Scanning magazines: What do they say about the Huskers?

[The Dude]

I may be alone on this but Im guessing none of the preseason mags have a whole lot to say about Taylor Martinez

I'm pretty sure Phil Steele is still talking about Bill Callahan every year in his preseason mag.

[ADS]

What's the point of talking about the kid when he doesn't even play for nebraska?

[hskrfan4life]

I really hope that we do see a qb battle until its clear who is better.

[VectorVictor]

 

 

You have to admit we've had some pretty bad luck for some of those seasons though.

 

Martinez getting hurt in the Mizzou game back in 2010, which affected him through 2011.

Losing Jared Crick for most of the season and Baker Steinkuhler before the CCG against Wiscy in 2012

Losing Martinez, half the offensive line, and multiple injuries to the receiving corps last season.

 

One of our biggest issues has been injuries. If we can stay healthy this year, I see no game on our schedule that is an obvious loss.

 

 

 

Every team has injuries, its a fact of football. When I look at the schedule, I'm unsure about Miami. I haven't followed them closely enough to have a strong opinion, but it feels like a game we would lose the last few years. But if I had to put money on the games, I'd say we'll lose at MSU and lose at Wisconsin.

 

 

Would give you Wisky since they've had our number...but honestly, we matched MSU pretty well in Lincoln, the only difference being 5 (FIVE!) turnovers.

 

We get rid of the damn fumblitis that has infected our team, and the only game I would say we should be a dog in is the Wisky one.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

Not really... you know the old saying. Once is a fluke, twice is a coincidence, three times is a trend. So what is 6? A continuation of that trend. That's not to say there HAS to be 4 losses. There could very well be a season of 1 loss or 6 losses. But if I were a betting man making a prediction, I would predict 4 losses.

There's no way I would. It's statistically absurd.

It has been the last 4. Hasn't stopped it from happening.

 

 

Hopefully we can look back on it the way we looked back on Tom's 7 year bowl losing streak before the mid 90's happened.

 

 

 

I get what you're doing, and absolutely, but the two aren't comparable

 

 

Not perfectly aligned, but definitely comparable. Especially if you consider a conference championship mandatory and the old Big 8 a slightly lesser prize:

 

1985 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1986 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8

1987 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1988 Nebraska finished 1st in the Big 8, finished 11-2, but the two losses were embarrassing blowouts

1989 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1990 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8, ended the season with embarrassing blowouts to Oklahoma and Georgia Tech

 

Nebraska was ranked in the Top 10 for most of this run, but anyone who lived through it remembers near identical grumbling that Tom Osborne's team wasn't trending in the right direction, and those six consecutive seasons simply weren't acceptible by Nebraska standards. After 17 seasons as head coach, conventional wisdom among the Husker faithful was that Tom Osborne couldn't get over the hump. In big games, the other coaches just seemed to have his number. And they were right. Osborne needed to change his approach. And he did.

[suh_fan93]

Not perfectly aligned, but definitely comparable. Especially if you consider a conference championship mandatory and the old Big 8 a slightly lesser prize:

 

1985 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1986 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8

1987 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1988 Nebraska finished 1st in the Big 8, finished 11-2, but the two losses were embarrassing blowouts

1989 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1990 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8, ended the season with embarrassing blowouts to Oklahoma and Georgia Tech

 

Nebraska was ranked in the Top 10 for most of this run, but anyone who lived through it remembers near identical grumbling that Tom Osborne's team wasn't trending in the right direction, and those six consecutive seasons simply weren't acceptible by Nebraska standards. After 17 seasons as head coach, conventional wisdom among the Husker faithful was that Tom Osborne couldn't get over the hump. In big games, the other coaches just seemed to have his number. And they were right. Osborne needed to change his approach. And he did.

So what about the 12 years prior to 1985???? TO had established himself long before then. He started head coaching in 1973 and his worst ranking before 1985 was 12th.

