Wins over ranked teams in the last decade...

[kchusker_chris]

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

[H2h]

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

 

Our defense played their asses off agaisnt OU in 2010. Go back and watch the game, they were the reason we could have won that game. Lets not forget that they basically put 7 points on the board for us, returning an interception inside the OU 5 yard line. You can't protect a 17 point lead for the entire game agaisnt an offense as good as OU's was that year.

[Count 'Bility]

Taylor's a very under-appreciated player.

 

THIS. And there will be many eating crow after this season. The guy spent spring break at a QB camp for god's sake. Time to get off his ass.

[robsker]

To have gone 10-24 against ranked teams over the past 10 years is testimony that NU football fell off the ledge --- making a sensationally rapid transition from being a 30-year national power to a program that has been irrelevant for the last 10-12 years. One poster above, in evaluating the data, stated that NU has been somewhere around the #21-25 program nationally over the past decade. That is about correct — this, after having been a top 3 or so program over the preceding 30 years.

 

This is not news to anyone... to be sure. Yet, the current team seems to be right about where the program has been for the past 10-12 years — ca. # 20-25 or so. Positive movement in the proper direction for the program has not been evident, or... if there has been movement in the right direction, it has not been sustained (a step forward, then a step backward... no net progress).

 

This year? It is tough to tell if a step forward will be made. I hope so. NU is dangerously close to having been irrelevant for so long as to make a positive move that much less likely in the future. Recruits do not look back more than a few years --- and what they see for NU over the immediate past (10-24) does not situate NU well in competing against the better programs for recruits. NU needs improvement --- massive improvement --- fast.

[kchusker_chris]

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

 

Our defense played their asses off agaisnt OU in 2010. Go back and watch the game, they were the reason we could have won that game. Lets not forget that they basically put 7 points on the board for us, returning an interception inside the OU 5 yard line. You can't protect a 17 point lead for the entire game agaisnt an offense as good as OU's was that year.

they didn't have to protect a 17 point lead for an entire game - just half the game.

[Saunders]

To have gone 10-24 against ranked teams over the past 10 years is testimony that NU football fell off the ledge --- making a sensationally rapid transition from being a 30-year national power to a program that has been irrelevant for the last 10-12 years. One poster above, in evaluating the data, stated that NU has been somewhere around the #21-25 program nationally over the past decade. That is about correct — this, after having been a top 3 or so program over the preceding 30 years.

 

This is not news to anyone... to be sure. Yet, the current team seems to be right about where the program has been for the past 10-12 years — ca. # 20-25 or so. Positive movement in the proper direction for the program has not been evident, or... if there has been movement in the right direction, it has not been sustained (a step forward, then a step backward... no net progress).

 

This year? It is tough to tell if a step forward will be made. I hope so. NU is dangerously close to having been irrelevant for so long as to make a positive move that much less likely in the future. Recruits do not look back more than a few years --- and what they see for NU over the immediate past (10-24) does not situate NU well in competing against the better programs for recruits. NU needs improvement --- massive improvement --- fast.

The complete and utter failure of 2002-2007 greatly affects the average "ranking" of the past decade. We are obviously a much, much better team than under Pelini than we were from 2002-2007. Now, we have a looong way to go to get back to where we were, but you have to admit that there has been progress.

[Saunders]

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

 

Our defense played their asses off agaisnt OU in 2010. Go back and watch the game, they were the reason we could have won that game. Lets not forget that they basically put 7 points on the board for us, returning an interception inside the OU 5 yard line. You can't protect a 17 point lead for the entire game agaisnt an offense as good as OU's was that year.

they didn't have to protect a 17 point lead for an entire game - just half the game.

IMO, I'd put 2010 OU on the D, and shawn watson. The 7 step drop and punt when we were in FG range was inexcusable. I'd also put 2009 VT on the O, because of getting 5 field goals. Remember first and goal from the 40?

[kchusker_chris]

i'm on the fence with the "progress" thing - and I'm talking specifically the team on the field - not everything positive Bo has done off it. And obviosly there has been progress since Callahan so don't just throw that time period out there when you start to argue with me. But during the timespan you mention the two high points are 2003, with the resurgence of the blackshirts, and 2009...with once again the resurgence of the blackshirts. Those are the only two periods where we saw a measurable amount of movement that was sustained for more than a couple of games. I think we've taken steps back in various aspects of the game since then, with marginal improvement in other areas...but not enough to compensate for the steps back. we're kind of flat IMO.

[Saunders]

i'm on the fence with the "progress" thing - and I'm talking specifically the team on the field - not everything positive Bo has done off it. And obviosly there has been progress since Callahan so don't just throw that time period out there when you start to argue with me. But during the timespan you mention the two high points are 2003, with the resurgence of the blackshirts, and 2009...with once again the resurgence of the blackshirts. Those are the only two periods where we saw a measurable amount of movement that was sustained for more than a couple of games. I think we've taken steps back in various aspects of the game since then, with marginal improvement in other areas...but not enough to compensate for the steps back. we're kind of flat IMO.

True, but even in the "step back" year of 2011, we beat 1 top 15 team and 1 top 10 team. We hadn't done either one of those since October of 2001.

[H2h]

We've been a 20-25ish team (some years worse). So if the rankings are in any way truely reflective of our team, then you'd expect this.

