What constitutes satisfaction?

[Hedley Lamarr]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

So the contract for the new coach reads finish outside the top 10 and you're history, right?

Finish outside the top 10 for over a half a decade straight then yes

I can hear the candidates beating on the door now.

You don't think that the right HC wouldn't be able to make us a top 10 team and win the B1G within 5 years for 4 mil a year?

 

[TheSker]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

So the contract for the new coach reads finish outside the top 10 and you're history, right?

Finish outside the top 10 for over a half a decade straight then yes

I can hear the candidates beating on the door now.

You don't think that the right HC wouldn't be able to make us a top 10 team and win the B1G within 5 years for 4 mil a year?

The new coach doesn't need or get 5 years to try. $4 mil is a pay cut for some coaches in college football nowadays.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

So the contract for the new coach reads finish outside the top 10 and you're history, right?

Finish outside the top 10 for over a half a decade straight then yes

I can hear the candidates beating on the door now.

You don't think that the right HC wouldn't be able to make us a top 10 team and win the B1G within 5 years for 4 mil a year?

The new coach doesn't need or get 5 years to try. $4 mil is a pay cut for some coaches in college football nowadays.

And a massive promotion for most.

 

[JJ Husker]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

So the contract for the new coach reads finish outside the top 10 and you're history, right?

Finish outside the top 10 for over a half a decade straight then yes

I can hear the candidates beating on the door now.

A top ten finish in a five year span is considered unreasonable? Wow! Expectations and standards really have fallen. Please tell me you have absolutely nothing to do with finding or retaining coaches for the Huskers.

I am so sick of this accepting and defeatist attitude. Boo hoo, nobody will come coach here. Waaa, it's just too tough and these fans are unreasonable, expecting wins and stuff.

 

[Count 'Bility]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

Both seasons only had 12 games, and a schedule like we have now.

And by the way, the year in the seventies you need to look at is 1977. That's the year that we went to the Liberty Bowl after OU smoked us. Osborne was given an ultimatum. Win the bowl or youre out. The next year he finally beat OU. And quit comparing rankings. Top 10 in the 1970's didnt carry half the weight as it does today.

In 1990, we lost to both the split national champions. And a mediocre OU whooped our a$$. Lost the last two games a combined 90-34 (TO never got blown out *rolls eyes*). Colorado scored 27 unanswered 4th quarter points to win 27-12, so that might as well have been a blowout. Finished the season ranked 17 and 24. 9-3.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

Both seasons only had 12 games, and a schedule like we have now.
And by the way, the year in the seventies you need to look at is 1977. That's the year that we went to the Liberty Bowl after OU smoked us. Osborne was given an ultimatum. Win the bowl or youre out. The next year he finally beat OU. And quit comparing rankings. Top 10 in the 1970's didnt carry half the weight as it does today.

In 1990, we lost to both the split national champions. And a mediocre OU whooped our a$$. Lost the last two games a combined 90-34 (TO never got blown out *rolls eyes*). Colorado scored 27 unanswered 4th quarter points to win 27-12, so that might as well have been a blowout. Finished the season ranked 17 and 24. 9-3.

So is asking to finished ranked in the top 10 every half a decade too much?

 

[TheSker]

Boo hoo, nobody will come coach here. Waaa, it's just too tough and these fans are unreasonable, expecting wins and stuff.

We are winning. And I'm not sure how to respond to "Boo hoo" and "Waaa".

 

[Count 'Bility]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

Both seasons only had 12 games, and a schedule like we have now.
And by the way, the year in the seventies you need to look at is 1977. That's the year that we went to the Liberty Bowl after OU smoked us. Osborne was given an ultimatum. Win the bowl or youre out. The next year he finally beat OU. And quit comparing rankings. Top 10 in the 1970's didnt carry half the weight as it does today.

In 1990, we lost to both the split national champions. And a mediocre OU whooped our a$$. Lost the last two games a combined 90-34 (TO never got blown out *rolls eyes*). Colorado scored 27 unanswered 4th quarter points to win 27-12, so that might as well have been a blowout. Finished the season ranked 17 and 24. 9-3.

So is asking to finished ranked in the top 10 every half a decade too much?

No it isnt

In all fact of matter, i'm sure you and I both are getting a little tired of the comparisons of then to now. It was a different era of football. Those two seasons then that we're talking about resulted in 9-3 finishes. 9-3 today *MIGHT* get you a top 20 finish today. Back then it was possible to be top ten. Why? There was only your select few perennial powers. Now it's everyone having a chance to be good. You didnt have Kansas St and Baylor and Ok St and Miss St and Ole Miss and TCU and etc etc etc vying for a spot in the top ten. I just wanted to point out some the facts of that time compared to now.

 

[JJ Husker]

We are winning. And I'm not sure how to respond to "Boo hoo" and "Waaa".

You could always go to the well and recycle one of these gems-

So the contract for the new coach reads finish outside the top 10 and you're history, right?

I can hear the candidates beating on the door now.

Keep telling yourself that......there's a reason coaches like N Saban or U Meyer have very specific schools they will coach. Notice Saban's off season flirting was with Texas, not Nebraska or Alaska.

