Jump to content
Hans Gruber

Holy $#@& Phil Steele

Recommended Posts

64572423_782595682134926_887131937869240

 

So much for reasonable expectations in year two.

 

Edit: I tried uploading a picture, but it didn't work. Anyways, Phil Steele has Nebraska playing Utah ... in the Rose Bowl. 

 

Edit 2: Figured it out. Picture is in.

Edited by Hans Gruber
Picture wouldn't load
  • Plus1 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nebraska is also his #1 most improved team and he said his main set of power ratings have the Huskers going 10-2.

 

I'm honestly worried now that Nebraska could have a pretty good 9-3 season, and then many fans would think it's a letdown season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, game on!!!

 

Does this mean he has Nebraska as B1G champs? Or does he have Michigan making the playoffs?  I can make out Clemson and Georgia, but can't make out who the 2 & 3 seeds are.

 

I mean, because if the Huskers don't win the conference, it would be kind of a downer to back into the Rose Bowl this year...... :sarcasm

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to think he is right. I think it might be 2020, before we really start thinking about a year like he's talking about.

So no, I won't think 9-3 is a let down. Just wishing for a return to what I grew up with. It's coming !!

 

GBR!!!

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, funhusker said:

Well, game on!!!

 

Does this mean he has Nebraska as B1G champs? Or does he have Michigan making the playoffs?  I can make out Clemson and Georgia, but can't make out who the 2 & 3 seeds are.

 

I mean, because if the Huskers don't win the conference, it would be kind of a downer to back into the Rose Bowl this year...... :sarcasm

Clemson and Georgia? I think Clemson and Alabama. Anywho, Steele has us winning the West the losing to Michigan who makes the playoff leaving us for a Rose Bowl appearance with PAC 12 champs Utah.

 

Mav posted Steeles prediction a day or 2 ago in the Husker preview megathread but I think most missed it

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think we all need to look back to what we used to think of the Big Ten...not much has changed.

 

The teams we thought sucked suck...We have just been waiting for the Huskers to get good again.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I still think we all need to look back to what we used to think of the Big Ten...not much has changed.

 

The teams we thought sucked suck...We have just been waiting for the Huskers to get good again.

I agree. Other than Ohio State being crazy good because of Urban Meyer the rest of the big 10 has been very beatable. Ohio State will be very beatable moving forward- you do not replace Urban Meyer. They will ride the superior talent for another 2-3 years like Solich did. Unfortunately Nebraska was on a downward trend the last 15 years but the Big 10 homers seem to think its because of them. Its not- the downward trend started like 7 years before we joined the conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we sure this hype wasn't generated by Remington Steele....?? Not Phil Steele...? (80's tv show reference for you youngsters :thumbs)

 

sincerely hope Mr Steele is correct

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I still think we all need to look back to what we used to think of the Big Ten...not much has changed.

 

The teams we thought sucked suck...We have just been waiting for the Huskers to get good again.

 

I think you are off some on your thinking.  Nebraska has not been very good over the coarse of time it has been in the B1G.  My opinion of the B1G has changed.  To me it is a league full of teams that are very solid/good they just aren't great.  Iowa, Wisconsin, NW, PSU, Michigan are all good teams that have shown very well all over the country over the last few years.  They just haven't been playoff teams. You can't sleep on Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana or  Maryland either.  They show up to play.  

 

The B1G is a league that you better show up and play every week.  It is still a big boy tough league that will beat each other up it is not a track meet like the B12.  It is much closer to the way the SEC plays football.  

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

I think you are off some on your thinking.  Nebraska has not been very good over the coarse of time it has been in the B1G.  My opinion of the B1G has changed.  To me it is a league full of teams that are very solid/good they just aren't great.  Iowa, Wisconsin, NW, PSU, Michigan are all good teams that have shown very well all over the country over the last few years.  They just haven't been playoff teams. You can't sleep on Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana or  Maryland either.  They show up to play.  

 

The B1G is a league that you better show up and play every week.  It is still a big boy tough league that will beat each other up it is not a track meet like the B12.  It is much closer to the way the SEC plays football.  

