Sorry guys

it takes a lot to get those "simple" 13 points.

you make it sound so easy when you reduce it down to one number like that, but this team didn't quite have everything in place to get there. we're getting closer and closer every year, but its much more complicated than "13 points"

and we do have a good offense. im getting tired of people constantly ragging on them. the improvement we made from last year is almost unbelievable. sure, we've had some bad games. im not going to argue with that. but we may have 3 1000 yard rushers this year, and thats incredible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ifs go both ways...

What if ISU has made the conversion

What if Helu wasn't healthy against Mizzou

What if Martinez wasn't healthy against OSU

It's not all that interesting to dwell on things that could have been, but with the health issues we've had with offensive playmakers all year we're lucky to be where we are.

 
Just think how embarrassing it would be to get beaten by some Ducks from the Pac-Ten.

That would be worse than the 2000? team getting blown out so bad by a "mediocre" Miami team in the Rose Bowl (that was so filled with future NFLers), that many considered that team the best of all time.

I'm not going to wish MNC "appearances" until we start having teams that deserve to be there and with "Dominating" O-Lines.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hercules said:
Nebraska's strength of schedule is considered far worse than Oregon's. They would have had a win over top 5 Stanford, we wouldn't have had a "quality" win. I don't think Oregon's schedule was actually tougher, but that's what the computers and voters think. We wouldn't have leapfrogged Oregon or Auburn.
Click to expand...
The computers have become far more realistic now that the regular season is over. Oregon's SOS ended up at #19, while ours was #28. We blew out two teams ranked ahead of us and barely lost (six combined points) to two teams ranked ahead of us. Oregon beat one team ranked in the top ten and played no others until you get to #22 USC.

Agree with the folks all saying that what's most disappointing is that we should have beaten the teams we lost to. As well as Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma played, we beat ourselves in those games, and we know it.

Would we beat Oregon? Hard to say. But if we were healthy and had our heads screwed on straight, we'd give them a hell of a game.

 
Hercules said:
Nebraska's strength of schedule is considered far worse than Oregon's. They would have had a win over top 5 Stanford, we wouldn't have had a "quality" win. I don't think Oregon's schedule was actually tougher, but that's what the computers and voters think. We wouldn't have leapfrogged Oregon or Auburn.

I think Nebraska took a huge step forward in 2008, and a huge step forward in 2009, and I think we took a small step forward in 2010. We're on the right track. To get into the title hunt, the team really just needs to learn to be consistent on offense, and we need to get lucky (notice: Darren Thomas, LaMichael James, Cam Newton all stayed healthy this year).
Click to expand...
I actually think we took a small step backwards this year. Last year, our worst loss was to Iowa State. Iowa State in 2009 was 7-6, bowl eligible, and finished fourth in the North. This year, our worst loss was to Texas. Texas in 2010 was 5-7, not bowl eligible, and finished dead last in the South.

On a side note, I bet OU would like to play this game as well for 2009. In 2009, OU lost five games. Four of those losses were by a combined 12 points.

 
mmmtodd said:
jake locker seems like a fine young man, and your starting QB types are not particularly scared of a challenge....

but in the back of his mind, he got to be thinking WTH, bro, WTH.
Click to expand...
exactly, but at the same time a player like that should be drooling at the chance of redemption and a higher draft spot. IMO he has everything to lose again with a poor showing against NU twice! Could be dangerous...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top