To Troy of Alabama by 5. Frost is 0-2 and Nebraska has not opened with 2 losses in ages.
Nebraska loses at home
- Thread starter arcb102000
- Start date
Sounds familiar. He is in rebuilding mode same as Brohm. I think 2 to 3 years from now both programs will be doing really well.
It just shows you it’s typically difficult taking over a program. Brohm had the luxury of a senior led defense last year. Both will be fine, however frustrating for both can bases
And now.....down goes Bucky to BYU.....snaps a 41-game home winning streak against non-conference opponents. Wow!
whaaaa...???
A B1G should NEVER lose to a MAC school? Are you out of your mind? Do you know how much flippin' talent is on many MAC rosters??
I hope I missed the sarcasm.
NU's days of being a dominant program are LONG gone, and never coming back. Almost all of the advantages Bob Devaney & Tom Osborne used to dominate the Big 8 are gone.
Unlimited scholarships - Gone.
Prop 48 kids - Gone. (a major deal for Tom Osborne and a HUGE reason why he hated the Big 8 taking on the Texas schools. The old Southwest Conference didn't allow Prop 48)
Loose Juco admission rules - Gone
Dominant tv coverage - Gone (conference networks and ESPN leveled the field)
NU has no natural fertile recruiting ground to mine talent from. It's stuck on the barren steppes of the midwest with no major metro areas. (No, Omaha and Lincoln don't count as major metro areas).
Bo Pelini and Frank Solich operated under these rules and got NU about as far as they were going to go. And what did the delusional NU adminstration do? Fired both of them. Both guys were winning 9 games or more every year. Now, NU is begging for that. Hilarious.
Unlimited scholarships - Gone.
Prop 48 kids - Gone. (a major deal for Tom Osborne and a HUGE reason why he hated the Big 8 taking on the Texas schools. The old Southwest Conference didn't allow Prop 48)
Loose Juco admission rules - Gone
Dominant tv coverage - Gone (conference networks and ESPN leveled the field)
NU has no natural fertile recruiting ground to mine talent from. It's stuck on the barren steppes of the midwest with no major metro areas. (No, Omaha and Lincoln don't count as major metro areas).
Bo Pelini and Frank Solich operated under these rules and got NU about as far as they were going to go. And what did the delusional NU adminstration do? Fired both of them. Both guys were winning 9 games or more every year. Now, NU is begging for that. Hilarious.
Meh... methinks you're more wishing and hoping than offering something of substance.
Kansas State . . . Iowa . . . Oklahoma . . . Oklahoma State . . . Missouri . . .
. . . All schools with (as you say) no natural fertile recruiting ground to mine talent from.
This country is FULL of major colleges in huge metro areas without NC contenders.
In this day and age, with limited scholarships, you bet your @ss schools like Nebraska still have a shot at being a "dominant program."
Nebraska has fewer than 2M people. Missouri has over 6M. St. Louis Metro by itself is 40% larger than Nebraska. Both states have one flagship university. One of the things Nebraska used to be able to do was recruit all of the top talent around neighboring states.
There is another big item that wasn't mentioned in the earlier post. Money. NU still has great support and makes good money. But the days of the haves and the have-nots in college football is over for P5 conferences.
The Huskers are still a school with great funding and facilities (except I really do hate their stadium). They have a lot to offer recruits. The difference is that there used to be only a handful of schools who could beat them out for a recruit that they really wanted. Now that's just not true.
Of course they won't be down forever. At the same time, nothing is pointing toward the 1990s coming back.
And ALL Missouri players stay in-state.
Dude.
Nebraska is BY FAR a better draw than Mizzou.
And KSU.
And.... well, you SHOULD get the point.
I didn't know "hte 1990s coming back" was the threshold... but, hey, maybe I missed something.
Then you haven't talked with a lot of Nebraska fans.
No, they don't. But trust me that I followed Big XII recruiting for quite a while when you probably didn't care about it at all. Nebraska could swoop in and take 5 of the top 10 in Missouri. By the late 2000s they were taking 1 and it wasn't always even top 10. Missouri's resurrection from the football dead really hurt Nebraska.
Not for Missouri kids. And why would you throw in the farm school that smells like pig crap? the only reason they are even relevant is because old Mr. Burns got a step on the Grim reaper and hasn't been caught yet.
QUOTE="Purdue85, post: 1854710, member: 896"]
And.... well, you SHOULD get the point.
[/QUOTE]
I get what you are saying, but there is absolutely nothing incorrect in what I said. Nebraska used to have HUGE advantages. Rules changes, TV coverage expansion and conference networks have simply made things a lot more even. In the last 10 years Missouri has won 5 division titles. Nebraska won 4. In the last 5 years, Mizzou won 2 and Nebraska won zero.
I'm not saying they will never have good seasons again - just that they will have to work for it like everyone else.
I wouldn't really call KSU a major program. They have had intermittent success over the last twenty years but to include them with Iowa, OU, Okie State, and Missouri is a stretch. Missouri isn't that far removed from going to back to back SEC Title Games. Okie State has seemed to be on the cusp the last decade. OU is.....OU. And Iowa would beat KSU 8 out of 10 times every year for the last decade.
Also, Missouri is a fertile recruiting ground given the proximity to St. Louis is only about 45 miles.
I didn't call KSU a major program. That wasn't the point.
