What did we learn? Northwestern Version

Lorewarn said:
How do you figure? We were coming off Callahan's barely .500 tenure and beat Clemson to the tune of a 9 win season in year one, whereas Clemson was coming off 8-8-9 win seasons and were preseason #9 before going 7-6 for their lowest win total in four years.
Click to expand...


What happened after that season and in the ensuing season? Put the 20 year win totals on a line graph for each team and compare. Clemson's program was on the rise, Nebraska's was experiencing a dead cat bounce. I was jokingly conjecturing that Clemson somehow stole our MOJO when we won that game, as their program continued on to Natty's and ours continued on to Riley and Frost. 

 
Born N Bled Red said:
What happened after that season and in the ensuing season? Put the 20 year win totals on a line graph for each team and compare. Clemson's program was on the rise, Nebraska's was experiencing a dead cat bounce. I was jokingly conjecturing that Clemson somehow stole our MOJO when we won that game, as their program continued on to Natty's and ours continued on to Riley and Frost. 
Click to expand...




You said when Bo beat Clemson, not after. But to answer the initial question, both programs went through a few years of being on the rise, jumping in and out of the top 10, with some big wins and some big losses. It took until 8 years after that Gator Bowl for Dabo to surpass Pelini's win percentage and for them to jump up into the 'great' category.

So when you said "When Bo Pelini beat Dabo we were a program in decline and they were a program on the rise." did you actually mean "8 years after Bo Pelini beat Dabo, in 2015, we were a program in decline and they were a program on the rise."...?

 
Bo owes me like $140 for that s#!t show I had to witness in Indianapolis.  He could of put in walk-ons and just said keep contain and it would have worked out better than what they were doing.  

 
Lorewarn said:
You said when Bo beat Clemson, not after. But to answer the initial question, both programs went through a few years of being on the rise, jumping in and out of the top 10, with some big wins and some big losses. It took until 8 years after that Gator Bowl for Dabo to surpass Pelini's win percentage and for them to jump up into the 'great' category.

So when you said "When Bo Pelini beat Dabo we were a program in decline and they were a program on the rise." did you actually mean "8 years after Bo Pelini beat Dabo, in 2015, we were a program in decline and they were a program on the rise."...?
Click to expand...


Ok dude, I get it. Sometimes you just want to argue, I get it. Its ok, let it out man, all that anger, its cool, I can take it. Sorry you had a tough weekend. 

Bo Pelini beat Dabo Swinney on January 1, 2009. My suggestion, made in jest is on that night, even though Nebraska won, Clemson somehow stole our ability to win. You seem to take umbrage at my suggestion that in 2008, Nebraska was a program in its decline, while Clemson was on the rise. So lets see- before 2009, what does Nebraska's trend line look like? Hmm- steadily going down. And Clemson's? Stabilized. Two years after that game, Clemson surpassed the Huskers in win percentage, and have not fallen below it since. Nebraska's has continued the downward trendline. I fail to see your point or issue with my comment, but like I said - sometimes a person just needs to argue. I get it. Hope your night gets better.

image.png

image.png

 
Born N Bled Red said:
Ok dude, I get it. Sometimes you just want to argue, I get it. Its ok, let it out man, all that anger, its cool, I can take it. Sorry you had a tough weekend. 

Bo Pelini beat Dabo Swinney on January 1, 2009. My suggestion, made in jest is on that night, even though Nebraska won, Clemson somehow stole our ability to win. You seem to take umbrage at my suggestion that in 2008, Nebraska was a program in its decline, while Clemson was on the rise. So lets see- before 2009, what does Nebraska's trend line look like? Hmm- steadily going down. And Clemson's? Stabilized. Two years after that game, Clemson surpassed the Huskers in win percentage, and have not fallen below it since. Nebraska's has continued the downward trendline. I fail to see your point or issue with my comment, but like I said - sometimes a person just needs to argue. I get it. Hope your night gets better.

View attachment 21052

View attachment 21053
Click to expand...


I mean ... it all depends on where you start the trendline.  You started at 2000, and I would say they were both trending down from there.  If you start at 2002 or 2004, I'd say Nebraska was trending up and Clemson was trending down.

Either way, I'm not sure your description of Clemson as a "program on the rise" was all that accurate.

But you were both somewhat correct, depending on the frame of reference.

obi-wan-kenobi-certain-point-of-view.gif


 
Born N Bled Red said:
When Bo Pelini beat Dabo we were a program in decline and they were a program on the rise. 
Click to expand...


That happened Jan 1, 2009 at the end of the 2008 season.

Born N Bled Red said:
View attachment 21052
Click to expand...






Look at your chart and notice that the lines before and going towards 2008 show Nebraska going up and Clemson going down.

I'm really not even 1% angry and I had a really fun weekend. I genuinely asked how you figured what you said, and then you responded by changing your argument (and then changing it again). Now like Mavric said, depending on what scale of time you're looking at you can make any argument you want, but if you're going to say from 2000 and then show this graph, at the very least Clemson has virtually no 'program on the rise' upward trend from 2000-2008 and at best you'd only be half right with that added and not-clear-at-the-start reference window. You even admitted as much:

Born N Bled Red said:
When Bo Pelini beat Dabo... they were a program on the rise. 
Click to expand...




Born N Bled Red said:
before 2009, what does Nebraska's trend line look like? Hmm- steadily going down. And Clemson's? Stabilized. 
Click to expand...

 
Lorewarn said:
That happened Jan 1, 2009 at the end of the 2008 season.

Look at your chart and notice that the lines before and going towards 2008 show Nebraska going up and Clemson going down.

I'm really not even 1% angry and I had a really fun weekend. I genuinely asked how you figured what you said, and then you responded by changing your argument (and then changing it again). Now like Mavric said, depending on what scale of time you're looking at you can make any argument you want, but if you're going to say from 2000 and then show this graph, at the very least Clemson has virtually no 'program on the rise' upward trend from 2000-2008 and at best you'd only be half right with that added and not-clear-at-the-start reference window. You even admitted as much:
Click to expand...


Do you know what trendlines are? A one season variation of half a percent does not make a trend. Do I need to back the chart up 5 more years to more clearly show the Huskers have been trending down since 1997??? Seriously you are arguing just to argue. We have been in a 25 year decline. The only hope is last year we hit our floor and we.go back on the upswing. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The biggest thing I learned, between the offensive play calling and the postgame comments by Rhule, are that Run the Dang Ball Coach knows we still are going to need to develop a functional passing game - especially with less experienced players being thrust into the fray by receiver injuries. They are going to “coach through” the difficulties and the process. I think this is wise and, like sausage making, isn’t going to be pretty.

I also learned that Omar is FAST. I can’t remember the last time a breakaway play against Nebraska was caught from behind, and it also happened with Farmer’s TD saving pursuit near the 10 yd line. Both HUGE plays.

Finally, I’m shaking my head over how many of us were afraid of a 3-3-5 and how it would work in the Big Ten.The Blackshirts are back baybee - now I’d like to see a return to throwing the bones.

 
Back
Top