I agree with this and will add that I think the B1G is much tougher top to bottom than any other league

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most improved is almost a no brainer.  You've got a 4-8 team that lost close games with a coach like Frost.  I wouldn't hold my breath on OSU being bad.  They've always been "good", though whether that's an objective statement statement or the result of overinflated poll rankings and a weak big ten, is up for debate.  Still, Ohio produces the 5th most talent in the nation (behind CA, TX, Fl, and Ga) and they aren't going anywhere.  I won't hold my breath on Georgia. Every time we're ranked 5th or higher we self destruct. Instead I will look forward to cooking Brats and watching the boys run the dang ball.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will dye my hair blonde and rock a Garrett Nelson style mullet if this comes to fruition. 

  • Plus1 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This should be Harbaugh’s year to win with the East being down. I’m interested in that narrative as the season plays out. OSU will be down, PSU will be down, MSU would need to rebound. With the hype and $$$ behind Harbaugh, it should be his year to capitalize 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RedSavage said:

I agree with this and will add that I think the B1G is much tougher top to bottom than any other league

 

Yes, I think top to bottom it is a pretty tough league.  The B1G has IMO the best coaching overall of any conference.  What it lacks is the overall top end talent that the SEC has.  Right now only OSU has that reload talent like an Alabama, Georgia, and LSU.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NUinID said:

 

I think you are off some on your thinking.  Nebraska has not been very good over the coarse of time it has been in the B1G.  My opinion of the B1G has changed.  To me it is a league full of teams that are very solid/good they just aren't great.  Iowa, Wisconsin, NW, PSU, Michigan are all good teams that have shown very well all over the country over the last few years.  They just haven't been playoff teams. You can't sleep on Purdue, Minnesota, Indiana or  Maryland either.  They show up to play.  

 

The B1G is a league that you better show up and play every week.  It is still a big boy tough league that will beat each other up it is not a track meet like the B12.  It is much closer to the way the SEC plays football.  

No...just like before we joined when we all made fun of the league, it still holds true.

 

OSU is great...then what?  

In the last 10 years the hoosiers have 44 wins

Minny has 61 wins

Purdue has 44

Maryland has 48

 

These teams suck...NU has like 70 wins over that time.

 

The opinion of the big ten changed all of a sudden because we (NU) has been lame so we have eaten some crow.

 

NU is already favored in all its games this year except OSU...think about that for a minute.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, teachercd said:

No...just like before we joined when we all made fun of the league, it still holds true.

 

OSU is great...then what?  

In the last 10 years the hoosiers have 44 wins

Minny has 61 wins

Purdue has 44

Maryland has 48

 

These teams suck...NU has like 70 wins over that time.

 

The opinion of the big ten changed all of a sudden because we (NU) has been lame so we have eaten some crow.

 

I like how you went straight to my Indiana, Purdue, Maryland and Minnesota comments and forgot about Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, MSU, NW, and PSU.

 

You confuse being good with being elite.  Right now their are about 4 elite teams in the country.  Teams that are only losing 1 game a year in the regular season consistently is what I call elite. Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Oklahoma are really the only teams right now that I think fit that bill. Oklahoma is iffy on that end IMO. Georgia may get their, but it is too soon to tell.  That still leaves a lot of good teams.  Lots of 8-10 win teams out there.  Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, PSU, NW and PSU fall into that category.  Nebraska has to play 3 of them every year.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

I like how you went straight to my Indiana, Purdue, Maryland and Minnesota comments and forgot about Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, MSU, NW, and PSU.

 

You confuse being good with being elite.  Right now their are about 4 elite teams in the country.  Teams that are only losing 1 game a year in the regular season consistently is what I call elite. Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Oklahoma are really the only teams right now that I think fit that bill. Oklahoma is iffy on that end IMO. Georgia may get their, but it is too soon to tell.  That still leaves a lot of good teams.  Lots of 8-10 win teams out there.  Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, PSU, NW and PSU fall into that category.  Nebraska has to play 3 of them every year.  

Well...you made the comment about those crappy teams so I was just showing that they are crappy.

 

We knew coming into the Big Ten that OSU and Michigan were good.  PSU is good.  MSU is average but had a nice little 3-4 year run (When Michigan sucked and when PSU was falling apart)...NW?  Come on.  Iowa?  Average.  

 

When we joined the Big Ten NO ONE was like "OMG...we have to play NW and Iowa this year!  UGggg, what are we going to do!"

 

Shoot we even joked about Wisconsin.  

 

It isn't that those teams are good...it is more those teams are all averagely the same...so they beat up each other and end up with those amazingly average records. 8 win teams?  Okay, who cares about that.  We make fun of 8 wins.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, teachercd said:

No...just like before we joined when we all made fun of the league, it still holds true.

