You're right, the B12 was pretty down that year. Must have been to have a worse bowl record than the B10.
Cowherd at it again
- Thread starter Gonzo
- Start date
They had 9, 10, and 10 win seasons their last three years in the B12. They shared or outright won their division each of those seasons. They represented the B12 North twice, losing by a combined total of 4 points to Texas and Oklahoma.
2008 Nebraska played 3 ranked teams all season and lost those games 151-76
2009 Nebraska only played 3 ranked teams in the regular season, lost to Iowa State and got blown out by Texas Tech at home
2010 Nebraska only played 3 ranked teams in the regular season, should have lost to Iowa State on a fake PAT and lost 3 of their final 4 games (Doyled it)
Not sure about that... they're 1 for 5 in winning the B1G West/Legends, but were 4/5 in the B12 North their last five years there (only three title games however).
I thought Nebraska was supposed to be a fake rival or something and now Hawkeye fans are defending them
They had 9, 10, and 10 win seasons their last three years in the B12. They shared or outright won their division each of those seasons. They represented the B12 North twice, losing by a combined total of 4 points to Texas and Oklahoma.
These are great stats. Lulz, **** Nebraska.
Sure, don't forget about two years out of the previous 80+ years. Minnesota won a few national titles around the turn of the century too, but you know what, no one gives a **** about that either.
That game also might have been one of the worst displays of Power 5 football since the 8 turnover game.
And look at them now, ask any bug eater fan and they will tell you finishing below Iowa on a regular basis is rock bottom. Their problem was trying to get the next Tom Osbourne. My point was, i know it's hard getting through to you dipshits, Iowa is one coaching hire away from being a joke, and you don't have the rich history of Nebraska to fall back on. You are like Virginia Tech, once your nice run is over, no one will care or notice.
They had 9, 10, and 10 win seasons their last three years in the B12. They shared or outright won their division each of those seasons. They represented the B12 North twice, losing by a combined total of 4 points to Texas and Oklahoma.
You failed to quote the pertinent part of Jamby's post where he said they reviewed all of iowa's season last year except the Rose Bowl.
Nebraska wasn't all that great for quite a few years prior to joining the Big Ten.
Really I can't recall a decent team from them since about 2001.
Just checked out of curiosity: Their record was pretty much the same after joining the Big Ten compared to the last few years of their time in the Big 12, with exception to last year, which was their 3rd losing season since 2002.
Penn State's been about the same, including a 12-0 record in their 2nd year in the B1G and plenty of 11 win seasons.
In short, it's not just because they're in the Big Ten.
They've had 7 teams with top 25 finishes since 2001. I wouldn't call them elite teams by any means (cutoff for that would be top 10 finishes for sure), but that would be a "decent" team under most fan definitions. Even out of touch Nebraska fans.
Yeah they weren't good that year, should have lost the next year to ISU too and those were Paul Rhoads coached teams
Nebraska fans from the big XII days consider anything that is not in national title contention not decent. Basically top 5 or the year was lost. Top 25 was a disappointment.
I agree with this. Kirk Ferentz is far from perfect, but he has done a good to great job at Iowa. Lose him and you never know what Iowa will hire next. Could the football version of Lickliter.
Yeah, probably true....'decent' may not be the correct wording. Certainly nothing memorable about them for sure though.
Point still stands that not much has changed in their recent history from moving into the Big Ten.
I see them getting worse though since the hiring of the guy from Oregon State.
This is true of any program outside of the true blue bloods (Florida State, Alabama, OSU, Michigan, Oklahoma, etc.) If you're not in one of the elite, recruiting hotbed programs, a bad coach means doom.
As for the "nice run" part, the last 36 years have been pretty good overall for Iowa football fans. Agreed that no one outside of Iowa fans care about 3-8 Iowa seasons. The good news those haven't been regular occurrences in the past 36 years.
It means doom for them too. It's just relative doom. Look at Tennesee, USC, Michigan, ND, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, etc. All have been very bad relative to their history at certain points. Even Bama, before Saban was bad for a bit.
An NCAA football coach is the most important coach in sports. There isn't one that's more important. I could write pages and pages on why this is but in short, it comes down to the number of guys he is managing both on his roster and his staff and the marginal impact they all make. It's like no other sport. Bad coaches or at least bad fits get exposed quickly. A bad coach is a bad coach is a bad coach.
Now, sometimes you get guys like Rich Rodriguez or Houston Nutt that are good coaches who either fall off or don't fit somewhere and it just doesn't work.
Definitely nothing like 5 top 10 finishes in the same time period but they have been decent.
