Bo would become the fifth coach in history of College Football

[popeyecv64]

I just wanted to point out that "hangin" hat on 9 wins a season now is a bit different then getting 9 wins 10-15 years ago. You can have 2 extra games for that 9 game mark now.

Better gauge would be coach that had 2-3 or less loses in 6+ seasons

then why is thar only 5 coaches to achieve such a thaaaaang ??

 

[psaboy]

then why is thar only 5 coaches to achieve such a thaaaaang ??

I see what you r thinking. I think that schedules back years ago it was easier to win 9, I may be in error, but think the gauge should be loses per season, not wins. I may be wrong on my assumption?

 

[psaboy]

So, it would be harder to win 9 per season with less games played. I think I was thinkin wrong here. Other than to compare Bo, who has more chances to win 9 per season (more games) I think we are comparing apples to oranges?

 

[Papalou]

Here is the list that didnt do it in this what would have been their 6th year

Bobby Petrino,Art Briles, Steve Fairchild, David Cutcliffe, Paul Johnson , Greg McMackin, Kevin Sumlin, Rich Rod, Houston Nutt, Ken Niamaloto, Jerry Kill, June Jones, Larry fedora, Mike Sherman, Rick Neuheisel, Paul Wulff, and Bill stewart.

Most of these coaches are no longer with the program they took over in 2008 and Bo is the only one in that class to win 9 in his first 6.

That list would shrink further yet if you only consider those in the first 6 years of their career as head coach.

 

[popeyecv64]

I see what you r thinking. I think that schedules back years ago it was easier to win 9, I may be in error, but think the gauge should be loses per season, not wins. I may be wrong on my assumption?

come on now son --just join the team

9 wins fer 6 seasons is quite a deal ---now or fifty years ago

 

[Papalou]

So, it would be harder to win 9 per season with less games played. I think I was thinkin wrong here. Other than to compare Bo, who has more chances to win 9 per season (more games) I think we are comparing apples to oranges?

Playing a 12 game schedule does give you both more chances to win as well as more chances to lose.

 

[HuskerinBig10]

I see what you r thinking. I think that schedules back years ago it was easier to win 9, I may be in error, but think the gauge should be loses per season, not wins. I may be wrong on my assumption?

The schedules now are easier. The OOC games now are jokes.

In the 1970s and 1980s nebraska's out of conference games were almost all AQ teams.

1973 UCLA, Wisconsin, North Carolina State, Minnesota

1975 LSU, Indiana, Miami, TCU

1983 OOC was Penn State, Wyoming, Syracuse, Minnesota and UCLA.

1986 Florida State, Illinois, Oregon, South Carolina

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

The argument that it was harder to do back in the day just doesn't hold water......

Here's a quick fact: Only 3 programs have won 9 games each season in the last 6 seasons. Those programs are Oregon, Alabama, and Nebraska.

So, besides the fact that Nebraska is in the company of Oregon and Alabama, there must be some explanation why no other programs out there have accomplished this. If it is as easy to do as people say, then someone else would be winning that many games besides the 2 best programs in the country in Oregon and Alabama........but the only other one is indeed Nebraska.

 

[Papalou]

In 1973 Wisconsin lost 7 games, NC State went 9-3(finished 16th)Minnesota went 7-4
1975 Indiana went 1-6-1 Miami went 2-8 TCU went 1-10
1983 Penn St went 8-4-1 ( thats right a 12 game sch) Wyoming went 7-5 Syracuse went 6-5 Minn went 1-10
UCLA went 7-4-1
1986 FSU 7-4-1 Illinois 4-7 Oregon 5-6 South Carolina 3-6-2

Husker in B!G is correct by saying we didnt always schedule FCS but TO played alot of them and Devaney did all he could to not put too much on TO s plate as well. It was dam seldom we played any world beaters in our ooc. And the Big 8 usually consisted of OU and UNL and a bunch of shit teams so dont let anyone fool you about how hard it was to win the big 8 and then get our asses handed to us in the bowls.

 

[Tomhusker]

TO always said "You should schedule your OOC games so there is one team you will beat, one team you should beat and one team that can beat you if you don't play well.

 

[Red_Alert]

TO always said "You should schedule your OOC games so there is one team you will beat, one team you should beat and one team that can beat you if you don't play well.

Wish NU could beat that one like they used to.

 

[psaboy]

come on now son --just join the team

9 wins fer 6 seasons is quite a deal ---now or fifty years ago

Pops, fifty (even 15) years ago you played less games. So, what I'm saying is it is easier to win 9 games a season if you play 13 or 14 games vs 11 or 12.