 

OSU is great...then what?  

In the last 10 years the hoosiers have 44 wins

Minny has 61 wins

Purdue has 44

Maryland has 48

 

These teams suck...NU has like 70 wins over that time.

 

The opinion of the big ten changed all of a sudden because we (NU) has been lame so we have eaten some crow.

 

NU is already favored in all its games this year except OSU...think about that for a minute.

Every conference has bottom dwellers that aren't that good.  You seem to be concentrating on them and ignoring everyone else.

 

As for me, I always thought the Big Ten was good.  It's just that when we were at the top echelon of college football, they weren't at our level.  They would have a team every once in a while like Michigan in 97 that would make some noise.  My opinion hasn't changed on that.  I still think it's a good conference and one we should be proud to win.....when that happens.  The conference does have a lot of teams in the middle that are good, but not elite.  That makes for a pretty tough conference to run the table in.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

I like how you went straight to my Indiana, Purdue, Maryland and Minnesota comments and forgot about Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, MSU, NW, and PSU.

 

You confuse being good with being elite.  Right now their are about 4 elite teams in the country.  Teams that are only losing 1 game a year in the regular season consistently is what I call elite. Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Oklahoma are really the only teams right now that I think fit that bill. Oklahoma is iffy on that end IMO. Georgia may get their, but it is too soon to tell.  That still leaves a lot of good teams.  Lots of 8-10 win teams out there.  Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, PSU, NW and PSU fall into that category.  Nebraska has to play 3 of them every year.  

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap. We started struggling in 2002 after the Osborne recruits were gone and have been struggling to find our way back. Its not because the Big 10 is a better conference thus we have been put in our place and would have never won as many games the last 50 years if we were in the Big 10 instead of the Big 12. We have been struggling the last 15 years and it is all on US, not what anyone has done to us. It doesnt matter if we are in the pac12, big10 or big 12 we have not played good football since 2001. 

 

Just a quick comparison. 

 

Since 1990 the big 12 teams have won 6 national titles and the big 10 has won 3. 

 

That same ratio exists if you go even further back to 1970. 

 

Since 1970 the big 12 teams have won 11 national titles and the big 10 has won 5. 

 

Point being, we won at an amazing rate because we were just that good. Not because we were in a weak conference. Based on the lack of elite competition, the elite teams like ohio state should have competed for more national championships over that same span.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like that pic is hotlink protected. If anyone can't get it to load, here it is:

 

2IvUwVr.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Every conference has bottom dwellers that aren't that good.  You seem to be concentrating on them and ignoring everyone else.

 

As for me, I always thought the Big Ten was good.  It's just that when we were at the top echelon of college football, they weren't at our level.  They would have a team every once in a while like Michigan in 97 that would make some noise.  My opinion hasn't changed on that.  I still think it's a good conference and one we should be proud to win.....when that happens.  The conference does have a lot of teams in the middle that are good, but not elite.  That makes for a pretty tough conference to run the table in.  

I can agree with that. The exception would be- when we were on top of our game in the 70's 80's 90's we would have crushed them just like we crushed the big 8 and big 12. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap. We started struggling in 2002 after the Osborne recruits were gone and have been struggling to find our way back. Its not because the Big 10 is a better conference thus we have been put in our place and would have never won as many games the last 50 years if we were in the Big 10 instead of the Big 12. We have been struggling the last 15 years and it is all on US, not what anyone has done to us. It doesnt matter if we are in the pac12, big10 or big 12 we have not played good football since 2001. 

 

Just a quick comparison. 

 

Since 1990 the big 12 teams have won 6 national titles and the big 10 has won 3. 

 

That same ratio exists if you go even further back to 1970. 

 

Since 1970 the big 12 teams have won 11 national titles and the big 10 has won 5. 

 

Point being, we won at an amazing rate because we were just that good. Not because we were in a weak conference. Based on the lack of elite competition, the elite teams like ohio state should have competed for more national championships over that same span.

Yep.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap.

 

Is someone actually making this argument?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Well...you made the comment about those crappy teams so I was just showing that they are crappy.

 

We knew coming into the Big Ten that OSU and Michigan were good.  PSU is good.  MSU is average but had a nice little 3-4 year run (When Michigan sucked and when PSU was falling apart)...NW?  Come on.  Iowa?  Average.  

