Nebraska Marching Band stadium crowd

[TrustMeIamRight]

You say you understand how we Husker fans feel about these 5-7/4-8 seasons.

I understand how you Michigan fans feel too. I lived the 9 and 10 win seasons through 7 years of Bo Pelini. Getting clobbered in big games, having the cameras on him every time something bad happened, never being able to get back to elite.

That is humorous you think anyone, outside of Nebraska, cared one bit about what Pelini was doing as a coach.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Who was the best team in 1997/Nebraska or Michigan/Discuss

By quantitative analysis, it is Nebraska.

By qualitative analysis, it is Nebraska.

Fixing the 1997 AP College Football Poll

Nebraska beat the SEC champion in the bowl game, that was the SEC's only loss. the SEC went 5-1 in bowl games.

By Michigan analysis, it is Michigan.

If only the two teams had played common opponents to see how they fared.

I’m sure using how schools neither played fared against schools only one of them played is WAY better to judge the outcome.

 

[7Samurai13]

If only the two teams had played common opponents to see how they fared.

I’m sure using how schools neither played fared against schools only one of them played is WAY better to judge the outcome.

Well when one person is claiming they played much tougher opponents then those teams should do better in their bowl games. If the tougher teams are all getting smoked in their bowls, maybe they weren’t as tough as the person claimed.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Well when one person is claiming they played much tougher opponents then those teams should do better in their bowl games. If the tougher teams are all getting smoked in their bowls, maybe they weren’t as tough as the person claimed.

Or maybe they just didn't care about the bowl games? Like Bo (he says confidently with no expectation of this comment getting replies).

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

In 2014, Michigan was giving football tickets away when people bought two Coca Colas for $3.

That would not surprise me in the least. And you still couldn’t have got me to go to the games.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Well when one person is claiming they played much tougher opponents then those teams should do better in their bowl games. If the tougher teams are all getting smoked in their bowls, maybe they weren’t as tough as the person claimed.

It’d make sense if they were playing a team both had faced. When comparing results against teams neither faced — it does absolutely nothing.

The ONLY games that could be used to compare the teams are the two teams they both faced.

It is utterly ridiculous to argue about something from 20+ years ago anyways. I just wish Saturday can get here so we have something better to talk about, like games play this century.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

The coaches wanted to honor your retiring your coach and gave him a gift. The unbiased AP voters did not.

We had one common opponent, Colorado. Michigan beat them 27-3. Nebraska struggled to beat them and scraped by 27-24. Enough said.

We had two common opponents. Baylor too.

We won 38-3 and they won 49-21.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

15 pages and counting on a marching band thread....

Just wait til a Nebraska Women’s Volleyball thread starts up — it will get to 30 pages.

 

[7Samurai13]

Or maybe they just didn't care about the bowl games? Like Bo (he says confidently with no expectation of this comment getting replies).

Which is why Bo was one of the most over rated coaches in coaching history. Coached games but didn’t even care if he won and if you listen to Michigan fans he has a Bear Bryant clone but never won a Natty.

 

[7Samurai13]

Just wait til a Nebraska Women’s Volleyball thread starts up — it will get to 30 pages.

And by god there better be photo/video evidence.

 

[7Samurai13]

It’d make sense if they were playing a team both had faced. When comparing results against teams neither faced — it does absolutely nothing.

The ONLY games that could be used to compare the teams are the two teams they both faced.

It is utterly ridiculous to argue about something from 20+ years ago anyways. I just wish Saturday can get here so we have something better to talk about, like games play this century.

It’s kind of like how AG claims how tough the PAC12 is because they all are really close. But once you watch them play other conferences they more times than not lose. It doesn’t mean that those teams are actually good.

 

[UCFhonors]

The best part of this, Nebraska hasn't won any conference title in 20 years. Not B12, not B10. This century, Nebraska has 0 conference titles and has never won the B10. But feel free to continue.

Huskers really need to understand these UCFacts. Especially @NU_FTW and his Uncle Rico mentality.

#UCFacts

 

[BigRedMoe]

Just wait til a Nebraska Women’s Volleyball thread starts up — it will get to 30 pages.

I'm cool with that if it's all booty short pics.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

We had two common opponents. Baylor too.

We won 38-3 and they won 49-21.

Oh SNAP! So, just to reiterate, among the two common opponents Michigan won 65-6 and Nebraska only won 76-45. And they're trying to claim their defense was better...lol ok.

 

[7Samurai13]

I’m glad we never have to hear Michigan fans cry about having to play at MSU and OSU every year since there is no difference between home and away games.

 

[Tin Man]

And here I thought this was a thread about the band...

 

[7Samurai13]

And here I thought this was a thread about the band...

It’s a typical off season thread that turns into two B1G teams doing a dick measuring.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

We had two common opponents. Baylor too.

We won 38-3 and they won 49-21.

Oh SNAP! So, just to reiterate, among the two common opponents Michigan won 65-6 and Nebraska only won 76-45. And they're trying to claim their defense was better...lol ok.