Numerous programs siphon kids from the St. Louis area. That doesn't qualify MO as fertile, IMHO.
If you're going to put OSU in that group, KSU belongs, as well. But, meh, I really don't care.
No, no he didn't.. I did. And even then I didn't say what you claim. I stated that their days of being a dominant program are over. They are. I didn't say they'd never have a winning season again. But the days of piss pounding everyone except one team (Oklahoma) in the conference are over. Get your posts straight. While Missouri isn't Texas, Florida, or California, the state does produce enough talent to provide a solid base. Supplement that with a few from recruiting hotbeds every year and you're in good shape. Nebraska has DICK for instate talent compared to Missouri. And don't underestimate the Kansas City metro for talent. Drew Lock is from the KC metro.
No, I'm not. You have a reading comprehension problem. Here are my words, quoted from the above string. Show my where I said they'd never have a winning season again.
"NU's days of being a dominant program are LONG gone, and never coming back. Almost all of the advantages Bob Devaney & Tom Osborne used to dominate the Big 8 are gone."
Nebraska has never had talent in state.
Missouri has a hard time keeping the best talent in state.
Nebraska gets a lot of KC kids.
No one expects championships annually. Doing what Wisconsin is doing and even to a further extent, having an identity to recruit towards, is what most fans want.
I see Mizzery is still being Mizzery.
Is anybody else reading “I know you are but what am I” in this back and forth?
You did.. no I didn’t... yes you did... no I didn’t you suck... no you suck.... no you suck, no takesies backsies.
Nebraska isn’t what it used to be in the 90’s. Nobody could or should argue otherwise. They hope to get there with their new coach, but they have to rebuild just like the Boilers. Purdue is having to repair relationships with all the best high schools in the Midwest because of how bad Haze was. But the success has improved tremendously in Ohio and Kentucky. It’s better in Indiana as well, and landing players like Bell and Williams would further that point. Nebraska is going to have to do the same thing. I don’t know what exactly what was being argued though, so I thought I would stick to the obvious stuff.
Also, when somebody turns to name calling, often times their argument is rendered moot.
Talent is much more even spread than it ever used to be and with the increase in revenue, the facilities and national exposure has changed as well. It is the very reason a UCF can do what they did. Same thing with Clemson’s rise. If the traditionally top programs don’t keep top coaching staffs/facilities, they will struggle. Don’t think any school can get by with name only any more.
Schools getting by the name is interesting to think about. There are schools that have traditional football programs. As years gone by some have lost their special appeal. In the meantime other programs have started winning and become regulars in the top 15. High school kids are the ones being recruited. They weren't born or remember the 80s or 90s. Things change. If they see trophies in the display case I'm sure it catches there eye but if it's from decades ago does it hold the same value?
QB rushing offices will always be moving very slowly by the end of big ten season
I’ve lost track of what you guys are even arguing about.
I don’t think anybody thinks the 90s are coming back for Nebraska.
I also don't think anybody expects them to be Kansas bad.
So we’re all in the middle, separated by degrees. I would be very confident that over the next 20 years, Nebraska will compile more wins than Iowa, and fewer wins than Oklahoma. Wisconsin seems like a good comparison, I’d probably expect badgers to compile more wins in that time frame.
I wasn't arguing about anything. Just wasn't going to let yet another dumb@ss from another team come on this forum and pull their sh*t.
I don't recall a comment about Nebraska and the 90s, nor do I recall discussing Kansas.
To compare the Boilers and Nebraska is to not understand the huge advantage Nebraska used to have in conference. Too many people read the earlier Tiger fan post as a "Nebraska sucks" post. It wasn't. It was saying that Nebraska had huge past advantages and now they are just like everyone else. 10-15 years ago if I went to a NU site and compared Nebraksa to the Boilers they would be pissed for failure to admire their greatness..
I don't know who read it that way. You're right. It wasn't. It was "NU's days of being a dominant program are LONG gone, and never coming back," which was a really dumb post. And it was called out. Rightfully so.
Perhaps we have different definitions of dominant. To me a dominant program does not mean dominating one game. It doesn't mean having a good season or two. It's about being in a championship hunt year after year over a sustained period. Nebraska had huge advantages in the past that allowed them to dominate. The world has changed. The entire P5 is more equal now.
Interesting that, in your prior post, you tried to characterize the debate in this way: "Too many people read the earlier Tiger fan post as a "Nebraska sucks" post."
It wasn't. It was precisely as I posted, in my response: "NU's days of being a dominant program are LONG gone, and never coming back."
In fact, that was a moronic post that had no basis. To my knowledge, there is no crystal ball demonstrating such a thing. You chose to defend that and, in a sense, walk it back. At a minimum you chose to defend it. That's not a wise thing to do. In fact, it was quite dumb. It was a dumb thing to post, and a dumb thing to defend.
You have a choice: You can keep this thread going, to which I'll likely respond and continue to highlight the stupidity of the original post. Or, admit the vacuous nature of the post. Or, let the thread die.
I am convinced you don’t read your own posts. Your comment didn’t make sense because it is incomplete and/or terrible grammar. Your prior posts had nothing to do with the incoherent rambling that made zero sense. The sentence lacked any structure.
you're arguing just to be arguing.
if there's a question you have, then state it.
Otherwise, you're just blathering.
Similar threads