 

Not to mention for many of those years when we took 2nd place it was to Oklahoma who was a college football powerhouse who we also gave a heckuva run for their money with some hard fought legendary games.

[Count 'Bility]

Jesus. Not another bo-to-osborne argument.

 

Osborne also didnt have to deal with half the parity and competition coaches today have to.

[skersfan]

Tired of hearing the Bo Tom cry.

 

I know Tom, quite well. I think he was one of the greatest coaches of all time.

 

Would he be doing a lot better than Bo at this moment in time. Highly doubtful. Too much competition from other programs. WE are not in the big 2 and little 6 any longer. Bo has a much tougher job than Coach Osborne had. Fans are still pretty much the same. But the rules have changed, and due to some of the things that happened when Nebraska was in their hay day.

 

Bo will end up a good, or great coach on his merits. No comparison between the two. Time to quit living in the past.

[Abdullah the Butcher]

Tired of hearing the Bo Tom cry.

 

I know Tom, quite well. I think he was one of the greatest coaches of all time.

 

Would he be doing a lot better than Bo at this moment in time. Highly doubtful. Too much competition from other programs. WE are not in the big 2 and little 6 any longer. Bo has a much tougher job than Coach Osborne had. Fans are still pretty much the same. But the rules have changed, and due to some of the things that happened when Nebraska was in their hay day.

 

Bo will end up a good, or great coach on his merits. No comparison between the two. Time to quit living in the past.

You're wrong, Tom played 23 schools from what would be the power 5 conferences today in non con his first six years. Bo has played 6. Not all of those teams were good but they were still major conference opponents. Tom played 4 ranked teams each year on average, Bo played 3.8 ranked teams. Apparently people forget the old days.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

Not perfectly aligned, but definitely comparable. Especially if you consider a conference championship mandatory and the old Big 8 a slightly lesser prize:

 

1985 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1986 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8

1987 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1988 Nebraska finished 1st in the Big 8, finished 11-2, but the two losses were embarrassing blowouts

1989 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1990 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8, ended the season with embarrassing blowouts to Oklahoma and Georgia Tech

 

Nebraska was ranked in the Top 10 for most of this run, but anyone who lived through it remembers near identical grumbling that Tom Osborne's team wasn't trending in the right direction, and those six consecutive seasons simply weren't acceptible by Nebraska standards. After 17 seasons as head coach, conventional wisdom among the Husker faithful was that Tom Osborne couldn't get over the hump. In big games, the other coaches just seemed to have his number. And they were right. Osborne needed to change his approach. And he did.

So what about the 12 years prior to 1985???? TO had established himself long before then. He started head coaching in 1973 and his worst ranking before 1985 was 12th.

 

Not to mention for many of those years when we took 2nd place it was to Oklahoma who was a college football powerhouse who we also gave a heckuva run for their money with some hard fought legendary games.

 

 

Someone brought up Tom's specific six year run compared to Bo's six year run. Someone else said they weren't comparable. I thought it was comparable and fairly interesting in terms of expectations, which are definitely built on the Osborne years. I mentioned Tom's 17 years of previous experience, and how it didn't matter to many fans at the time. After the Georgia Tech loss, Tom told his assitants to get their resumes ready.

 

And believe me, the fact that Oklahoma was a powerhouse didn't make us feel any better. No better than it would feel to lose to Ohio State every year.

 

Since someone already brought up parity, I think it's fair and honorable to point out that no 21st Century team is likely to repeat Nebraska's 40 year run, and our current "trough" is probably enviable as troughs go.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

Not perfectly aligned, but definitely comparable. Especially if you consider a conference championship mandatory and the old Big 8 a slightly lesser prize:

 

1985 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1986 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8

1987 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1988 Nebraska finished 1st in the Big 8, finished 11-2, but the two losses were embarrassing blowouts

1989 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1990 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8, ended the season with embarrassing blowouts to Oklahoma and Georgia Tech

 

Nebraska was ranked in the Top 10 for most of this run, but anyone who lived through it remembers near identical grumbling that Tom Osborne's team wasn't trending in the right direction, and those six consecutive seasons simply weren't acceptible by Nebraska standards. After 17 seasons as head coach, conventional wisdom among the Husker faithful was that Tom Osborne couldn't get over the hump. In big games, the other coaches just seemed to have his number. And they were right. Osborne needed to change his approach. And he did.