 

When we joined the Big Ten NO ONE was like "OMG...we have to play NW and Iowa this year!  UGggg, what are we going to do!"

 

Shoot we even joked about Wisconsin.  

 

It isn't that those teams are good...it is more those teams are all averagely the same...so they beat up each other and end up with those amazingly average records. 8 win teams?  Okay, who cares about that.  We make fun of 8 wins.

 

I guess if you think winning 8 games a year is average than we have a different definition of average.  I am talking about games being gimmies.  There are very few gimmies in the B1G right now and really hasn't been a lot of gimmies since we joined the B1G.  Even if Nebraska is an elite team games against Wisconsin, NW, MSU, PSU, Iowa aren't gimmies.  Do you think Urban Meyer thought those were cake walk games?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BigRedBuster said:

 

Is someone actually making this argument?

I think that is a fairly common sentiment among big 10 homers. I remember that exact narrative all those years of Nebraska being good. "Oh you guys just dont play anybody, here in the big 10 our conference is so tough we just beat eachother up and thats why we dont win the big one" 

 

Have you really never heard that sentiment? 

 

I think the SEC has faired just fine "beating eachother up"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

I guess if you think winning 8 games a year is average than we have a different definition of average.  I am talking about games being gimmies.  There are very few gimmies in the B1G right now and really hasn't been a lot of gimmies since we joined the B1G.  Even if Nebraska is an elite team games against Wisconsin, NW, MSU, PSU, Iowa aren't gimmies.  Do you think Urban Meyer thought those were cake walk games?  

 

 

Yes...I do think that and that is why he lost like 4 conference games in 7 years.  

 

I know a lot of fans love to buy into coach speak...but with 100% certainty I can tell you that Meyer thought almost every conference game was going to be a cakewalk.  And he pretty much proved it with his coaching and talent.

 

I would also imagine that pretty much every NU fan would consider 8 wins average, at best.   

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

I guess if you think winning 8 games a year is average than we have a different definition of average.  I am talking about games being gimmies.  There are very few gimmies in the B1G right now and really hasn't been a lot of gimmies since we joined the B1G.  Even if Nebraska is an elite team games against Wisconsin, NW, MSU, PSU, Iowa aren't gimmies.  Do you think Urban Meyer thought those were cake walk games?  

 

 

In 7 years as the head coach of Ohio State. Urban Meyer went 54-4 in the big ten conference. So yeah I dont think he was too much worried about anyone. 4 conference losses in 7 years. That's actually pretty sad. Only 1 national title in that span too. So its not like they were Alabama.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap. We started struggling in 2002 after the Osborne recruits were gone and have been struggling to find our way back. Its not because the Big 10 is a better conference thus we have been put in our place and would have never won as many games the last 50 years if we were in the Big 10 instead of the Big 12. We have been struggling the last 15 years and it is all on US, not what anyone has done to us. It doesnt matter if we are in the pac12, big10 or big 12 we have not played good football since 2001. 

 

Just a quick comparison. 

 

Since 1990 the big 12 teams have won 6 national titles and the big 10 has won 3. 

 

That same ratio exists if you go even further back to 1970. 

 

Since 1970 the big 12 teams have won 11 national titles and the big 10 has won 5. 

 

Point being, we won at an amazing rate because we were just that good. Not because we were in a weak conference. Based on the lack of elite competition, the elite teams like ohio state should have competed for more national championships over that same span.

 

What you say makes a lot more sense than the teacher.  Nobody said the conference is tough as crap.  I didn't say that.  I said their is a lot of good teams.  The BIG is a better conference than it was in 1997 so is the Big12.  Teams are better, their is too much money out their for teams to not try and be better.  

2 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think that is a fairly common sentiment among big 10 homers. I remember that exact narrative all those years of Nebraska being good. "Oh you guys just dont play anybody, here in the big 10 our conference is so tough we just beat eachother up and thats why we dont win the big one" 

 

Have you really never heard that sentiment? 

 

I think the SEC has faired just fine "beating eachother up"

 

I am not a B1G homer.  Yes, I do get that some B1G fans think that.  I am not worried about what some fan in Wisconsin is saying.  I know a decent football team when I see it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap. We started struggling in 2002 after the Osborne recruits were gone and have been struggling to find our way back. Its not because the Big 10 is a better conference thus we have been put in our place and would have never won as many games the last 50 years if we were in the Big 10 instead of the Big 12. We have been struggling the last 15 years and it is all on US, not what anyone has done to us. It doesnt matter if we are in the pac12, big10 or big 12 we have not played good football since 2001. 

