Unless the offense can gain some consistency there are very few garanteed wins. Everything looks good in the press clippings but they always do. Yes we had a good win against Michigan last year but they were in a bit of a downhill spiral at the time. Not to take anything away from the Huskers. Had they not stayed on top of them the way they did Michican could have easily had the win. It was a great game and showed a great deal of heart on the part of the Huskers. I truly believe they wanted it more at the end of the game. CU was yet another team with issues. Turnovers and penalties can kill a good team against a lessor team. There are very few givens in terms of w's and l's. I remember the 83 team that lost to Miami in the Orange bowl. The Huskers were a superior team and should have blown them out. Miami was good but I still don't believe they were in the same class as the Huskers but they did get the win. A couple of turnovers, a blown assignment and a couple of big plays and the Cyclones could look pretty darn good after 4 quarters. Barney Cotton has always struck me as fairly conservative. If he mixes it up a bit, gets some momentum and keeps the D scratching their heads...........could be interesting.
Valid points, but...
The consistency issue can be almost entirely laid at the feet of the offensive line. No time to pass, no holes in which to run. That's what's so significant about the CU and Michigan games - we started to see the offensive line look as if they were playing well.
While I might agree that CU was a team that had some problems, I don't agree about Michigan being in a downward spiral - or, at least, no more so than most years when they seem to blow it.
And, regardless - both teams were ranked well above the Huskers, both teams were not only expected to win but to dominate, and both teams were meeting the Huskers on either home or neutral fields. Despite all of that, the line did a pretty good job.
ower 
