What is our second most impressive win?

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

 

I'm pretty sure if we checked back to the pre-season threads, most were in agreement that we had four "tougher" games on the schedule and eight games we "should" win. We have played seven of the teams were were expected to beat and did. We have played two of the "tougher" games and gone 1-1. I really don't think it's that surprising that our second best win is hard to determine. Alabama is in pretty much the same boat and they play in supposedly the toughest division in toughest conference.

I mean, I've seen Nebraska play, and I've seen Bama and the sec west play, and I feel pretty comfortable saying we aren't similar.

You might be right but I don't believe that they are far apart as you think.

Perhaps, but I don't hear anyone questioning Alabama's ability to not fumble the snap 9 games in.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

When KSU and Baylor inevitably fall back into obscurity I sure hope our unfair and awful Big Ten schedule appeases our thirst for true competition.

Inevitably? What gives you the expertise / right to say this? Seems like future smack at it's finest based on.....1992?? Hate to say this but in today's current world, TCU Baylor & Kansas State are ranked among the 12 best in college football. Two out of three of them are in the top 7.

 

But somehow they will fall just because you said so I guess. I don't agree with you on that bud.

Kansas State is enjoying a nice run largely in part to Bill Snyder. I dont see them churning out the wins when he retires again. Step back is inevitable.

Baylor and TCU also enjoying nice runs. Largely due to their coaches who will be targets for better programs. Even if they both stay put, how long can we really expect this funk Texas is in to last? Once they get roling again, both TCU and Baylor will be impacted.

Lastly, either the Big 12 expands causing the slate to get rougher or it dissolves. Neither of which favor these three teams. No need to agree or disagree, this is what I believe.

What you believe is very wrong. Right now the top four in the XII is better than the Big Ten. So if they have to improve or die I'm worried about the B1G by that logic.

 

And I wonder what you'd say if someone said "Nebraska enjoyed a nice run because of Tom Osborne", because that's what you alluding to with KSU. I understand what they were in the 80's but that was a while ago. California voted republican in the 80's and ain't no one calling it a red state today.

 

According to ESPN, here are the Power Rankings for the Bg 12 and B1G

 

TCU

KSU

WVU

Baylor

 

MSU

OSU

NU

Wisconsin

 

You can't tell me that if you matched them up according to rank and had them play that you would favor the 4 Big 12 teams ahead of the 4 B1G teams in a game.

 

And with regards to Bill Snyder, I think this is a rare instance where it is all about the coach. He made them good, retired, they stunk with a new coach, he came back and made them good again. No denying what he has done there.

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

 

When KSU and Baylor inevitably fall back into obscurity I sure hope our unfair and awful Big Ten schedule appeases our thirst for true competition.

 

Inevitably? What gives you the expertise / right to say this? Seems like future smack at it's finest based on.....1992?? Hate to say this but in today's current world, TCU Baylor & Kansas State are ranked among the 12 best in college football. Two out of three of them are in the top 7.

 

But somehow they will fall just because you said so I guess. I don't agree with you on that bud.

Kansas State is enjoying a nice run largely in part to Bill Snyder. I dont see them churning out the wins when he retires again. Step back is inevitable.

Baylor and TCU also enjoying nice runs. Largely due to their coaches who will be targets for better programs. Even if they both stay put, how long can we really expect this funk Texas is in to last? Once they get roling again, both TCU and Baylor will be impacted.

Lastly, either the Big 12 expands causing the slate to get rougher or it dissolves. Neither of which favor these three teams. No need to agree or disagree, this is what I believe.

What you believe is very wrong. Right now the top four in the XII is better than the Big Ten. So if they have to improve or die I'm worried about the B1G by that logic.

And I wonder what you'd say if someone said "Nebraska enjoyed a nice run because of Tom Osborne", because that's what you alluding to with KSU. I understand what they were in the 80's but that was a while ago. California voted republican in the 80's and ain't no one calling it a red state today.

According to ESPN, here are the Power Rankings for the Bg 12 and B1G

 

TCU

KSU

WVU

Baylor

 

MSU

OSU

NU

Wisconsin

 

You can't tell me that if you matched them up according to rank and had them play that you would favor the 4 Big 12 teams ahead of the 4 B1G teams in a game.

