Nebraska Dynasty....still the greatest

[Kernal]

Nebraska From 1992-1997

69-6 (should have been 70-5, got screwed in `93)

3 undefeated seasons (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

3 national titles (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

Alabama from 2008-2013

72-9

1 undefeated seasons

3 national titles

the best run(s) by either team..

NU 23-0 `94 & 95

NU 49-2 `94-`97

NU 60-3 `93-`97 (should have been 61-2, got screwed in `93)

Bama is a great team....but not even close to the dominance we saw in the `90s from Nebraska.

The big difference is Alabama's run is current and ongoing, and Nebraska's was so long ago that the players have no direct memory of it. When I was in college for the 90's run, the 70's run seemed like ancient history. Today, the same is true of our 90's run- it's ancient history.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

Not Shawn Eichorst @NotADEichorst 3h

Nebraska beat Georgia. Georgia beat LSU. LSU beat Auburn. Auburn beat Alabama. Ipso facto the Huskers are SEC Champions

 

[Mavric]

Perhaps how I'd put it is Nebraska was easily a more dominant. It would be up for debate about which one was tougher to accomplish but I might give the edge to Alabama.

 

[California Husker]

Bucky, you can be funny sometimes. Did you actually state that "no conference partner of Nebraska won a national championship from 1992 to 1997"?

I wonder if that has anything at all to do with Nebraska playing for it 4 of those 6 years and winning it thrice. I'm a little fuzzy on 92 and 96, but I'm guessing our conference partners struggled with Nebraska those years as well. If your point is, Nebraska was so dominate their conference partners didn't have the opportunity, then I get it. But it seemed like you were trying to prop up Bama because they couldn't even dominate their own conference. Seems like a silly point to try to make.

I dont even know why 1992 is in the converstaion. it's abotu 93-97 and Bama's '09-'13. Equal 5 year spans.

I included `92 Nebraska because I was including `08 Bama. The reason I included `08 Bama was because it was the start of their current run.

 

[nebraskaart]

Nebraska From 1992-1997

69-6 (should have been 70-5, got screwed in `93)

3 undefeated seasons (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

3 national titles (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

Alabama from 2008-2013

72-9

1 undefeated seasons

3 national titles

the best run(s) by either team..

NU 23-0 `94 & 95

NU 49-2 `94-`97

NU 60-3 `93-`97 (should have been 61-2, got screwed in `93)

Bama is a great team....but not even close to the dominance we saw in the `90s from Nebraska.

how did we get screwed in 93?

 

[BigRedBuster]

Nebraska From 1992-1997

69-6 (should have been 70-5, got screwed in `93)

3 undefeated seasons (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

3 national titles (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

Alabama from 2008-2013

72-9

1 undefeated seasons

3 national titles

the best run(s) by either team..

NU 23-0 `94 & 95

NU 49-2 `94-`97

NU 60-3 `93-`97 (should have been 61-2, got screwed in `93)

Bama is a great team....but not even close to the dominance we saw in the `90s from Nebraska.

how did we get screwed in 93?

OMG...the FSU game?

 

[2ndNnine]

total hose job

 

[NUpolo8]

You know what would be a fun discussion?

One comparing a current Nebraska title run to the 90's.

Until then, #9wins.

 

[Mavric]

Well, in 1990 we got blown out by the only ranked team we played, got run off the field by an unranked Oklahoma team the got throttled in the bowl game..

In 1991, we go blown out in week 3, eeked out a win over the #24 team in the country, got a close win and a tie against the other two ranked teams we played, even though we were ranked higher and got blown out in our bowl game.

In 1992, we got embarrassed on national TV in week 3, the got a couple really good wins before the coaches didn't have us ready to play a lowly Iowa St. team and we lost. Got blown out in the bowl game.

That's what you were talking about, right?

 

[Foppa]

Nebraska From 1992-1997

69-6 (should have been 70-5, got screwed in `93)

3 undefeated seasons (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

3 national titles (should have been 4, got screwed in `93)

Alabama from 2008-2013

72-9

1 undefeated seasons

3 national titles

the best run(s) by either team..

NU 23-0 `94 & 95

NU 49-2 `94-`97

NU 60-3 `93-`97 (should have been 61-2, got screwed in `93)

Bama is a great team....but not even close to the dominance we saw in the `90s from Nebraska.

83 replies supporting this and no one gave a +1? I've seen +1's given basically because someone did a facebook-like post saying 'Well...I went to the toilet, and it was good, go Huskers!' So I'm definitely hitting you up California Husker.

