When 9 wins a year isn't the whole story.

[Saunders]

Can I say "Quincy Enunwa dropped too many passes this season. At times I wondered why he was on the field, because his hands were too unreliable"? He might take offense to that, but I hate to break it to him, it's true.

Sure you can post it, just don't get mad if people tell you to STFU because you don't know what you're talking about, and question your knowledge and motives.

Question my knowledge? Cool, whatever. I really don't care. Question my motives? That makes no sense. But question away.

Sure it does. Question whether the person is trolling, or just stupid.

That seems like you are questioning my knowledge again. Or maybe I'm just stupid.

lol, they're tied together, i.e is he doing it just to be a d!(k?

 

[sd'sker]

Is it about the wins and losses or lack of conference championships/big name bowl games?

Lets say he is 10-2, misses the conference championship game and loses in the Fiesta Bowl. Finishes 10-3. Are we happier than if he goes 8-4, misses the conference championship game but wins the Capital One Bowl and finishes 9-4?

What if we go 12-1, and dont even play in the conference championship game? Cuz that is every bit as possible as well.

both would be good. the problem is the inconsistency in play and just poor execution. wins and losses are manifestations of that. if we went 9-4, but looked great in every game and just lost to superior teams, i think most people could handle that. but because of our schedule, losing 4 games means we are not playing good football consistently. and even some of our wins are concerning.

 

[Junior]

lol, they're tied together, i.e is he doing it just to be a d!(k?

So it has to be one or the other? Because I don't think I'm either. Or maybe I'm both... Ask my wife. She's sure to have an opinion on this topic.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

How many posters here are Division 1A athletes?

This is the internet . . . so I was. Hell of an athlete, really.

I came from a naturally strong family.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

It seems to me that, so far in Pelini's time here, the record doesn't matter. Every year we've had 9 or 10 wins and every year we've had 4 losses. So what we have to evaluate on is how we've looked in those wins and losses. I think that's what the Boleavers or whatever stupid term you want to use are saying, and it's a valid thing to use.

If we go 9-4, our losses being close, competitive games sprinkled with an upset and just sound play, no one here who is reasonable will complain. If we do any better than that with the same quality of play, you won't find anybody arguing.

But for now, the record doesn't matter; how we've looked in attaining that record is more important.

 

[knapplc]

That's what I was going to aim at when I started the four-loss thread, Bye. You expressed it better.

 

[skersfan]

I have felt that way the last few years. More important in how we play, the level of perfection we play at than the wins and losses. But I did see things this year, that indicate Bo is learning, and possibly how to make the improvements on his side to accomplish what we all want. Not sure it will happen, but I am willing to give it this year to see improvement in the team, not so much the wins and losses.

 

[JJ Husker]

both would be good. the problem is the inconsistency in play and just poor execution. wins and losses are manifestations of that. if we went 9-4, but looked great in every game and just lost to superior teams, i think most people could handle that. but because of our schedule, losing 4 games means we are not playing good football consistently. and even some of our wins are concerning.

It seems to me that, so far in Pelini's time here, the record doesn't matter. Every year we've had 9 or 10 wins and every year we've had 4 losses. So what we have to evaluate on is how we've looked in those wins and losses. I think that's what the Boleavers or whatever stupid term you want to use are saying, and it's a valid thing to use.

If we go 9-4, our losses being close, competitive games sprinkled with an upset and just sound play, no one here who is reasonable will complain. If we do any better than that with the same quality of play, you won't find anybody arguing.

But for now, the record doesn't matter; how we've looked in attaining that record is more important.

These guys get it. +1 to both of you.

Nine wins doesn't mean anything if they are sloppily played games against inferior opponents.

Four losses don't mean anything if they are well played affairs against good/better teams.

So, by logical reasoning, wins and losses aren't all that important. They become important only because they are one of the leading indicators of how well we are playing/performing/executing.

I think most of the angst over these 9 or 4 numbers is because we aren't playing complete games, are inconsistent, and it seems whenever one unit gets headed in the right direction another starts going in the wrong direction. Imo, it's pretty fair and reasonable to hold the HC accountable for these things.

 

[knapplc]

I think people mostly pay attention to the nine wins because it was once a major streak in the lore of Husker football.

Put it this way. S hits the fan, the team goes in the tank and we lose the sellout streak. A few years go by, we start selling the place out again on a regular basis, people will mention it, it will be noticed, and it'll be nice.

But that's all it'll be.

It won't erase the times we didn't sell out the stadium, and it won't resurrect the "good old days." But to ignore it would just seem weird.