 

And with regards to Bill Snyder, I think this is a rare instance where it is all about the coach. He made them good, retired, they stunk with a new coach, he came back and made them good again. No denying what he has done there.

Those would be four interesting games for sure. But that's my point. If the XII is laughable weak and doomed to fold, the B1G is too.

 

And again, I'm not going to disparage KSU with Bill Snyder because it will call into question our time in the 21st century.

[darkhorse85]

 

 

 

 

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

I'm pretty sure if we checked back to the pre-season threads, most were in agreement that we had four "tougher" games on the schedule and eight games we "should" win. We have played seven of the teams were were expected to beat and did. We have played two of the "tougher" games and gone 1-1. I really don't think it's that surprising that our second best win is hard to determine. Alabama is in pretty much the same boat and they play in supposedly the toughest division in toughest conference.

I mean, I've seen Nebraska play, and I've seen Bama and the sec west play, and I feel pretty comfortable saying we aren't similar.

You might be right but I don't believe that they are far apart as you think.

Perhaps, but I don't hear anyone questioning Alabama's ability to not fumble the snap 9 games in.

 

 

Perhaps it's because you're on a Nebraska message board and not an Alabama one? They are just as critical as fans can be here.

[sd'sker]

i would love to see those match-ups. that would be a fun saturday.

[knapplc]

Well, as soon as we get ourselves cleaned up and we get a little smellum in our hair, why, we're gonna feel 100% better about ourselves and about life in general.

[Redux]

 

 

 

When KSU and Baylor inevitably fall back into obscurity I sure hope our unfair and awful Big Ten schedule appeases our thirst for true competition.

Inevitably? What gives you the expertise / right to say this? Seems like future smack at it's finest based on.....1992?? Hate to say this but in today's current world, TCU Baylor & Kansas State are ranked among the 12 best in college football. Two out of three of them are in the top 7.

 

But somehow they will fall just because you said so I guess. I don't agree with you on that bud.

Kansas State is enjoying a nice run largely in part to Bill Snyder. I dont see them churning out the wins when he retires again. Step back is inevitable.

Baylor and TCU also enjoying nice runs. Largely due to their coaches who will be targets for better programs. Even if they both stay put, how long can we really expect this funk Texas is in to last? Once they get roling again, both TCU and Baylor will be impacted.

Lastly, either the Big 12 expands causing the slate to get rougher or it dissolves. Neither of which favor these three teams. No need to agree or disagree, this is what I believe.

What you believe is very wrong. Right now the top four in the XII is better than the Big Ten. So if they have to improve or die I'm worried about the B1G by that logic.

And I wonder what you'd say if someone said "Nebraska enjoyed a nice run because of Tom Osborne", because that's what you alluding to with KSU. I understand what they were in the 80's but that was a while ago. California voted republican in the 80's and ain't no one calling it a red state today.

There is a major difference between Nebraska and K States history, not even remoteoy the same thing and you know it.

 

You also know the Big Ten is WAY more stable than the Big 12. Maybe this ten team format works out for em, but I doubt it. Your basically just looking for things to disagree with so Ill leave you to it.

[NUpolo8]

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

 

I'm pretty sure if we checked back to the pre-season threads, most were in agreement that we had four "tougher" games on the schedule and eight games we "should" win. We have played seven of the teams were were expected to beat and did. We have played two of the "tougher" games and gone 1-1. I really don't think it's that surprising that our second best win is hard to determine. Alabama is in pretty much the same boat and they play in supposedly the toughest division in toughest conference.

 

I mean, I've seen Nebraska play, and I've seen Bama and the sec west play, and I feel pretty comfortable saying we aren't similar.

You might be right but I don't believe that they are far apart as you think.

 

Perhaps, but I don't hear anyone questioning Alabama's ability to not fumble the snap 9 games in.

 

Perhaps it's because you're on a Nebraska message board and not an Alabama one? They are just as critical as fans can be here.

 

Well that and they don't have snap issues either.

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

 

When KSU and Baylor inevitably fall back into obscurity I sure hope our unfair and awful Big Ten schedule appeases our thirst for true competition.

