What does a realistic successful season look like this year?

Moiraine said:
I'm just going off memory, which can be faulty, but I seem to recall we were favored in a lot of those losses in games that would have gotten us over the hump. 
Click to expand...


That's fine.  But that a significantly different argument than losing to "clearly inferior" teams.

 
runningblind said:
Mavric's win total stats are correct,  but Bo lost a fair amount to lower ranked teams, (at the time of the game), which is what you're remembering. 

2009:

#15 Nebraska loses to unranked Texas Tech 

2010:

#9 Nebraska loses to #18 A&M

2011:

#17 Nebraska loses by 28 to #20 Michigan

2012:

#16 Nebraska loses to unranked UCLA

#14 Nebraska loses by 39 to unranked Wisconsin

2013:

#25 Nebraska loses to unranked Minnesota

2014:

#11 Nebraska loses by 35 to #22 Wisconsin

#21 Nebraska loses to unranked Minnesota 
Click to expand...


Those results are a reminder of what the Pelini era was.  Occasionally looking like we were on the verge of turning the corner and then having our hopes dashed by losses.  In and out of the top 25, erratically good but never great.  Given Bo's volatile personality it makes sense that the team couldn't keep it together for a sustained amount of time to build on success and make the leap.  I believe Frost's even temperament will eventually be reflected in the team and is needed to steadily build to greatness.

The results are also are a reminder that prior to the Riley experiment, we were ranked often.  It could seem strange if we at least get back to that.

 
Mavric said:
That's fine.  But that a significantly different argument than losing to "clearly inferior" teams.
Click to expand...




True. Basically, I never felt confident about any games with Pelini against the top half of teams we played, even the ones I thought we were better than. And that’s not because we lost to them most of the time (we didn’t), we just lost to them often enough that I didn’t expect to win. Regardless, I think he was a good coach (we just needed better) and I hope with Frost we expect to/will expect to win those games. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
4skers89 said:
Those results are a reminder of what the Pelini era was.  Occasionally looking like we were on the verge of turning the corner and then having our hopes dashed by losses.  In and out of the top 25, erratically good but never great.  Given Bo's volatile personality it makes sense that the team couldn't keep it together for a sustained amount of time to build on success and make the leap.
Click to expand...


Good teams that all too often couldn't get out of their own damn way led by a good man who all too often couldn't get out of his own damn way.

 
Definitely true.  But some of that is also the trouble of looking at incomplete data (rankings during the year) instead of the whole picture at the end of the year.

runningblind said:
Mavric's win total stats are correct,  but Bo lost a fair amount to lower ranked teams, (at the time of the game), which is what you're remembering. 

2009:

#15 Nebraska loses to unranked Texas Tech - Tech lost two early games to #2 Texas and #17 Houston so they were unranked when they played us but they finished 9-4, won a bowl game and ended up a ranked team.

2010:

#9 Nebraska loses to #18 A&M - A&M finished the year 9-4, ranked ahead of us and three of their losses were to teams that finished in the Top 20

2011:

#17 Nebraska loses by 28 to #20 Michigan - Michigan finished the year 11-2 and won the Sugar Bowl

2012:

#16 Nebraska loses to unranked UCLA - UCLA was unrakned in Week 2 but got to 9-2 and ranked #15 in the country before losing back-to-back games to #7 Stanford at the end of the year

#14 Nebraska loses by 39 to unranked Wisconsin - This was ugly but Wisconsin was the B1G Champion* that year

2013:

#25 Nebraska loses to unranked Minnesota - Another ugly one but Minnesota did get to 8-2 and ranked a couple weeks later before faltering down the stretch.

2014:

#11 Nebraska loses by 35 to #22 Wisconsin - Wisconsin did finish the year 11-3, ranked #13 and beat Auburn in the Outback bowl

#21 Nebraska loses to unranked Minnesota - Minnesota was 8-3 and ranked after they beat us - four of their five losses were to Top 15 teams
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
Definitely true.  But some of that is also the trouble of looking at incomplete data (rankings during the year) instead of the whole picture at the end of the year.
Click to expand...
I fully agree,  but the rankings at the time seem to stand out in people's memories more than where things stand at the end of the season. 

 
8-4 would actually be disappointing for me this season. I'm expecting a 9-3 year. 

Also a little bit of a tangent but in terms of things I expect to see, I'll be watching our defense really closely during the first three games to see if it looks like there are 11 starters out on the field that want to be playing football and want to win the game. If we see that, it's going to be a year where we probably won't lose to the Purdues and Nothwesterns of the schedule.

 
Undone said:
8-4 would actually be disappointing for me this season. I'm expecting a 9-3 year. 

Also a little bit of a tangent but in terms of things I expect to see, I'll be watching our defense really closely during the first three games to see if it looks like there are 11 starters out on the field that want to be playing football and want to win the game. If we see that, it's going to be a year where we probably won't lose to the Purdues and Nothwesterns of the schedule.
Click to expand...


If you have to watch really closely to figure that out, we might be in trouble.

 
Undone said:
8-4 would actually be disappointing for me this season. I'm expecting a 9-3 year. 

Also a little bit of a tangent but in terms of things I expect to see, I'll be watching our defense really closely during the first three games to see if it looks like there are 11 starters out on the field that want to be playing football and want to win the game. If we see that, it's going to be a year where we probably won't lose to the Purdues and Nothwesterns of the schedule.
Click to expand...




Me too. 8-4 means we probably lost to Iowa and Wisconsin and Ohio Stat again.

 
Huckleberry Muhammad said:
Moos said he wanted 6 wins ("expected" 6 wins?  I forgot the quote, but sure remember the 6).   My thoughts were pretty close to that at 7 for a great improvement over last season and 2017.  It's been 20 years now since we were relevant at all, but things are in place now for getting to our used-to-be.  I still think it'll take a couple of years, but yes I have my dreams too (Big 10 Championship game).  

We'll see.
Click to expand...


We played a tougher schedule  last year and would have been 6-6 if not for Akron screwing us out of our tune-up game and AM getting assaulted post-play against CU. Going 6-6 this season would be officially better but practically speaking shows no improvement. If AM stays healthy and we can't manage Bo results( 8-4 or better) we have problems to address. 

 
With a healthy Martinez last season is a 6 win season. Thus with a healthy Martinez and an easier schedule we should expect 9 wins. If a 2nd year coach doesn't make a +3 jump from their year 1 to year 2 it doesn't bode well for the future.

 
Blackshirt316 said:
With a healthy Martinez last season is a 6 win season. Thus with a healthy Martinez and an easier schedule we should expect 9 wins. If a 2nd year coach doesn't make a +3 jump from their year 1 to year 2 it doesn't bode well for the future.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't it be +3 from the actual win total, not +3 from how many wins we could have had?

I mean, we could have also beaten Ohio State, Northwestern, and Iowa, so by your logic we should have been 9-3, so a +3 means we need to go undefeated or Scott Frost isn't a good coach?

 
I want to say we will go 10-2 but I still feel like it will be a 9-3, 8-4 type of season. I hope I am all the way wrong though!

 
Back
Top