Is there a certain record you need to see next year or...

[Savage Husker]

My expectation/goal every year is to win the division and play for a CCG. I see 9 wins as an achievable number of wins regular season. If they don't achieve what I think they're capable of, I'm not going to consider it a wasted season, but I'm not going to be satisfied with less.

[Apathy]

I would like to see a 8-4 or 9-3 regular season record but for God sakes don't get beat by IOWA this year......can't go another year of the douchebag Iowa fans I work with running their mouth.

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

Honestly ill take whatever record it takes to win the very winnable West Division. But im a trophy whore!

[Redux]

 

 

 

 

Too many unknown and unproven players to declare anything but an average season right now. I think getting to 7-5 would be a really good season.

 

Confident in:

- WR/TE play

- LB play

 

Questions in:

- DB play

- QB play

 

Worried about:

- DL play

- OL play

- Running game

- Playcalling (one game vs UCLA doesn't erase last year, considering UCLA couldn't stop anyone in the run last year)

- Screen game (did we have any good screens last year, I don't recall many if any)

I just don't consider 7-5 "really good". They get a pass for the crappy record last season, but really losing 5 this year would likely mean losing to Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Northwestern and Iowa. Regardless of scoreboard, that's not what we want in year 2.

Seriously. Change 2 of the "last play" losses last year, and we're 7-5.

Thats fine for year 1 I guess. But is 7-5 REALLY acceptable in year 2? We can chalk up the plethora of head scratching losses in year 1 to the transition, but in year 2 a lot of those have to turn into wins.

I am with you...just like Bo's lame 9-4 became a trend...another year of 5 losses starts to feel like a trend.

No specific amount of wins comes to mind, but we have to win some of those competetive games and eventually make them not competetive games in our favor.

[TonyStalloni]

Ms. Karma really needs to smile on the Huskers this next season after the year we had in 2015. If not she will be living up to her nickname

[hskrfan4life]

National Title or bust!

[Enhance]

Ms. Karma really needs to smile on the Huskers this next season after the year we had in 2015. If not she will be living up to her nickname

I think we've been waiting for Ms. Karma to shine on us since 2001.

[Sargon]

will you be okay with "improvement" and "lack of blowouts" again?

 

With the schedule I think 10 wins is very doable but that might be a little on the positive side. I really think the defense could be nasty...in a really good way.

 

You didn't answer your own question. Is there a minimum record you need to see? If so what is it?

 

Me....no there's no minimum it'll be in context like always. Missing 100 1st team starts and say TA out for many games is a heck of a lot different than not missing many 1st team starts. Schedulewise this year...shouldn't be too tough certainly not a top 30 SOS so I expect better than I would if we had the '07 or '08 schedules (going off memory think those SOS were some of the highest).

[Sargon]

 

Ms. Karma really needs to smile on the Huskers this next season after the year we had in 2015. If not she will be living up to her nickname

I think we've been waiting for Ms. Karma to shine on us since 2001.

 

 

She's a bit(# so not to be counted on.

[wanderful]

 

Ms. Karma really needs to smile on the Huskers this next season after the year we had in 2015. If not she will be living up to her nickname

I think we've been waiting for Ms. Karma to shine on us since 2001.

 

I've always thought Ms. Karma has been shining on us since 2001, when we backed into a NC game we had no business being in, and had 15 years of bad luck as a result.

[Blackshirt96]

I would really expect to be at 9-10 wins. So much of the season is going to be on TA's shoulders. He needs to make better reads & better throws this year.

 

The truth is if Riley puts together a really good class like I think he will this year. He will get to year three no matter what his record is this year. To be fair he desirves the time to get his guys in place to see if he is going to work out.

[Blackshirt96]

 

 

Ms. Karma really needs to smile on the Huskers this next season after the year we had in 2015. If not she will be living up to her nickname

I think we've been waiting for Ms. Karma to shine on us since 2001.

 

I've always thought Ms. Karma has been shining on us since 2001, when we backed into a NC game we had no business being in, and had 15 years of bad luck as a result.

 

That means it is over then right?

[Saunders]

 

 

 

Too many unknown and unproven players to declare anything but an average season right now. I think getting to 7-5 would be a really good season.

 

Confident in:

- WR/TE play

- LB play

 

Questions in:

- DB play

- QB play

 

Worried about:

- DL play

- OL play

- Running game

- Playcalling (one game vs UCLA doesn't erase last year, considering UCLA couldn't stop anyone in the run last year)

- Screen game (did we have any good screens last year, I don't recall many if any)

I just don't consider 7-5 "really good". They get a pass for the crappy record last season, but really losing 5 this year would likely mean losing to Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Northwestern and Iowa. Regardless of scoreboard, that's not what we want in year 2.

Seriously. Change 2 of the "last play" losses last year, and we're 7-5.

Thats fine for year 1 I guess. But is 7-5 REALLY acceptable in year 2? We can chalk up the plethora of head scratching losses in year 1 to the transition, but in year 2 a lot of those have to turn into wins.

 

Oh, absolutely not. If we don't hit 8 wins minimum during the regular season, we haven't moved forward at all.

[Redux]

 

 

 

 

Too many unknown and unproven players to declare anything but an average season right now. I think getting to 7-5 would be a really good season.

 

Confident in:

- WR/TE play

- LB play

 

Questions in:

- DB play

- QB play

 

Worried about:

- DL play

- OL play

- Running game

- Playcalling (one game vs UCLA doesn't erase last year, considering UCLA couldn't stop anyone in the run last year)

- Screen game (did we have any good screens last year, I don't recall many if any)

 

I just don't consider 7-5 "really good". They get a pass for the crappy record last season, but really losing 5 this year would likely mean losing to Oregon, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Northwestern and Iowa. Regardless of scoreboard, that's not what we want in year 2.

Seriously. Change 2 of the "last play" losses last year, and we're 7-5.

Thats fine for year 1 I guess. But is 7-5 REALLY acceptable in year 2? We can chalk up the plethora of head scratching losses in year 1 to the transition, but in year 2 a lot of those have to turn into wins.

Oh, absolutely not. If we don't hit 8 wins minimum during the regular season, we haven't moved forward at all.

If we go 8-4 i will be a little disappointed I guess, unless we had a real shot at winning those 4 until refs screw us/injuries prevent it.

[teachercd]

 

will you be okay with "improvement" and "lack of blowouts" again?

 

With the schedule I think 10 wins is very doable but that might be a little on the positive side. I really think the defense could be nasty...in a really good way.

 

You didn't answer your own question. Is there a minimum record you need to see? If so what is it?

 

Me....no there's no minimum it'll be in context like always. Missing 100 1st team starts and say TA out for many games is a heck of a lot different than not missing many 1st team starts. Schedulewise this year...shouldn't be too tough certainly not a top 30 SOS so I expect better than I would if we had the '07 or '08 schedules (going off memory think those SOS were some of the highest).

 

I think if I see 5 or more losses I will be "concerned" and start to think that Riley is in fact what we thought.

 

9 wins and I will be "okay"

 

10 wins and I will be "happy"

 

Anything over 10 and I will think this staff is really getting it going.