Inevitably? What gives you the expertise / right to say this? Seems like future smack at it's finest based on.....1992?? Hate to say this but in today's current world, TCU Baylor & Kansas State are ranked among the 12 best in college football. Two out of three of them are in the top 7.

 

But somehow they will fall just because you said so I guess. I don't agree with you on that bud.

Kansas State is enjoying a nice run largely in part to Bill Snyder. I dont see them churning out the wins when he retires again. Step back is inevitable.

Baylor and TCU also enjoying nice runs. Largely due to their coaches who will be targets for better programs. Even if they both stay put, how long can we really expect this funk Texas is in to last? Once they get roling again, both TCU and Baylor will be impacted.

Lastly, either the Big 12 expands causing the slate to get rougher or it dissolves. Neither of which favor these three teams. No need to agree or disagree, this is what I believe.

What you believe is very wrong. Right now the top four in the XII is better than the Big Ten. So if they have to improve or die I'm worried about the B1G by that logic.

And I wonder what you'd say if someone said "Nebraska enjoyed a nice run because of Tom Osborne", because that's what you alluding to with KSU. I understand what they were in the 80's but that was a while ago. California voted republican in the 80's and ain't no one calling it a red state today.

There is a major difference between Nebraska and K States history, not even remoteoy the same thing and you know it.

You also know the Big Ten is WAY more stable than the Big 12. Maybe this ten team format works out for em, but I doubt it. Your basically just looking for things to disagree with so Ill leave you to it.

The stability of the big ten isn't what you were talking about. You were being dismissive and arrogant saying those teams will fall back to earth based on nothing more than how it used to be. That isn't the case.

[darkhorse85]

 

 

 

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

 

I'm pretty sure if we checked back to the pre-season threads, most were in agreement that we had four "tougher" games on the schedule and eight games we "should" win. We have played seven of the teams were were expected to beat and did. We have played two of the "tougher" games and gone 1-1. I really don't think it's that surprising that our second best win is hard to determine. Alabama is in pretty much the same boat and they play in supposedly the toughest division in toughest conference.

 

I mean, I've seen Nebraska play, and I've seen Bama and the sec west play, and I feel pretty comfortable saying we aren't similar.

You might be right but I don't believe that they are far apart as you think.

 

Perhaps, but I don't hear anyone questioning Alabama's ability to not fumble the snap 9 games in.

 

Perhaps it's because you're on a Nebraska message board and not an Alabama one? They are just as critical as fans can be here.

 

Well that and they don't have snap issues either.

 

Maybe you should watch their Florida game again. I recall Sims fumbling a snap against Arkansas as well.

[Redux]

If you actually read my comment you would notice my prediction had a alot of stake in what the future holds in store for the Big 12.

 

And golly, if me thinking KSU ends up being an also ran when Snyder retires make me arrogant, I bet theres alot of arrogant folk on this board.

 

Gotta say man, last couple days your arguments havent been very valid. Your choosing some weak sides to take a firm stance on. To each their own.

[knapplc]

We're going to stop discussing the people we're talking to and stick to the topic. Labeling a person "arrogant," using "you" and "you're" statements are not appropriate for this forum. This is not a new rule.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

 

I'm pretty sure if we checked back to the pre-season threads, most were in agreement that we had four "tougher" games on the schedule and eight games we "should" win. We have played seven of the teams were were expected to beat and did. We have played two of the "tougher" games and gone 1-1. I really don't think it's that surprising that our second best win is hard to determine. Alabama is in pretty much the same boat and they play in supposedly the toughest division in toughest conference.

 

I mean, I've seen Nebraska play, and I've seen Bama and the sec west play, and I feel pretty comfortable saying we aren't similar.

You might be right but I don't believe that they are far apart as you think.

 

Perhaps, but I don't hear anyone questioning Alabama's ability to not fumble the snap 9 games in.

 

Perhaps it's because you're on a Nebraska message board and not an Alabama one? They are just as critical as fans can be here.

 

Well that and they don't have snap issues either.

Do you know that for sure?

[JJ Husker]

And I wonder what you'd say if someone said "Nebraska enjoyed a nice run because of Tom Osborne",

I would say that person was absolutely right. What has Nebraska done without Tom Osborne?

[Saunders]

This thread is a logical fallacy factory.

 

GG guys.