 

Just a quick comparison. 

 

Since 1990 the big 12 teams have won 6 national titles and the big 10 has won 3. 

 

That same ratio exists if you go even further back to 1970. 

 

Since 1970 the big 12 teams have won 11 national titles and the big 10 has won 5. 

 

Point being, we won at an amazing rate because we were just that good. Not because we were in a weak conference. Based on the lack of elite competition, the elite teams like ohio state should have competed for more national championships over that same span.

 

I'm not really sure if that is a good indication of if a conference is better top to bottom or not.  If the same few teams are winning the championships, it's no indication about if the teams below them are better or not than the other conference.

 

For instance, Since 1990, Big 12 teams have won 6 championships.  Those 6 championships were won by 4 teams.  In that time frame, The Big 10 has won 3 championships.  Those 3 were won by 2 teams. Now, of the 4 from the Big 12, one of those was Colorado in 1990.  We all know that Colorado simply had a relatively short time as a good team and put it together in one season.  Since then, they have not been an elite team.

 

Interestingly, since we are talking about how good the Big 10 is now, you could say that actually right now, the Big 10 has 3 teams that have won 6 NCs since 1990.  The Big 12 only has 2 teams that have won 2.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

What you say makes a lot more sense than the teacher.  Nobody said the conference is tough as crap.  I didn't say that.  I said their is a lot of good teams.  The BIG is a better conference than it was in 1997 so is the Big12.  Teams are better, their is too much money out their for teams to not try and be better.  

 

I am not a B1G homer.  Yes, I do get that some B1G fans think that.  I am not worried about what some fan in Wisconsin is saying.  I know a decent football team when I see it. 

Fair enough. I just personally hate that we have been on our lowest point since like the 50's. Then some Big 10 folks feel validated that we have come in and struggled when in reality we were already struggling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

I think that is a fairly common sentiment among big 10 homers. I remember that exact narrative all those years of Nebraska being good. "Oh you guys just dont play anybody, here in the big 10 our conference is so tough we just beat eachother up and thats why we dont win the big one" 

 

Have you really never heard that sentiment? 

 

I think the SEC has faired just fine "beating eachother up"

I'm specifically asking about people claiming the reason Nebraska hasn't won anything recently is because the Big 10 is so good....instead of us being not nearly as good as we used to be.  

 

I honestly don't know of one Husker fan that thinks we are just as good as we used to be......but the conference is just so gang tough.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Yes...I do think that and that is why he lost like 4 conference games in 7 years.  

 

I know a lot of fans love to buy into coach speak...but with 100% certainty I can tell you that Meyer thought almost every conference game was going to be a cakewalk.  And he pretty much proved it with his coaching and talent.

 

I would also imagine that pretty much every NU fan would consider 8 wins average, at best.   

 

Right now I would be very happy with winning 8 games next year. 

 

I don't Urban Meyer took teams lightly, that is why he only lost 4 games in that span.  TO didn't take teams lightly.  Bo Pelini took teams lightly that is why he lost games he shouldn't have.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Right now I would be very happy with winning 8 games next year. 

 

I don't Urban Meyer took teams lightly, that is why he only lost 4 games in that span.  TO didn't take teams lightly.  Bo Pelini took teams lightly that is why he lost games he shouldn't have.  

Well...then I hope that you are jizzing in your pants  at the end of the season and not just "very happy" because none of the rest of us are going to be very happy with 8 wins.

 

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NUinID said:

 

Right now I would be very happy with winning 8 games next year. 

 

I don't Urban Meyer took teams lightly, that is why he only lost 4 games in that span.  TO didn't take teams lightly.  Bo Pelini took teams lightly that is why he lost games he shouldn't have.  

I do actually think Meyer took teams lightly. Just based on recruiting rankings there was no one in the big 10 that should have even competed with Ohio State. 

 

Plus if memory serves me right- Meyer has a history of over looking teams. Or maybe not getting his team up for the challenge week in and week out. As great as he is and as great as his teams talent have been he has never had an undefeated national championship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Well...then I hope that you are jizzing in your pants  at the end of the season and not just "very happy" because none of the rest of us are going to be very happy with 8 wins.

