Interesting fact.

[knapplc]

I'm more impressed that you took the time to format that into something legible. That's dedication!

[TAKODA]

I'm more impressed that you took the time to format that into something legible. That's dedication!

 

hehe, I tried to paste it but man, it looked like Japanese so yes, it took a bit to get it on here ~

[BigRedBuster]

Boise State is deceiving. They have only been in Div 1 since 1996.

[hangdog]

I wonder how much better it would have been if we hadn't dumped Frank.

[ADS]

HOW FAR HAVE WE FALLEN?

[EZ-E]

HOW FAR HAVE WE FALLEN?

 

Just dropped my phone laughing when I read this

[JJ Husker]

Any number you pick is going to be arbitrary. You've basically picked 19.5 years, but you could have chosen 50, or 25, or 17 or any number. Since not all programs started playing football at the same time it's difficult to establish a good starting/stopping point.

 

Shutup Knapp. He started in 1994....... If he goes for a longer time period fine but, if he starts shortening it up, I blame you. Everyone knows you start these types of things in either 1970 or 1994. No other year is an eligible starting point.

[GBRedneck]

stassen.com makes these things easy.

[Scratchtown]

1994-2001: 0+0+2+0+4+1+2+2 (11 losses, 8 seasons - 1.38 )

2002-2007: 7+3+6+4+5+7 (32 losses, 7 seasons - 4.57)

2008-2013: 4+4+4+4+4+2 (22 losses so far, 6 seasons - 3.67 if we win out)

Total: 65 (3.25 average) (this number's different from what you have)

 

Average of the top 15 over 20 seasons (assuming win out) - 3.37

 

Numbers are always interesting and it's clear that programs have peaks and troughs. A lot of the programs on that list were pretty bad for stretches and are riding on current success. It's pretty clear that Nebraska's spot on the list is owing to an extremely above average first 8 years. We're over a decade removed from that one currently and under Bo, so far, we're a very stable 4-loss team. Which also means a 9-10 win team -- which fits with our current status as a perennial borderline Top 25 finisher.

 

I understand that almost any time period you pick has a degree of arbitrariness, but with these numbers we're clearly resting on past laurels.

 

My bad, thanks for double checking. I went back to check the page I got it from and sure enough it was 65. I think I added an extra 4 losses to one of Bo's years.

That puts nebraska tied with Virginia Tech.

[Mavric]

Boise State is deceiving. They have only been in Div 1 since 1996.

According to those numbers, they must have been D-1 earlier, dropped, then came back. They have more wins >1970 than >1990.

[desertshox]

Boise State is deceiving. They have only been in Div 1 since 1996.

According to those numbers, they must have been D-1 earlier, dropped, then came back. They have more wins >1970 than >1990.

 

numbers are wrong then because they didnt start playing football at the ncaa level until 1970. then they were fcs from 1978-1996. and before 1968 they were a junior college.

[Ulty]

 

 

1990 through 2012

 

1.Boise State --------- 169 - 46 - 0 win % 78605

2.Florida --------------- 228- 65 - 1 win % 77721

3.Ohio State ---------- 211 - 62 - 3 win % 76993

4.Florida State ------- 213 - 67 - 1 win % 75979

5.Nebraska ----------- 221 - 72 - 1 win % 75340

6.Miami Florida ------ 204 - 77 - 0 win % 72598

7.Texas --------------- 206 - 79 - 2 win % 72125

8.Virgina Tech ------- 205 - 83 - 1 win % 71107

9.Oklahoma ---------- 203 - 83 - 3 win % 70761

10.Michigan ---------- 200 - 82 - 3 win % 70702

 

OK, now you can make whatever argument you want with the above details... carry on!

 

If my mathematizing is correct, even if you remove the 60-3 record between '93 and '97, Nebraska is still sitting at a 70% win percentage for all other games during this time period, which still puts us close to this group. Not too shabby overall.

[grandpasknee]

I'm more impressed that you took the time to format that into something legible. That's dedication!

 

hehe, I tried to paste it but man, it looked like Japanese so yes, it took a bit to get it on here ~

So...I now blame the Japanese for making Taylor Martinez making us suck.

[TAKODA]

I'm more impressed that you took the time to format that into something legible. That's dedication!

 

hehe, I tried to paste it but man, it looked like Japanese so yes, it took a bit to get it on here ~

So...I now blame the Japanese for making Taylor Martinez making us suck.

 

LOL! it's your right to do whatever you want.

[Redux]

I dont like the fact we are 69ing with USC.....

 

Wait, can we somehow facor Erin Andrews into this list