ESPN: Is Nebraska back?

[Scratchtown]

Ohio State has superior recruiting but it's netted them 1 undefeated national championship season in my lifetime. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I also don't care what someone from their stuck up fanbase says. We aren't back, whatever that means, but I don't care about their opinion.

Really?

You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for

8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship?

Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

I hate to defend tOSU here, but yes they have and currently are. Their last 15 years are very comparable to our run, and honestly, I think they would have went undefeated in 2012. But regardless..

I don't agree with that. National championships matter. Almost doesn't count. They've had 2 in that span, and one of those was with a loss. Alabama has had a run like ours (and arguably better). OSU has not, yet. If in 5 years they've won 1-2 more NC then there's an argument.
I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

Their achievements in the recent are what is going to keep them atop of where NU wants to be. You can keep sticking to your guns but again. OSU is the superior program. More national titles, higher winning percentage overall. There's really no argument about "achievement". NU has more WINS, but has a 40 games played lead on OSU.

OSU > NU

OSU also has a coach that every kid would at least give some thought about playing for because of his name alone. NU doesn't. OSU is in a hotbed for recruiting. NU isn't. It's not that it isn't close, but c'mon you're acting like OSU has nothing on NU when it's actually the other way around.

This has nothing to do with Oregon so lets not deflect either.

You're not talking about the same thing Moraine is.

How am I not? OSU achievements are > NU's

 

[Saunders]

Ohio State has superior recruiting but it's netted them 1 undefeated national championship season in my lifetime. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I also don't care what someone from their stuck up fanbase says. We aren't back, whatever that means, but I don't care about their opinion.

Really?

You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for

8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship?

Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

I hate to defend tOSU here, but yes they have and currently are. Their last 15 years are very comparable to our run, and honestly, I think they would have went undefeated in 2012. But regardless..

I don't agree with that. National championships matter. Almost doesn't count. They've had 2 in that span, and one of those was with a loss. Alabama has had a run like ours (and arguably better). OSU has not, yet. If in 5 years they've won 1-2 more NC then there's an argument.
I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

Their achievements in the recent are what is going to keep them atop of where NU wants to be. You can keep sticking to your guns but again. OSU is the superior program. More national titles, higher winning percentage overall. There's really no argument about "achievement". NU has more WINS, but has a 40 games played lead on OSU.

OSU > NU

OSU also has a coach that every kid would at least give some thought about playing for because of his name alone. NU doesn't. OSU is in a hotbed for recruiting. NU isn't. It's not that it isn't close, but c'mon you're acting like OSU has nothing on NU when it's actually the other way around.

This has nothing to do with Oregon so lets not deflect either.

You're not talking about the same thing Moraine is.

How am I not? OSU achievements are > NU's

Nebraska has more conference titles, and more legitimate (aka not tied garbage in the 40's) national titles. They've had more recent success (alot of it due to dominating a crap B1G), but that doesn't make them better overall. If you go over the entire program histories, they're roughly on par with no distinct gap.

 

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

IM BACK!!!!

 

[Mierin]

Ohio State has superior recruiting but it's netted them 1 undefeated national championship season in my lifetime. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I also don't care what someone from their stuck up fanbase says. We aren't back, whatever that means, but I don't care about their opinion.

Really?

You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for

8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship?

Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

I hate to defend tOSU here, but yes they have and currently are. Their last 15 years are very comparable to our run, and honestly, I think they would have went undefeated in 2012. But regardless..

I don't agree with that. National championships matter. Almost doesn't count. They've had 2 in that span, and one of those was with a loss. Alabama has had a run like ours (and arguably better). OSU has not, yet. If in 5 years they've won 1-2 more NC then there's an argument.
I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

Their achievements in the recent are what is going to keep them atop of where NU wants to be. You can keep sticking to your guns but again. OSU is the superior program. More national titles, higher winning percentage overall. There's really no argument about "achievement". NU has more WINS, but has a 40 games played lead on OSU.
OSU > NU

OSU also has a coach that every kid would at least give some thought about playing for because of his name alone. NU doesn't. OSU is in a hotbed for recruiting. NU isn't. It's not that it isn't close, but c'mon you're acting like OSU has nothing on NU when it's actually the other way around.

This has nothing to do with Oregon so lets not deflect either.

You're not talking about the same thing Moraine is.

How am I not? OSU achievements are > NU's

Nebraska has more conference titles, and more legitimate (aka not tied garbage in the 40's) national titles. They've had more recent success (alot of it due to dominating a crap B1G), but that doesn't make them better overall. If you go over the entire program histories, they're roughly on par with no distinct gap.

Thank you. Not sure why I've needed to explain this 3 times now. I've already explained I'd trade the last 13 years but not the programs' overall history.
I think age might be a big factor here. Landlord and Coach are both under 30. So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

 

[HuskerMav11]

Ohio State has superior recruiting but it's netted them 1 undefeated national championship season in my lifetime. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I also don't care what someone from their stuck up fanbase says. We aren't back, whatever that means, but I don't care about their opinion.

Really?

You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for

8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship?

Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

I hate to defend tOSU here, but yes they have and currently are. Their last 15 years are very comparable to our run, and honestly, I think they would have went undefeated in 2012. But regardless..