 

 

 

Nice, where did that come from? 

 

So I am the only Nebraska fan that thinks we have to learn to crawl first.  Doubling our win total this year will be a complete disappointment to everyone but me.  OK  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all...
Two years ago we were a very fitting 4-8.
Last year we were probably the best 4-8 team in the history of the game.
Given this year's schedule, 10-2 is not that much of a stretch.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I'm not really sure if that is a good indication of if a conference is better top to bottom or not.  If the same few teams are winning the championships, it's no indication about if the teams below them are better or not than the other conference.

 

For instance, Since 1990, Big 12 teams have won 6 championships.  Those 6 championships were won by 4 teams.  In that time frame, The Big 10 has won 3 championships.  Those 3 were won by 2 teams. Now, of the 4 from the Big 12, one of those was Colorado in 1990.  We all know that Colorado simply had a relatively short time as a good team and put it together in one season.  Since then, they have not been an elite team.

 

Interestingly, since we are talking about how good the Big 10 is now, you could say that actually right now, the Big 10 has 3 teams that have won 6 NCs since 1990.  The Big 12 only has 2 teams that have won 3.  

If you look at the old big 8/12 structure vs Big 10. Focus on the big 3 of each conference to start.

 

Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas wins hand down in my opinion over Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State

 

Colorado and Kansas State were badass in the 90's into early 2000's. You could say they both had national championship caliber teams in that span if Nebraska wasnt in their way. Can you say that about anyone else in the big 10 outside of the big 3?

 

I think the rest of the big 10 and big 12 teams could be strong and steady opponents but none threatening to win a natty. Wisconsin, Michigan state, texas A&M those types could be tough but were not a real talent threat to win it all.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NUinID said:

 

Nice, where did that come from? 

 

So I am the only Nebraska fan that thinks we have to learn to crawl first.  Doubling our win total this year will be a complete disappointment to everyone but me.  OK  

Huh?  No...I said most of us will not be "very happy" with 8 wins.  

I think 8 wins will make the fans base feel sort of...okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Nice, where did that come from? 

 

So I am the only Nebraska fan that thinks we have to learn to crawl first.  Doubling our win total this year will be a complete disappointment to everyone but me.  OK  

 

 

I don't think that's what he's saying. Not being "very happy" is not the same as "completely disappointed."

I would be somewhat disappointed with 8 wins. Fairly content with 9 wins. Happy with 10. Very happy with 11+. We have one of the best QBs in the nation and there should be improvement in year 2 of a new coaching staff.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if you want to compare the competition Nebraska is playing against in either conference, you need to take Nebraska out of the statistics.  

 

So, since 1990, The Big 12 has had 3 NCs won by 3 teams.

 

Since 1990, the Big 10 has had 3 NCs won by 2 teams.

 

Not that big of a difference if you are trying to use this as an indication of one conference being more dominant than the other.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apsu said:

Hello all...
Two years ago we were a very fitting 4-8.
Last year we were probably the best 4-8 team in the history of the game.
Given this year's schedule, 10-2 is not that much of a stretch.

 

Hi, new person, welcome to HuskerBoard!

 

oro2B3J.gif

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a fan of a long time Big10 team, I can honestly say that most people were happy with Nebraska joining our conference. I don't remember thinking the Big10 was validated because Nebraska has struggled. I think most people understood that what happened at Nebraska could happen at their school if they made the wrong moves when hiring a new AD and HCs. I do remember hearing many Nebraska fans, online and in person, that thought the Big10 would be a cake walk. Maybe it will be for Nebraska in the future but that isn't how it has played out so far.

 

As for OSU being down, we will see, but I think some of you have a short memories. There hasn't been anything in their recent history that I would base that prediction off of. Yes, they just lost one of the best coaches in college football, but that doesn't mean they will all of a sudden be a consistent 9 win or less team. OSU's AD has made some great hires and I assume at this point that Day will is ready to take on the challenge. Maybe they won't be as good as they were during the Meyer years,  I can understand that, but they won't be a shell of their former self.  

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I don't think that's what he's saying. Not being "very happy" is not the same as "completely disappointed."

I would be somewhat disappointed with 8 wins. Fairly content with 9 wins. Happy with 10. Very happy with 11+. We have one of the best QBs in the nation and there should be improvement in year 2 of a new coaching staff.

Yep!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×