Holy $#@& Phil Steele

[NUinID]

Well...you made the comment about those crappy teams so I was just showing that they are crappy.

We knew coming into the Big Ten that OSU and Michigan were good.  PSU is good.  MSU is average but had a nice little 3-4 year run (When Michigan sucked and when PSU was falling apart)...NW?  Come on.  Iowa?  Average.  

When we joined the Big Ten NO ONE was like "OMG...we have to play NW and Iowa this year!  UGggg, what are we going to do!"

Shoot we even joked about Wisconsin.  

It isn't that those teams are good...it is more those teams are all averagely the same...so they beat up each other and end up with those amazingly average records. 8 win teams?  Okay, who cares about that.  We make fun of 8 wins.

I guess if you think winning 8 games a year is average than we have a different definition of average.  I am talking about games being gimmies.  There are very few gimmies in the B1G right now and really hasn't been a lot of gimmies since we joined the B1G.  Even if Nebraska is an elite team games against Wisconsin, NW, MSU, PSU, Iowa aren't gimmies.  Do you think Urban Meyer thought those were cake walk games?  

 

[Huskers93-97]

Is someone actually making this argument?

I think that is a fairly common sentiment among big 10 homers. I remember that exact narrative all those years of Nebraska being good. "Oh you guys just dont play anybody, here in the big 10 our conference is so tough we just beat eachother up and thats why we dont win the big one" 

Have you really never heard that sentiment? 

I think the SEC has faired just fine "beating eachother up"

 

[teachercd]

I guess if you think winning 8 games a year is average than we have a different definition of average.  I am talking about games being gimmies.  There are very few gimmies in the B1G right now and really hasn't been a lot of gimmies since we joined the B1G.  Even if Nebraska is an elite team games against Wisconsin, NW, MSU, PSU, Iowa aren't gimmies.  Do you think Urban Meyer thought those were cake walk games?  

Yes...I do think that and that is why he lost like 4 conference games in 7 years.  

I know a lot of fans love to buy into coach speak...but with 100% certainty I can tell you that Meyer thought almost every conference game was going to be a cakewalk.  And he pretty much proved it with his coaching and talent.

I would also imagine that pretty much every NU fan would consider 8 wins average, at best.   

 

[Huskers93-97]

I guess if you think winning 8 games a year is average than we have a different definition of average.  I am talking about games being gimmies.  There are very few gimmies in the B1G right now and really hasn't been a lot of gimmies since we joined the B1G.  Even if Nebraska is an elite team games against Wisconsin, NW, MSU, PSU, Iowa aren't gimmies.  Do you think Urban Meyer thought those were cake walk games?  

In 7 years as the head coach of Ohio State. Urban Meyer went 54-4 in the big ten conference. So yeah I dont think he was too much worried about anyone. 4 conference losses in 7 years. That's actually pretty sad. Only 1 national title in that span too. So its not like they were Alabama.

 

[NUinID]

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap. We started struggling in 2002 after the Osborne recruits were gone and have been struggling to find our way back. Its not because the Big 10 is a better conference thus we have been put in our place and would have never won as many games the last 50 years if we were in the Big 10 instead of the Big 12. We have been struggling the last 15 years and it is all on US, not what anyone has done to us. It doesnt matter if we are in the pac12, big10 or big 12 we have not played good football since 2001. 

Just a quick comparison. 

Since 1990 the big 12 teams have won 6 national titles and the big 10 has won 3. 

That same ratio exists if you go even further back to 1970. 

Since 1970 the big 12 teams have won 11 national titles and the big 10 has won 5. 

Point being, we won at an amazing rate because we were just that good. Not because we were in a weak conference. Based on the lack of elite competition, the elite teams like ohio state should have competed for more national championships over that same span.

What you say makes a lot more sense than the teacher.  Nobody said the conference is tough as crap.  I didn't say that.  I said their is a lot of good teams.  The BIG is a better conference than it was in 1997 so is the Big12.  Teams are better, their is too much money out their for teams to not try and be better.  

I think that is a fairly common sentiment among big 10 homers. I remember that exact narrative all those years of Nebraska being good. "Oh you guys just dont play anybody, here in the big 10 our conference is so tough we just beat eachother up and thats why we dont win the big one" 

Have you really never heard that sentiment? 

I think the SEC has faired just fine "beating eachother up"

I am not a B1G homer.  Yes, I do get that some B1G fans think that.  I am not worried about what some fan in Wisconsin is saying.  I know a decent football team when I see it. 

 

[BigRedBuster]

I think part of point he is making is the same that I was making and believe to be true. People who think Nebraska has struggled in the Big 10 because the Big 10 is just so tough is crap. We started struggling in 2002 after the Osborne recruits were gone and have been struggling to find our way back. Its not because the Big 10 is a better conference thus we have been put in our place and would have never won as many games the last 50 years if we were in the Big 10 instead of the Big 12. We have been struggling the last 15 years and it is all on US, not what anyone has done to us. It doesnt matter if we are in the pac12, big10 or big 12 we have not played good football since 2001. 

Just a quick comparison. 

Since 1990 the big 12 teams have won 6 national titles and the big 10 has won 3. 

That same ratio exists if you go even further back to 1970. 

Since 1970 the big 12 teams have won 11 national titles and the big 10 has won 5. 

Point being, we won at an amazing rate because we were just that good. Not because we were in a weak conference. Based on the lack of elite competition, the elite teams like ohio state should have competed for more national championships over that same span.