......but apparently since we haven't been able to do that in the last 15 years and 3 head coaches (plus Tom Osborne as athletic director for nearly half that) it must not be quite as easy to do as it might seem.

If it's not easy Nebraska can't do it?

If it's that hard, how do other teams do it?

We will never progress beyond 4 loss seasons and that's ok? Or, do you see some evidence, any evidence, that Bo and this staff are making progress towards something better? Or, is Nebraska's potential maxed out?

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

I will answer for you 79 top 10, 90 24. Neither season had 4 losses. We finished ranked outside the top 10 7 times in 25 years with TO. We have finished ranked outside the top 10 every year with Bo. Seems like we let our expectations slip a bit

Both seasons only had 12 games, and a schedule like we have now.
And by the way, the year in the seventies you need to look at is 1977. That's the year that we went to the Liberty Bowl after OU smoked us. Osborne was given an ultimatum. Win the bowl or youre out. The next year he finally beat OU. And quit comparing rankings. Top 10 in the 1970's didnt carry half the weight as it does today.

In 1990, we lost to both the split national champions. And a mediocre OU whooped our a$$. Lost the last two games a combined 90-34 (TO never got blown out *rolls eyes*). Colorado scored 27 unanswered 4th quarter points to win 27-12, so that might as well have been a blowout. Finished the season ranked 17 and 24. 9-3.

So is asking to finished ranked in the top 10 every half a decade too much?

No it isnt
In all fact of matter, i'm sure you and I both are getting a little tired of the comparisons of then to now. It was a different era of football. Those two seasons then that we're talking about resulted in 9-3 finishes. 9-3 today *MIGHT* get you a top 20 finish today. Back then it was possible to be top ten. Why? There was only your select few perennial powers. Now it's everyone having a chance to be good. You didnt have Kansas St and Baylor and Ok St and Miss St and Ole Miss and TCU and etc etc etc vying for a spot in the top ten. I just wanted to point out some the facts of that time compared to now.

Oh I am right with you. Which is why this 9 win crap is ridiculous. Top 10 finishes and hardware are what is important to me. I know we can't win it all every year. Heck I'm not even asking to win it at this point. I want progression. I want a top 10 finish and a conference championship during Bo's 7 years. That isn't even setting the bar high. That is something that should be a given at NU.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

The college football community understands that Nebraska has legacy, talent, top-flight facilities and a willingness to spend $3 million on a head coach. A rabid fanbase who expects better is a liability if you don't deliver, but they treat you like a god if do. Everyone reminds us how hard it is to consistently win 9 games, but I don't hear them saying Nebraska should be satisfied with our place in the pecking order.

Nebraska's head coach is a high-profile job with amenities and a challenge. There will always be applicants.

 

[TheSker]

We will never progress beyond 4 loss seasons and that's ok? Or, do you see some evidence, any evidence, that Bo and this staff are making progress towards something better? Or, is Nebraska's potential maxed out?

Let me be absolutely clear.....you will not find any quote from me using "Boo hoo" or "Waa". And "evidence" of progress has been discussed ad nauseum. I am ready for a conference championship also......and a shot at more. I also realize Pelini has been in the championship game of two different conferences........and one of those games was a "blowout".....the others were not. As far as whether it's "ok"......two of Pelini's bosses (one being Tom Osborne himself) are in charge of helping determine that. I personally want Pelini to succeed at Nebraska and don't plan to spend every post running Nebraska and Pelini in the ground. I'll leave that to others......

 

[LJsurf41]

I love football but pure satisfaction for me is this:

 

[Glendower]

Nebraska is seeking to break a conference championship drought that stretches back to the 1990s. And most of us believe that a win in the championship game would be enough to keep us happy for a while.

Would it? Or would we just raise the bar?

Wouldn’t there be some people who would express disappointment if we got beat soundly in the next game? Wouldn’t the same questions be asked then about the coach and the direction of the program?

Did we totally miss something by dismissing the win streak that we went on in 2012 that set us up to play for the title? And all because of one fluky 60 minute stretch.

Consider what’s going on in Mississippi right now. Mississippi State hasn’t won a conference title since 1941. And Ole Miss is not far behind with a drought that stretches back to 1963. Only two teams have a longer drought.... Vanderbilt, 1923; and Iowa State, 1912.

Should those two teams be disappointed if they don’t end the drought this year? Or should they be satisfied that they were, at long last, competitive?

In a world where one-loss and multiple national title winning coach Nick Saban is expressing frustration that the fans aren’t happy because his Crimson Tide isn’t winning by enough, one has to ask the question.

Will we ever be truly satisfied?

I'm not sure what you mean about being satisfied if we win the conference championship. Like, I wouldn't have any expectations next year? That we could just fold up shop because there was a conference championship? Or if next year has 7 or 8 wins I wouldn't be upset because there was a conference championship the year before? The concept of satisfied suggests finality; I think most people want progress. Of course, if you're at the absolute top, there is literally no where to go but down, so that's a special circumstance.