They came into the B1G and were expected to dominate. The teams in the B1G feared their arrival. Last year they got bitch-slapped including a loss to Northwestern. Today they got absolutely steamrolled 63-38 by an Ohio State team that could only beat Michigan State by one point.
What’s with the program that was tops in the feared Big 12 conference and looks absolutely pathetic in the “weak” B1G?
Who expected them to dominate? I certainly didn’t. Most media followers of the B1G didn’t. I thought the expectations were for Nebraska to do well in the B1G, but they were on par with Michigan (which was a maybe going into last year), Michigan State, Wisconsin, and Ohio State. For overall football tradition, they were equal to UM, OSU, and Penn State. Nothing that I saw said that the B1G was going to belong to Nebraska with the rest of the league a warmup. The Northwestern win is a surprise, but that’s how it is with Northwestern. They’re scrappy and pull off a few surprises each year since the mid-90s.
Well, I don’t agree. I think that with their Big 12 resume they were expected to be a very dominant factor in the B1G. I don’t think anyone expected them to be as big of a bust as they have been. The mantra has been that the B1G is an overrated conference. Some things that have happened have supported that notion. My estimation is that it is a conference that beats the crap out of each other due to parity. Who knows what is going to happen on Saturday? It’s not that they have the best teams in college football but that the difference between best to least is closer than in many other conferences.
Yea, I know, the SEC is the NFL minor league but let’s put that aside. The SEC is obviously the strongest conference. The Big 12 was suppose to be just a notch below the SEC. Now, Nebraska is looking like just another name on the schedule in the B1G.
I will never discredit Northwestern. I admire them as the smallest and only private college in the B1G. Is wasn’t that long ago that there were rumbles that they should leave. They persevered and rose above the critics. They spent so many years as a doormat that it was particularly gratifying to have them give Nebraska a hazing as a welcome to the B1G.
As someone who was weaned on SEC football, I have always been skeptical on how strong the old Big 12 Conference was.
Former Big 12 school, Mizzou is finding out that there is not many different of flavors of cupcakes in the SEC as they lost to Vanderbilt and 0-3 in the conference. 'Bama is next for them. (I wonder how that will work out!)
TAMU does a couple wins, against Arkansas (who was reeling) and perennial cupcake Ole Miss.
OP, Nebraska football has been in the shitter for quite awhile now, regardless of what conference they are in. Where’ve you been?
It would be nice to read a CFB thread without people gushing over the allegedly superior SEC. The Big Ten is better than people think it is and the SEC has the advantage of having the pollsters in their back pocket and playing all their bowl games at home.
Penn State also thought they would run roughshod over the Big Ten and they actually did for one season. There are a lot of teams that can play with Nebraska and I suspect they haven’t lost their last conference game of the year.
Factually speaking, the SEC isn’t allegedly superior, it IS superior. There’s no debating that, but I get the frustration with the SEC fanboys.
Alabama is the best team in college football, S. Carolina and Florida are both good, and LSU might be good (though they seem to struggle on offense this year). Somehow, four good teams in the conference gives every yokel in Tennessee cause to crow about how awesome the SEC is, as if this awesomeness somehow transfers to them personally. They’re the only fans who do this.
Nebraska did just score 38 on Ohio State, on the road. Give 'em credit for that. Turnovers killed them.
Also remember that these are college-age kids, and their quality of play will fluctuate substantially within a season (or even a game), much less year to year. Dominance in CFB is mainly a function of a getting a few top recruits, and that’s a year to year thing itself. It’s very hard for anyone to sustain long-term.
The problem with conference comparisons is that the conferences are closer than the arguments make them seem.
So, Nebraska could move to any of the major conferences and I think their win percentage would be substantially similar, maybe a game different here or there.
Regarding the SEC, I think the same thing applies. I’ve looked at the stats for number of players per team getting drafted and the SEC, on average was higher than all of the other conferences, and they do tend to have 2 top teams more frequently than the other conferences which typically only have 1 top team at a time. But the overall difference is a lower percentage than how it gets portrayed in discussions.
Regarding NU and OSU: I’m glad NU lost, it bugs me to watch Pelini on the sidelines getting so freaking angry with his players constantly. I don’t know him, but the guy looks like a prick.
Nebraska hasn’t been a national contender since Osborne retired. They had three good years his recruits, and then haven’t finished higher then 14th. That’s a decade of mediocrity. No analyst, writer, coach, or commentator of any significance thought they would dominate the Big 10. For the last 10 years Nebraska was a 2nd rate program in the Big 12, behind Texas and Oklahoma. The expectation was another Wisconsin or Michigan State. Decent to good year in and year out, and every so often they would challenge for the Big 10 title.
Nebraska was tops in the Big XII conference?
Say what? They were in the Championship game twice while the current players would have been on campus (once as cochamp of the North), losing both times. The Big XII north has not been the good half of the conference since right at the beginning of its existence.
Nebraska hasn’t won a conference championship in more than a decade.
Nobody besides hardcore Nebraska fans thought that Nebraska would dominate the Big Ten. This isn’t the 1990’s anymore. They are just about exactly as good as I and most other Big Ten fans thought they would be - behind Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State, and Ohio State.
???
Nebraska was the 4th best program in the BigTen at best when they entered. No one expected them to dominate, the Big 12 has sucked for a long time and plays no defense. If anything Nebraska should be concerned about having to face fewer patsies and one-dimensional teams.
By whom? Do you have any cites?
OK, “dominate” was too strong of a word. I think they were expected to be a contender. With all the criticism that the B1G has taken over the years as being “overrated”, etc., etc., you would think that a team for the “tough” B12 would be formidable. They wouldn’t get 63 points laid on them by an OSU team that is probably weaker than they have been in recent years and has no bowl incentive. 63 points is what OSU used to do to Northwestern when they were setting the loss record and there was “The Big 2 and the Little 8”.
Colorado put 65 on Nebraska in 2007. They just aren’t the team that you remember them to be. They haven’t been for a long time.
Or maybe Ohio State is better than you’re giving them credit for.
Mark my words: the Buckeyes will be in the Nat’l Championship game next year. Braxton Miller is only a sophomore.
Come on, quit crying poor. Since 1998 they have 7 bowl wins and have finished in the rankings 9 times. Yea, it may not be the days of the consecutive NC’s but that is still solid. They finished ranked #24 last year. That’s not chopped liver. Pelini started the season at 40-17. How many coaches can compare to that?
Bret Bielema at Wisconsin is 60-19 with six Bowl Games in six years and two Rose Bowls. Nebraska hasn’t been to a meaningful Bowl Game in a decade. #24 was fourth in the Big Ten.