So what about the 12 years prior to 1985???? TO had established himself long before then. He started head coaching in 1973 and his worst ranking before 1985 was 12th.

 

Not to mention for many of those years when we took 2nd place it was to Oklahoma who was a college football powerhouse who we also gave a heckuva run for their money with some hard fought legendary games.

 

Someone brought up Tom's specific six year run compared to Bo's six year run. Someone else said they weren't comparable. I thought it was comparable and fairly interesting in terms of expectations, which are definitely built on the Osborne years. I mentioned Tom's 17 years of previous experience, and how it didn't matter to many fans at the time. After the Georgia Tech loss, Tom told his assitants to get their resumes ready.

 

And believe me, the fact that Oklahoma was a powerhouse didn't make us feel any better. No better than it would feel to lose to Ohio State every year.

 

Since someone already brought up parity, I think it's fair and honorable to point out that no 21st Century team is likely to repeat Nebraska's 40 year run, and our current "trough" is probably enviable as troughs go.

 

I gotcha. Thanks for explaining.

[TheSker]

 

Not perfectly aligned, but definitely comparable. Especially if you consider a conference championship mandatory and the old Big 8 a slightly lesser prize:

 

1985 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1986 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8

1987 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1988 Nebraska finished 1st in the Big 8, finished 11-2, but the two losses were embarrassing blowouts

1989 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1990 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8, ended the season with embarrassing blowouts to Oklahoma and Georgia Tech

 

Nebraska was ranked in the Top 10 for most of this run, but anyone who lived through it remembers near identical grumbling that Tom Osborne's team wasn't trending in the right direction, and those six consecutive seasons simply weren't acceptible by Nebraska standards. After 17 seasons as head coach, conventional wisdom among the Husker faithful was that Tom Osborne couldn't get over the hump. In big games, the other coaches just seemed to have his number. And they were right. Osborne needed to change his approach. And he did.

So what about the 12 years prior to 1985???? TO had established himself long before then. He started head coaching in 1973 and his worst ranking before 1985 was 12th.

 

Not to mention for many of those years when we took 2nd place it was to Oklahoma who was a college football powerhouse who we also gave a heckuva run for their money with some hard fought legendary games.

 

Well, during those 12 years prior to 1985, Osborne very very nearly became the coach of the Buffaloes.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

Not perfectly aligned, but definitely comparable. Especially if you consider a conference championship mandatory and the old Big 8 a slightly lesser prize:

 

1985 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1986 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8

1987 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1988 Nebraska finished 1st in the Big 8, finished 11-2, but the two losses were embarrassing blowouts

1989 Nebraska finished 2nd in the Big 8

1990 Nebraska finished 3rd in the Big 8, ended the season with embarrassing blowouts to Oklahoma and Georgia Tech

 

Nebraska was ranked in the Top 10 for most of this run, but anyone who lived through it remembers near identical grumbling that Tom Osborne's team wasn't trending in the right direction, and those six consecutive seasons simply weren't acceptible by Nebraska standards. After 17 seasons as head coach, conventional wisdom among the Husker faithful was that Tom Osborne couldn't get over the hump. In big games, the other coaches just seemed to have his number. And they were right. Osborne needed to change his approach. And he did.

So what about the 12 years prior to 1985???? TO had established himself long before then. He started head coaching in 1973 and his worst ranking before 1985 was 12th.

 

Not to mention for many of those years when we took 2nd place it was to Oklahoma who was a college football powerhouse who we also gave a heckuva run for their money with some hard fought legendary games.

 

Well, during those 12 years prior to 1985, Osborne very very nearly became the coach of the Buffaloes.

 

 

We all know how that turned out.