I accept all views on this as everyone has an opinion

:rollseyes:

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

The argument that it was harder to do back in the day just doesn't hold water......

Here's a quick fact: Only 3 programs have won 9 games each season in the last 6 seasons. Those programs are Oregon, Alabama, and Nebraska.

So, besides the fact that Nebraska is in the company of Oregon and Alabama, there must be some explanation why no other programs out there have accomplished this. If it is as easy to do as people say, then someone else would be winning that many games besides the 2 best programs in the country in Oregon and Alabama........but the only other one is indeed Nebraska.

^^^^^^

This gives that argument no life, though

 

[HuskerInSecLand]

Gotta agree with Kool-Aid Man on this one. If there wasn't anything to it there'd be a bunch more who have done it. Everyone gets the participation ribbon only a few the championship trophies.


Which reminds me, hopefully we can wipe some dust off a space in that trophy case one of those these next few years. That group that hasn't won one since... is getting smaller too.

 

[popeyecv64]

Pops, fifty (even 15) years ago you played less games. So, what I'm saying is it is easier to win 9 games a season if you play 13 or 14 games vs 11 or 12.

I accept all views on this as everyone has an opinion

:rollseyes:

are you f'ning with me ??

 

[jedburks]

Here is the list that didnt do it in this what would have been their 6th year

Bobby Petrino,Art Briles, Steve Fairchild, David Cutcliffe, Paul Johnson , Greg McMackin, Kevin Sumlin, Rich Rod, Houston Nutt, Ken Niamaloto, Jerry Kill, June Jones, Larry fedora, Mike Sherman, Rick Neuheisel, Paul Wulff, and Bill stewart.

Most of these coaches are no longer with the program they took over in 2008 and Bo is the only one in that class to win 9 in his first 6.

That list would shrink further yet if you only consider those in the first 6 years of their career as head coach.

Not really fair to just throw those names out there without any context. Look at some of the situations with some of those coaches.

Briles got a job at Baylor who hadn't had a winning team since 1995.
Petrino had his own issues off the field to get himself fired.
Fairchild took over Colorado St, enough said.
Cutcliffe took over a Duke team that hadn't had a winning season since 1994.
Sumlin got promoted to Texas A&M.
Jerry Kill got promoted to Minnesota.
June Jones took over SMU who hadn't had a winning season since 1997.
Fedora got promoted to UNC.

Most of these guys didn't come into great situations and have either done well enough to get a better job or has turned their program around.

 

[Exorbitant]

Fuel for thought... If Bo wasn't such a mad dog and had he hired some experienced assistants back in 2008, he may have really done something historic like win 10 games per season in each of his first six seasons!

 

[psaboy]

Just saying, that the more games you play in a season, the more chances you have to win. So, back years ago when you played 11 regular season games and a bowl you have to win 75% games to get your 9 wins. Now with 12 regular season games, conference championship game (if you play) and bowl game you only have to win 64% of games to get your nine wins.

 

[jedburks]

Congrats to Oregon, Alabama, and Nebraska for getting at least 9 wins a year for 6 straight years. All 3 teams have so much to show for it. I mean just look at all the accomplishments.

Alabama: 2 conference titles in the best conference in the country, 5 BCS bowl games, 3 national titles, 27-8 record vs ranked teams, and never finished a season ranked lower than 11th in the coach's poll.

Oregon: 3 conference titles, 4 BCS bowl games, 1 national title game appearance, 19-8 record vs ranked teams, and never finished a season ranked lower than 11th in the coach's poll.

Nebraska: ...well...um...let's see...they never finished higher than 14th in the coach's poll, oh and they are now 9-14 vs ranked teams.

Yep, congrats to Nebraska and Bo Pelini. You deserve a pat on the back and a raise!!!

 

[Red_Alert]

Congrats to Oregon, Alabama, and Nebraska for getting at least 9 wins a year for 6 straight years. All 3 teams have so much to show for it. I mean just look at all the accomplishments.

Alabama: 2 conference titles in the best conference in the country, 5 BCS bowl games, 3 national titles, 27-8 record vs ranked teams, and never finished a season ranked lower than 11th in the coach's poll.

Oregon: 3 conference titles, 4 BCS bowl games, 1 national title game appearance, 19-8 record vs ranked teams, and never finished a season ranked lower than 11th in the coach's poll.

Nebraska: ...well...um...let's see...they never finished higher than 14th in the coach's poll, oh and they are now 9-14 vs ranked teams.

Yep, congrats to Nebraska and Bo Pelini. You deserve a pat on the back and a raise!!!

Yeah, but you see next season's gonna be different. Pelini and staff are going to magically turn on the conference and national title quality coaching.

Did you miss the memo?