 

I think it's important to note our best year (2009) was also our best defense. As much as people want to put all of these on the offense, the defense is more often to blame IMO. 2008. 2009 V.Tech, 2010 Oklahoma game, South Carolina, etc. With even a marginally effective defense we win those 3 games, and a number of others up there. (others like A&M are on the offense however)

 

That's why Bo has consistently won his 9 games - because he hasn't had a pathetic defense. Last year was rough, but not as bad as some of these years in the last decade...or other teams like Michigan recently. Bo should always get his 9 wins because of this. You can have a great offense and mediocre defense and only win 8. But have an above average defense and it takes a pretty bad offense to keep you from 9 - as we've proven unfortunately .

 

Our defense played their asses off agaisnt OU in 2010. Go back and watch the game, they were the reason we could have won that game. Lets not forget that they basically put 7 points on the board for us, returning an interception inside the OU 5 yard line. You can't protect a 17 point lead for the entire game agaisnt an offense as good as OU's was that year.

they didn't have to protect a 17 point lead for an entire game - just half the game.

 

We were up 17 with 12+ minutes to go in the 2nd quarter. We were only up 3 at half, and our offense produced a whopping 0 points the rest of the way. Hard to win when you don't score in the 2nd half.

[Enhance]

i'm on the fence with the "progress" thing - and I'm talking specifically the team on the field - not everything positive Bo has done off it. And obviosly there has been progress since Callahan so don't just throw that time period out there when you start to argue with me. But during the timespan you mention the two high points are 2003, with the resurgence of the blackshirts, and 2009...with once again the resurgence of the blackshirts. Those are the only two periods where we saw a measurable amount of movement that was sustained for more than a couple of games. I think we've taken steps back in various aspects of the game since then, with marginal improvement in other areas...but not enough to compensate for the steps back. we're kind of flat IMO.

I think that's a fair assessment.

 

But, I do think people expect things to progress and mature in a certain fashion. When they don't, they look at the surface details and really only see what they want to see. While I agree we seem to progress in one area, and regress in another at times, there's no one way to build a football team. A lot of head coaches at major universities, like Nebraska, were head coaches before they took the job. Pelini, obviously, never had that experience at a smaller school. There are obviously exceptions to every rule or idea, but it's something we need to keep in mind.

 

I'm more proud of Pelini's four years than anything Callahan ever did, even he's not winning us championships yet.

[jsneb83]

I think the fact that Bo had so much success right away sort of brought increased expectations to team that they weren't really ready for. There was so much wrong with the program when he took over that it would take quite a bit of time to get us back to where we want to be. Where we are now is about where people (me, atleast) were expecting us to be when Bo was hired. Bo's early success masked the underlying problems we had (ie lack of depth, leadership), things that take some time to develop. I think we are starting to see the depth and leadership develop, and Bo growing as a head coach. On the surface it may look like we haven't progressed much, but that doesn't mean that progress still hasn't been made.

[HuskerShark]

I may not be satisfied with 9 and 10 wins a season, but I refuse to be pissed. I have to say that the most frustrating season so far in Bo's tenure has been the 2010 season. We were what, 10 or 15 points away from playing in the national title game? That year was such a let-down, and still probably Bo's best team he has put out on the field as a whole. Obviously 2009's defense was the best because of Suh dominating the LOS but I would say that as a whole, 2010 was Bo's best team.

[The Dude]

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.

You seem to be upset about this. It's neither made up nor "spun". It's simply a true fact. The top 20 thing was made relevant by the fact that Nebraska went so long without beating a top 20 team.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

To have gone 10-24 against ranked teams over the past 10 years is testimony that NU football fell off the ledge --- making a sensationally rapid transition from being a 30-year national power to a program that has been irrelevant for the last 10-12 years. One poster above, in evaluating the data, stated that NU has been somewhere around the #21-25 program nationally over the past decade. That is about correct — this, after having been a top 3 or so program over the preceding 30 years.

 

This is not news to anyone... to be sure. Yet, the current team seems to be right about where the program has been for the past 10-12 years — ca. # 20-25 or so. Positive movement in the proper direction for the program has not been evident, or... if there has been movement in the right direction, it has not been sustained (a step forward, then a step backward... no net progress).

 

This year? It is tough to tell if a step forward will be made. I hope so. NU is dangerously close to having been irrelevant for so long as to make a positive move that much less likely in the future. Recruits do not look back more than a few years --- and what they see for NU over the immediate past (10-24) does not situate NU well in competing against the better programs for recruits. NU needs improvement --- massive improvement --- fast.

 

I think in these past four years with Bo as a head coach, we haven't been able to put it all together for one season. When I say all, I mean solid defensive play, solid offensive play, and solid play on the special teams.

 

If you mash in the 2008 offense or the 2011 offense with the 2009 defense or the 2010 defense, you would have a hell of a team. The problem is, the 2008 offense was matched with the 2008 defense, the 2009 defense was matched with the 2009 offense, the 2010 defense was matched with the 2010 offense, and the 2011 offense was matched with the 2011 defense.

 

Here is what gets me excited about this upcoming year. Our biggest problem last year, in my opinion, was our defense. The defense was, for the most part, a pretty young defense last year; and a defense that was ravaged by injuries (especially along the defensive front and in the secondary). The offense has pretty much the same personnel from 2009. You throw in an experienced offense with at least a more experienced defense than last year, and you should get out a better season than the last. If the team can't get above that 9 win gap, then to me it will be a disappointing year--not one to get Pelini fired, but a disappointing year nonetheless.

 

This is the first time Pelini has had any semblance of experience on both sides of the ball. The great coaches, well I think the great coaches are a product of having the right combination of players on both sides of the football. Bo has a chance now to a least stem the tide of his critics by putting together by going out and winning a conference championship. If he can beat Michigan, beat Wisconsin, and go to Michigan State and Ohio State and secure wins there, I think that will go a long way in making this team even more better for the following year.