I'm not really sure if that is a good indication of if a conference is better top to bottom or not.  If the same few teams are winning the championships, it's no indication about if the teams below them are better or not than the other conference.

For instance, Since 1990, Big 12 teams have won 6 championships.  Those 6 championships were won by 4 teams.  In that time frame, The Big 10 has won 3 championships.  Those 3 were won by 2 teams. Now, of the 4 from the Big 12, one of those was Colorado in 1990.  We all know that Colorado simply had a relatively short time as a good team and put it together in one season.  Since then, they have not been an elite team.

Interestingly, since we are talking about how good the Big 10 is now, you could say that actually right now, the Big 10 has 3 teams that have won 6 NCs since 1990.  The Big 12 only has 2 teams that have won 2.  

 

[Huskers93-97]

What you say makes a lot more sense than the teacher.  Nobody said the conference is tough as crap.  I didn't say that.  I said their is a lot of good teams.  The BIG is a better conference than it was in 1997 so is the Big12.  Teams are better, their is too much money out their for teams to not try and be better.  

I am not a B1G homer.  Yes, I do get that some B1G fans think that.  I am not worried about what some fan in Wisconsin is saying.  I know a decent football team when I see it. 

Fair enough. I just personally hate that we have been on our lowest point since like the 50's. Then some Big 10 folks feel validated that we have come in and struggled when in reality we were already struggling.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I think that is a fairly common sentiment among big 10 homers. I remember that exact narrative all those years of Nebraska being good. "Oh you guys just dont play anybody, here in the big 10 our conference is so tough we just beat eachother up and thats why we dont win the big one" 

Have you really never heard that sentiment? 

I think the SEC has faired just fine "beating eachother up"

I'm specifically asking about people claiming the reason Nebraska hasn't won anything recently is because the Big 10 is so good....instead of us being not nearly as good as we used to be.  

I honestly don't know of one Husker fan that thinks we are just as good as we used to be......but the conference is just so gang tough.  

 

[NUinID]

Yes...I do think that and that is why he lost like 4 conference games in 7 years.  

I know a lot of fans love to buy into coach speak...but with 100% certainty I can tell you that Meyer thought almost every conference game was going to be a cakewalk.  And he pretty much proved it with his coaching and talent.

I would also imagine that pretty much every NU fan would consider 8 wins average, at best.   

Right now I would be very happy with winning 8 games next year. 

I don't Urban Meyer took teams lightly, that is why he only lost 4 games in that span.  TO didn't take teams lightly.  Bo Pelini took teams lightly that is why he lost games he shouldn't have.  

 

[teachercd]

Right now I would be very happy with winning 8 games next year. 

I don't Urban Meyer took teams lightly, that is why he only lost 4 games in that span.  TO didn't take teams lightly.  Bo Pelini took teams lightly that is why he lost games he shouldn't have.  

Well...then I hope that you are jizzing in your pants  at the end of the season and not just "very happy" because none of the rest of us are going to be very happy with 8 wins.

 

[Huskers93-97]

Right now I would be very happy with winning 8 games next year. 

I don't Urban Meyer took teams lightly, that is why he only lost 4 games in that span.  TO didn't take teams lightly.  Bo Pelini took teams lightly that is why he lost games he shouldn't have.  

I do actually think Meyer took teams lightly. Just based on recruiting rankings there was no one in the big 10 that should have even competed with Ohio State. 

Plus if memory serves me right- Meyer has a history of over looking teams. Or maybe not getting his team up for the challenge week in and week out. As great as he is and as great as his teams talent have been he has never had an undefeated national championship. 

 

[NUinID]

Well...then I hope that you are jizzing in your pants  at the end of the season and not just "very happy" because none of the rest of us are going to be very happy with 8 wins.

Nice, where did that come from? 

So I am the only Nebraska fan that thinks we have to learn to crawl first.  Doubling our win total this year will be a complete disappointment to everyone but me.  OK  

 

[Toe]

 

[Apsu]

Hello all...
Two years ago we were a very fitting 4-8.
Last year we were probably the best 4-8 team in the history of the game.
Given this year's schedule, 10-2 is not that much of a stretch.

 

[Huskers93-97]

I'm not really sure if that is a good indication of if a conference is better top to bottom or not.  If the same few teams are winning the championships, it's no indication about if the teams below them are better or not than the other conference.

For instance, Since 1990, Big 12 teams have won 6 championships.  Those 6 championships were won by 4 teams.  In that time frame, The Big 10 has won 3 championships.  Those 3 were won by 2 teams. Now, of the 4 from the Big 12, one of those was Colorado in 1990.  We all know that Colorado simply had a relatively short time as a good team and put it together in one season.  Since then, they have not been an elite team.

Interestingly, since we are talking about how good the Big 10 is now, you could say that actually right now, the Big 10 has 3 teams that have won 6 NCs since 1990.  The Big 12 only has 2 teams that have won 3.  

If you look at the old big 8/12 structure vs Big 10. Focus on the big 3 of each conference to start.

Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas wins hand down in my opinion over Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State

Colorado and Kansas State were badass in the 90's into early 2000's. You could say they both had national championship caliber teams in that span if Nebraska wasnt in their way. Can you say that about anyone else in the big 10 outside of the big 3?

I think the rest of the big 10 and big 12 teams could be strong and steady opponents but none threatening to win a natty. Wisconsin, Michigan state, texas A&M those types could be tough but were not a real talent threat to win it all.