I don't agree with that. National championships matter. Almost doesn't count. They've had 2 in that span, and one of those was with a loss. Alabama has had a run like ours (and arguably better). OSU has not, yet. If in 5 years they've won 1-2 more NC then there's an argument.
I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

Their achievements in the recent are what is going to keep them atop of where NU wants to be. You can keep sticking to your guns but again. OSU is the superior program. More national titles, higher winning percentage overall. There's really no argument about "achievement". NU has more WINS, but has a 40 games played lead on OSU.

OSU > NU

OSU also has a coach that every kid would at least give some thought about playing for because of his name alone. NU doesn't. OSU is in a hotbed for recruiting. NU isn't. It's not that it isn't close, but c'mon you're acting like OSU has nothing on NU when it's actually the other way around.

This has nothing to do with Oregon so lets not deflect either.

You're not talking about the same thing Moraine is.

How am I not? OSU achievements are > NU's

Nebraska has more conference titles, and more legitimate (aka not tied garbage in the 40's) national titles. They've had more recent success (alot of it due to dominating a crap B1G), but that doesn't make them better overall. If you go over the entire program histories, they're roughly on par with no distinct gap.

Just to play devil's advocate here, I don't think the B1G is any worse than the Big 8/12 were through the TO era. You also have to keep in mind this is a different age of football where even the FCS schools have top level training facilities.

 

[Landlord]

So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97.

And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that.

So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them?

 

[Saunders]

So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97.

And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that.

So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them?

OSU finished unranked 7 of those years (over 1/3) from 1980-2000.

During that same stretch, Nebraska finished ranked every year. 19 times in the top 20, 17 times in the top 15, 15 times in the top 10, 9 times in the top 5.

That's not really similar.

 

[Mierin]

So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97.

And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that.

So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them?

What saunders said.

And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships.

Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3.

 

[HuskerExpat]

Over the last 50 years we have 26 more wins than Ohio State. We also have more national championships. I guess I would say they overtake us as a more successful dynasty when they surpass us in those two stats over a 50 year period. A dynasty isn't success over just 15 or 20 years. A fair number of teams have done that. Alabama and us are about the only teams that qualify in the modern era of college football.

If things keep going as they are it won't be long until Ohio State overtakes us, but they're not there yet.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The difference in college football is that during Nebraska's 40 year reign, the bluebloods of Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan, USC, Texas, Notre Dame, Penn State and Oklahoma had the same expectations as Nebraska year in and year out.

About halfway through that reign, the Florida schools started sharing that expectation.

These days Oregon, Stanford, Utah, Boise State, Texas A&M, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Houston, Clemson, and almost the entire SEC have programs, recruits and fanbases that now expect to compete at the highest level.

Not to mention North Dakota State, Appalachian State and other little out-of-conference fodder that can ruin your season.

 

[RunMickeyRun02]

I'm not concerned with "back" I'm more worried about a let down against Northwestern. It would be a very NW thing to do to deflate our positive mojo and negate our Oregon win with a NW loss. Jerks.

They always seem to have our number regardless of how good or bad they are and it's our first road game.

 

[jaws]

I didn't see this thread morphing into a NU vs OSU battle. I assume that most Nebraska fans would take Nebraska's history and Ohio State fans would take Ohio State's history.

One day Urban will leave OSU but when was the last time that Ohio State didn't have a HOF coach on the sidelines (Not counting Luke Fickell's one year as the interim HC)? I have faith they can find another good coach. In the meantime, I hope to see a couple more playoff appearances for the Buckeyes. NC are harder to come by with the playoff system in place.

 

[Landlord]

So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97.

And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that.

So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them?

What saunders said.

And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships.

Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3.

So if we have 20 more seasons never winning conference championships, never finishing ranked in the top 15, never playing in major bowls, and they continue to do all of those things routinely but don't win any more national championships, then we'd still be the better program?

All of their all-time numbers are comparable to ours, and they've done a lot over the last 15 years that we haven't, and are poised to continue to be an elite program, whereas we either aren't, or we can't really tell one way or the other.

 

[Mierin]

So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97.

And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that.

So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them?

What saunders said.
And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships.

Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3.

So if we have 20 more seasons never winning conference championships, never finishing ranked in the top 15, never playing in major bowls, and they continue to do all of those things routinely but don't win any more national championships, then we'd still be the better program?

All of their all-time numbers are comparable to ours, and they've done a lot over the last 15 years that we haven't, and are poised to continue to be an elite program, whereas we either aren't, or we can't really tell one way or the other.

Why did people complain about Osborne not winning a national championship?

 

[Landlord]

So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97.

And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that.

So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them?

What saunders said.
And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships.

Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3.

So if we have 20 more seasons never winning conference championships, never finishing ranked in the top 15, never playing in major bowls, and they continue to do all of those things routinely but don't win any more national championships, then we'd still be the better program?

All of their all-time numbers are comparable to ours, and they've done a lot over the last 15 years that we haven't, and are poised to continue to be an elite program, whereas we either aren't, or we can't really tell one way or the other.

Why did people complain about Osborne not winning a national championship?

because people are generally ungrateful and lack healthy perspective. all it takes is looking through any alabama messageboard for a few minutes to see that - there's still constantly plenty of fans talking about how they suck and Saban should go.