Dirk on Hype vs. Reality

[Kernal]

 

Chatelain wasn't calling out those players, he was calling out the fans and the media. The media drum up the excitement to unrealistic levels and the fans gobble it up. What Dirk was saying is that other teams' fans and media do the same thing, and that the preseason hype and expectations aren't necessarily representative of objective reality.

 

I liked that particular part of the column. I disagree with his assessment NU is closer to #50 than #10. I don't think there's enough evidence to say either way. I doubt the team themselves know where they belong, and indeed that's as it should be. The team will be judged by their results, not their intentions or potential, and right now we are 2 games through a 12/13/14/15 game schedule.

 

How did you get the above from this?

 

Recognize that McNeese State has players not just equal, but better than Taariq Allen and Daniel Davie and Josh Banderas and Givens Price and, well, you get the picture. Recognize that you don't change the weaknesses of a program by flipping the calendar.

 

And we're 26th, essentially a loss to Fresno or Miami away from landing in the 30's, maybe even 40's. We're about 7-8 wins from finding ourselves in the top 10. After Saturday I could see the losses happening before us rattling off 9 straight wins.

 

 

Ah, I was going from memory and referencing this part of the column:

 

And because our exposure is generally limited to Nebraska, we seem to forget that Iowa has a Maliek Collins, too. And Wisconsin has two Jake Cottons. And Michigan State has three Corey Coopers. And Ohio State has four of everything.

 

I forgot about the part you mention. Yeah, I agree calling those players out by name is unnecessary. I guess objectively, the media can do that. It's just not the typical tone taken by any of the Husker coverage.

[NUinID]

 

 

 

If you can't see that then you should just f'ing leave. Your sh#t is tired and played out.

 

You are the one who tried to make a point using the numbers 3.9 and 3.83. I'll admit I wasn't a math major. I did not personally insult you by the way......

 

My point was that Osborne made up for the "weak" conference by playing tough competition at the start of the year. He played on average an equivalent # of ranked teams that Pelini faces, which is one of yours and others excuses on this board. So saying Pelini's competition is better than what Osborne faced is certainly debateable is it not? Or do you think the Big 10 is actually a respectable conference? Because the entire nation is bagging on them right now in case you haven't been paying attention.

 

Sorry to hurt your sensitive feelings.

 

While the Big 8 was often referred to as "the Big 2, Little 6", it wasn't always that way. There were years when Colorado, Kansas, KSU, Missouri, OK State were stiff competition. Even lowly Iowa State pulled the upset of NU in 1992 I believe. Playing OU every year was equivalent to playing Bama every year now. There were several years were 3 or more Big 8 teams finished in the top 10, and other years when multiple Big 8 teams finished in the top 20. Colorado and Ok State won conf championships in the 1970s or 80s (Ok State tied wt OU - late 1970s ). Co was a co-national champ in 1990. While OU and NU were the heavy weights in the conference, it didn't mean that there was no competition. 2 examples:

 

From Wikipedia:

In the 1971 college football season, Big Eight teams finished ranked #1 (Nebraska), #2 (Oklahoma) and #3 (Colorado) in the nation in the AP Poll – the only time in college football history teams from one conference have held the top three spots in the final poll. In the final AP Poll issued before the Big Eight became the Big 12, half of the conference's teams were ranked in the nation's top 10 (#1 Nebraska, #5 Colorado, #7 Kansas State, #9 Kansas).

 

 

ISU 46-60-4

KU 38-68-6

KSU 21-87-6

CU 50-63-1

MU 45-64-4

OSU 70-43-3

 

This is the records of the little six during the 1980's. This is the reason why it was called the Big 2 and little 6. If you want to argue about OSU there record during the 90's was 41-68-3 and 56-53-3 in the 70's nothing better than average. Most years that was 6 gimmy wins ad in 3 other patsies in non conference at you are at 9 wins.

 

I am not trying to downplay TO or Nebraska's accomplishments, but there was a lot of really bad teams in the 70s-80s and into the 90s. Nebraska was the model of consistency.

 

The big ten as a conference is not super elite at the top but is a fairly solid throughout excluding Purdue. If you don't show up to play you can lose on most weekends. It is really the physical style of play that makes it that way.

[TheSker]

 

Chatelain wasn't calling out those players, he was calling out the fans and the media. The media drum up the excitement to unrealistic levels and the fans gobble it up. What Dirk was saying is that other teams' fans and media do the same thing, and that the preseason hype and expectations aren't necessarily representative of objective reality.

 

I liked that particular part of the column. I disagree with his assessment NU is closer to #50 than #10. I don't think there's enough evidence to say either way. I doubt the team themselves know where they belong, and indeed that's as it should be. The team will be judged by their results, not their intentions or potential, and right now we are 2 games through a 12/13/14/15 game schedule.

 

How did you get the above from this?

 

Recognize that McNeese State has players not just equal, but better than Taariq Allen and Daniel Davie and Josh Banderas and Givens Price and, well, you get the picture. Recognize that you don't change the weaknesses of a program by flipping the calendar.

 

And we're 26th, essentially a loss to Fresno or Miami away from landing in the 30's, maybe even 40's. We're about 7-8 wins from finding ourselves in the top 10. After Saturday I could see the losses happening before us rattling off 9 straight wins.

 

GBR. Generally speaking.

[carlfense]

This seems at least as critical as anything that Chatelain said:

When that happens, he [Armstrong] is pretty good. When that doesn’t happen, he’s not very good.

 

Tim Beck. http://www.omaha.com/huskers/huskers-second-half-breakdown-was-a-group-effort-tim-beck/article_46f46372-79d0-510d-b56a-3d1fdd8d29f4.html