In Nebraska's last 6 games...

[Mavric]

 

 

 

 

Probably the stretch from 2009 to 2010 when NU went 15-2, with dominating wins over a 7th ranked team and a top 25 team, two other wins over top 25 teams and a close loss to a 3rd ranked team.

 

I think the UCLA and Oregon wins sound good based on name prestige, but neither of those teams were very good when we played them (sort of like Miami in 2014).

 

Personally, I don't think the term "turning a program" in a corner is very meaningful. Things change too much from year to year to have a statement implying that "we've arrived" make any sense. I thought the same thing back in 2009 when Bo made the declaration after the Arizona win.

Thanks, Bo.

 

Rare thing to witness here - I agree with cm.

 

 

We're on a good upswing, but we've got a long ways to go. The only part of this impressive by historical Nebraska standards was the MSU win, everything else is what we should be doing. Oregon still has sexy name recognition, but there's a good chance they don't finish ranked. UCLA was a lot like us vs Washington - they didn't want it nearly as much as we did and saw it as beneath them, to their detriment. Wins over Fresno and Wyoming are what they are, and the loss to Iowa...wait, I'm confused. Was Iowa a top 5 team or not? We can't credit them as that when it makes it sound good to us, and then talk about how they weren't that good when it makes them sound bad. One or the other, please.

 

 

I'm excited and pleased and happy about where we're at. But it's entirely too premature to have any kind of discussion about being 'back' or having turned a corner.

It definitely doesn't establish we've reached the promise land, but it does show we're headed in the right direction; we beat a ranked non conference opponent. Neither of the last two coaches did that, ever. Think about that for a minute.

 

If that's not evidence that we're closer to where we want to go, then I'm not sure what is...

You're not counting bowls?

 

Each of the last two coaches faced only 2 ranked teams in the non-conference. So not a lot to derive from a stat like that, imo.

 

 

Yeah, I think the stat should have been haven't beaten a ranked non-con opponent *at home*, which we hadn't done since Notre Dame in 2001.

 

Ranked Non-Con Opponents Faced:

2014 - #24 USC - L 45-42

2013 - #23 Georgia - W 24-19

2013 - #16 UCLA - L 41-21

2012 - #7 Georgia - L 45-31

2009 - #22 Arizona - W 33-0

2007 - #1 USC - L 49-31

2006 - #10 Auburn - L 17-14

2002 - #25 Penn State - L 40-7

 

So Pelini was 2-2 against those teams, Cally was 0-2, Frank was 0-2 (since that Notre Dame win) and we lost to USC after Pelini was fired.

[Landlord]

Forgetting '09 Va Tech, and also '08 Va Tech if we're going by end of season rankings, which we should be.

[Mavric]

Forgetting '09 Va Tech, and also '08 Va Tech if we're going by end of season rankings, which we should be.

 

I agree that would be better but that's not how others are doing it.

[RedDenver]

 

Forgetting '09 Va Tech, and also '08 Va Tech if we're going by end of season rankings, which we should be.

 

I agree that would be better but that's not how others are doing it.

 

We can't go by end of season for Oregon yet, so it's probably more apples to apples to use the ranking at the time we played.

[Landlord]

 

 

Forgetting '09 Va Tech, and also '08 Va Tech if we're going by end of season rankings, which we should be.

 

I agree that would be better but that's not how others are doing it.

 

We can't go by end of season for Oregon yet, so it's probably more apples to apples to use the ranking at the time we played.

 

 

 

More apples to apples, maybe, but you have no idea if those apples are rotten or poisonous or not.

[RedDenver]

 

 

 

Forgetting '09 Va Tech, and also '08 Va Tech if we're going by end of season rankings, which we should be.

 

I agree that would be better but that's not how others are doing it.

 

We can't go by end of season for Oregon yet, so it's probably more apples to apples to use the ranking at the time we played.

 

 

 

More apples to apples, maybe, but you have no idea if those apples are rotten or poisonous or not.

 

Correct.

[GBRFAN]

Football is a game full of injuries and momentum. You need to go by current ranking starting from the 5th game on. Any game played before game 5 can be talked about as their current ranking and then adjusted when that point of the season has occurred. If you beat a quality team in week 5, however by the end of the season they have lost their qb and 3 or 4 other key players causing them to lose 4 of their last 5 games that shouldn't effect the quality of win early on.

 

As many have said before polls shouldn't start until the end of the first 1/3 of season, however too much $$$ involved so we know that won't happen.

[Red Five]

Jordan Stephenson Ewing Theory...