NU & KSU in SI's bottom 10

[Blackshirt]

Ok, I have no problem with us being in these "bottom 10" polls for underachieving -if anything it's a sign of respect. But I DO have a big problem with these ignorant comments that come along with them - i.e. ..which is actually nice to see after years of the Huskers mercilessly running up the score". What a bunch of garbage. Are people outside of the midwest really that ignorant to the difference b/t a Steve Spurrier 70 pt game & a Tom Osborne 70 pt game? I guess its the whole concept of guilty by association - the jacka$$ Spurrier always got all the pub for his "fun n gun" and how ruthless he was about piling it on, so people must assume that all coaches have the same mentality.

Nebraska (4-2): Ex-NFL boss Bill Callahan trucked the West Coast offense to the Heartland, but no one in Big Red Country can explain the 70-10 thrashing by Texas Tech (which is actually nice to see after years of the Huskers mercilessly running up the score). Would Southern Miss have strolled out of Lincoln with a W if Tom Osborne were still in charge? Or even Frank Solich? None of Nebraska's wins have come against a ranked opponent, and it has a tough road ahead with Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas State and Colorado still to play.

SI bottom 10

 

[DaveH]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's fashionable to take a shot at the Huskers.

 

[AR Husker Fan]

I think a lot of this has resulted from Nebraska having routinely scheduled rather weak non-conference foes, more than what they have done to conference foes. They have seen NU schedule oppoents in which huge, lop-sided scores were sure to result.

The funny thing is, of course, that a lot of the elite teams do the same thing.

 

[gamecocks]

I think a lot of this has resulted from Nebraska having routinely scheduled rather weak non-conference foes, more than what they have done to conference foes. They have seen NU schedule oppoents in which huge, lop-sided scores were sure to result.
The funny thing is, of course, that a lot of the elite teams do the same thing.

I wouldn't say that we are known for scheduling weak nonconference teams. Would you call Penn State, Notre Dame, Michigan State, Arizona State, and we have USC coming up. I wouldn't call those teams a push over. Now K-State plays a weak schedule.

 

[Benard]

I think a lot of this has resulted from Nebraska having routinely scheduled rather weak non-conference foes, more than what they have done to conference foes. They have seen NU schedule oppoents in which huge, lop-sided scores were sure to result.
The funny thing is, of course, that a lot of the elite teams do the same thing.

That's not true. We scheduled some tough teams but we did have to get some cupcakes because we couldn't get anyone decent to come play at nebraska because they were to scared.

 

[JHHusker]

Benard-

That's a bunch of poop that the AD put out.

You can't tell me kids wouldn't want to play a top 5 team, because they were SCARED?!?!?!?

Horse manure. So should NU not schedule USC if asked?

 

[Benard]

Benard-
That's a bunch of poop that the AD put out.

You can't tell me kids wouldn't want to play a top 5 team, because they were SCARED?!?!?!?

Horse manure. So should NU not schedule USC if asked?

I didn't say the kids were scared. I said the team was scared. A team in the south like the florida's didn't want to come to lincoln and freeze their butt in the cold and get whooped. We have a very tough time getting any good teams to come here because they knew it was very tough to win in memorial stadium and that we were a very punishing team. However, the little teams would take the offer because of the money.

 

[gamecocks]

Most schedules are not decided because they are scared of a team. It has a lot to do with money that the program can bring in. Nebraska does not want to schedule a home and home series with some one from the SEC because it is not profitable in the year that we would have to travel because our goal is to get seven home games a year and that would mean that the Big 12 schedule would have to fall right for us to have five home games and then we would have to get two other teams to agree to travel to Lincoln to play here. There are a lot of factors that go into making a schedule and I don't believe that being scared of a team is one of them.

 

[JHHusker]

I think a lot of this has resulted from Nebraska having routinely scheduled rather weak non-conference foes, more than what they have done to conference foes.  They have seen NU schedule oppoents in which huge, lop-sided scores were sure to result.
The funny thing is, of course, that a lot of the elite teams do the same thing.

That's not true. We scheduled some tough teams but we did have to get some cupcakes because we couldn't get anyone decent to come play at nebraska because they were to scared.

Last time I checked a team consisted of player typically 18-23 years old (those are kids in my eyes).

It came down to money, and sometimes teams wouldn't be willing to put hte home and home series. Basically the come here and play, but we aren't going there to play. Now a days home and home are pretty mcuh the only way games are scheduled (yes there are exceptions).

However, at no time did a team not schedule another team because they were "scared." I'd really like to know why a team wouldn't want to play a consistantly rated top 5 team? It's a Nebraska football myth, always has been.