahan era and fans took note of that. Since 2009, we have seriously turned it around by scoring not just one, but several wins over ranked and even highly ranked opponents. The difference is from 2009 onwards.

 

So I think this is an area that Bo should be lauded. An embarrassing spot for our program that he has conquered.

 

This goes way beyond QBs, but if you really want to compare our past two starters, Taylor is 4-4 and Zac is 3-2* with a capital *. I don't think that says a whole lot, as both are small samples and these guys had very different situations.

 

Valid point, but the defense that we had the year Lee was QB was much better than the defenses that Martinez has had. Basically, when Lee was QB, his job was not to win games. His job was to not lose games.

 

I stand by Taylor pretty much all the way. I recognize his deficiencies, but he seems to make the efforts to improve in those areas as well, which is what good players do to become great.

[kchusker_chris]

I don't understand the choice of categorization here.

 

It's clear that we really struggled against ranked teams for a while. It was something we rarely accomplished during the Callahan era and fans took note of that. Since 2009, we have seriously turned it around by scoring not just one, but several wins over ranked and even highly ranked opponents. The difference is from 2009 onwards.

 

So I think this is an area that Bo should be lauded. An embarrassing spot for our program that he has conquered.

 

This goes way beyond QBs, but if you really want to compare our past two starters, Taylor is 4-4 and Zac is 3-2* with a capital *. I don't think that says a whole lot, as both are small samples and these guys had very different situations.

 

Valid point, but the defense that we had the year Lee was QB was much better than the defenses that Martinez has had. Basically, when Lee was QB, his job was not to win games. His job was to not lose games.

 

I stand by Taylor pretty much all the way. I recognize his deficiencies, but he seems to make the efforts to improve in those areas as well, which is what good players do to become great.

right - which is why this is one of those crazy statistics the media makes up to spin something however they feel they need to spin it (which is why they chose to use top 20, instead of top 25 - because it fits their argument better as saunders pointed out). also, by your explanation, you could say that the athletic director running the program is much better the years Bo has been here than what Callahan had.

[Saunders]

I don't understand the choice of categorization here.

 

It's clear that we really struggled against ranked teams for a while. It was something we rarely accomplished during the Callahan era and fans took note of that. Since 2009, we have seriously turned it around by scoring not just one, but several wins over ranked and even highly ranked opponents. The difference is from 2009 onwards.

 

So I think this is an area that Bo should be lauded. An embarrassing spot for our program that he has conquered.

 

This goes way beyond QBs, but if you really want to compare our past two starters, Taylor is 4-4 and Zac is 3-2* with a capital *. I don't think that says a whole lot, as both are small samples and these guys had very different situations.

 

Valid point, but the defense that we had the year Lee was QB was much better than the defenses that Martinez has had. Basically, when Lee was QB, his job was not to win games. His job was to not lose games.

 

I stand by Taylor pretty much all the way. I recognize his deficiencies, but he seems to make the efforts to improve in those areas as well, which is what good players do to become great.

right - which is why this is one of those crazy statistics the media makes up to spin something however they feel they need to spin it (which is why they chose to use top 20, instead of top 25 - because it fits their argument better as saunders pointed out). also, by your explanation, you could say that the athletic director running the program is much better the years Bo has been here than what Callahan had.

The logic behind the top 20 wins in this case, was that the last time we beat a top 20 team was November of 2001. It had been said quite a few times, and I remember announcers saying the only 2 BCS conference teams that hadn't beaten a top 20 team in that timeframe was Nebraska... and Duke.

 

Still, even when including ranked teams, period, it's rather lame how poorly we have been.