 

[TheSker]

Well, in 1990 we got blown out by the only ranked team we played, got run off the field by an unranked Oklahoma team the got throttled in the bowl game..

In 1991, we go blown out in week 3, eeked out a win over the #24 team in the country, got a close win and a tie against the other two ranked teams we played, even though we were ranked higher and got blown out in our bowl game.

In 1992, we got embarrassed on national TV in week 3, the got a couple really good wins before the coaches didn't have us ready to play a lowly Iowa St. team and we lost. Got blown out in the bowl game.

That's what you were talking about, right?

Blasphemy.......

 

[JJ Husker]

Well, in 1990 we got blown out by the only ranked team we played, got run off the field by an unranked Oklahoma team the got throttled in the bowl game..In 1991, we go blown out in week 3, eeked out a win over the #24 team in the country, got a close win and a tie against the other two ranked teams we played, even though we were ranked higher and got blown out in our bowl game.

In 1992, we got embarrassed on national TV in week 3, the got a couple really good wins before the coaches didn't have us ready to play a lowly Iowa St. team and we lost. Got blown out in the bowl game.

That's what you were talking about, right?

If the current team could bring the losing up to that level for three years running, we might be in position for another run. /jk

 

[Count 'Bility]

Well, in 1990 we got blown out by the only ranked team we played, got run off the field by an unranked Oklahoma team the got throttled in the bowl game..

In 1991, we go blown out in week 3, eeked out a win over the #24 team in the country, got a close win and a tie against the other two ranked teams we played, even though we were ranked higher and got blown out in our bowl game.

In 1992, we got embarrassed on national TV in week 3, the got a couple really good wins before the coaches didn't have us ready to play a lowly Iowa St. team and we lost. Got blown out in the bowl game.

That's what you were talking about, right?

Those Washington games were not blow outs or national tv embarrassments. We lead 21-9 at one point in '91, and in '92, we stuck with them outside of a few plays. Not nailbiters, but not exactly the run-aways we've come accustomed to. Now, the 2 losses in late in 1990, yes, them were blowouts. I remeber Ga Tech letting off the gas in the second half or they mighta dropped 70 on us. God forbid.

 

[Mavric]

Well, in 1990 we got blown out by the only ranked team we played, got run off the field by an unranked Oklahoma team the got throttled in the bowl game..

In 1991, we go blown out in week 3, eeked out a win over the #24 team in the country, got a close win and a tie against the other two ranked teams we played, even though we were ranked higher and got blown out in our bowl game.

In 1992, we got embarrassed on national TV in week 3, the got a couple really good wins before the coaches didn't have us ready to play a lowly Iowa St. team and we lost. Got blown out in the bowl game.

That's what you were talking about, right?

Those Washington games were not blow outs or national tv embarrassments. We lead 21-9 at one point in '91, and in '92, we stuck with them outside of a few plays. Not nailbiters, but not exactly the run-aways we've come accustomed to. Now, the 2 losses in late in 1990, yes, them were blowouts. I remeber Ga Tech letting off the gas in the second half or they mighta dropped 70 on us. God forbid.

I was using the current definition of "blowout" - you look at the final score and don't care how it got there.

Also, you need to look back at who I was replying to to get the context for my descriptions.

 

[Count 'Bility]

Well, in 1990 we got blown out by the only ranked team we played, got run off the field by an unranked Oklahoma team the got throttled in the bowl game..

In 1991, we go blown out in week 3, eeked out a win over the #24 team in the country, got a close win and a tie against the other two ranked teams we played, even though we were ranked higher and got blown out in our bowl game.

In 1992, we got embarrassed on national TV in week 3, the got a couple really good wins before the coaches didn't have us ready to play a lowly Iowa St. team and we lost. Got blown out in the bowl game.

That's what you were talking about, right?

Those Washington games were not blow outs or national tv embarrassments. We lead 21-9 at one point in '91, and in '92, we stuck with them outside of a few plays. Not nailbiters, but not exactly the run-aways we've come accustomed to. Now, the 2 losses in late in 1990, yes, them were blowouts. I remeber Ga Tech letting off the gas in the second half or they mighta dropped 70 on us. God forbid.

I was using the current definition of "blowout" - you look at the final score and don't care how it got there.

Also, you need to look back at who I was replying to to get the context for my descriptions.

Gottcha.

In the same context that we call the Michigan St and Iowa games this year blowouts, eh? You know, games that were still very much in question well into the 4th quarters? I understand.