"In their regular season finale (not counting the Big 12 title game), Nebraska survived a rally from 5-6 Colorado to win by only 27-24. Michigan had already beaten Colorado 27-3, so this was a "common opponents" argument as well as a poor performance argument. Michigan had also beaten Baylor by 35, while Nebraska beat them by "only" 28.

The Baylor game is irrelevant, as neither team was threatened, and anyway, Michigan played them at home and Nebraska played them on the road, and the standard 3.5 point home field advantage swing wipes out Michigan's 7 point difference, rendering those Baylor performances the same.

So we're really just looking at one common opponent mattering here: Colorado.

Now first of all, common opponents are a very poor way to rank teams, as I discussed in this section of my how-to-rate teams guide ("Common Opponents" subsection is at the bottom of the page there). This is particularly true when you're just looking at one common opponent. Secondly, Michigan played Colorado at home, in the season opener. Nebraska played Colorado on the road, at the end of the season, when Colorado was 5-5 and needed a win to get a bowl invitation. Moreover, it was a rivalry game for Nebraska, as Colorado annually printed the Nebraska game in red on their schedule, and almost always played Nebraska tougher than one would otherwise expect them to. So the comparison is not at all equitable"



"In the "national championship" sense, it's good that the AP poll went with Michigan at #1, because otherwise Michigan would have gone unbeaten and uncrowned in most people's eyes, a bitter pill for a great program that had not won a mythical national championship since 1948. But that's the bitter pill Penn State had to swallow in 1994 and Auburn in 2004, and I think that both of those teams have as much of an argument for sharing a title as Michigan did in '97 (and probably better arguments). For myself, I consider Michigan and Nebraska co-champions regardless of where they are ranked (and I extend the same view to Penn State '94 and Auburn 2004 too), but the question here is, who should be ranked #1? And there is simply no real argument for Michigan.

As you can see, I have written an enormous amount on this issue by now (and have spent many hours on it). That is because I don't like to reverse an AP poll decision at the top. So I looked at Michigan's case from every angle, trying to find some solid reason to keep them #1. But the fact is, no such reason exists. As far as I can tell, Michigan was voted #1 not by merit, but because that was the result AP voters wanted. So, being writers, they picked up their pens, and wrote their own ending. Eyes closed.

In the end, all I've done is spent a lot of time corroborating what was already blatantly obvious from the beginning. Nebraska went 13-0 while playing 5 rated opponents, won by an average of 30 points a game, gained 515 yards per game offense, gave up 262 on defense, and won their bowl over the then-#3 team by 25 points. Very few teams in the AP poll era (1936 to present) have put up those kinds of numbers. And the few that have never finished #2.

I worked my brain overtime on this first fix, but really it's a no-brainer: Nebraska moves to #1, and Michigan drops to #2."

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

"In their regular season finale (not counting the Big 12 title game), Nebraska survived a rally from 5-6 Colorado to win by only 27-24. Michigan had already beaten Colorado 27-3, so this was a "common opponents" argument as well as a poor performance argument. Michigan had also beaten Baylor by 35, while Nebraska beat them by "only" 28.

The Baylor game is irrelevant, as neither team was threatened, and anyway, Michigan played them at home and Nebraska played them on the road, and the standard 3.5 point home field advantage swing wipes out Michigan's 7 point difference, rendering those Baylor performances the same.

So we're really just looking at one common opponent mattering here: Colorado.

Now first of all, common opponents are a very poor way to rank teams, as I discussed in this section of my how-to-rate teams guide ("Common Opponents" subsection is at the bottom of the page there). This is particularly true when you're just looking at one common opponent. Secondly, Michigan played Colorado at home, in the season opener. Nebraska played Colorado on the road, at the end of the season, when Colorado was 5-5 and needed a win to get a bowl invitation. Moreover, it was a rivalry game for Nebraska, as Colorado annually printed the Nebraska game in red on their schedule, and almost always played Nebraska tougher than one would otherwise expect them to. So the comparison is not at all equitable"



"In the "national championship" sense, it's good that the AP poll went with Michigan at #1, because otherwise Michigan would have gone unbeaten and uncrowned in most people's eyes, a bitter pill for a great program that had not won a mythical national championship since 1948. But that's the bitter pill Penn State had to swallow in 1994 and Auburn in 2004, and I think that both of those teams have as much of an argument for sharing a title as Michigan did in '97 (and probably better arguments). For myself, I consider Michigan and Nebraska co-champions regardless of where they are ranked (and I extend the same view to Penn State '94 and Auburn 2004 too), but the question here is, who should be ranked #1? And there is simply no real argument for Michigan.

As you can see, I have written an enormous amount on this issue by now (and have spent many hours on it). That is because I don't like to reverse an AP poll decision at the top. So I looked at Michigan's case from every angle, trying to find some solid reason to keep them #1. But the fact is, no such reason exists. As far as I can tell, Michigan was voted #1 not by merit, but because that was the result AP voters wanted. So, being writers, they picked up their pens, and wrote their own ending. Eyes closed.

In the end, all I've done is spent a lot of time corroborating what was already blatantly obvious from the beginning. Nebraska went 13-0 while playing 5 rated opponents, won by an average of 30 points a game, gained 515 yards per game offense, gave up 262 on defense, and won their bowl over the then-#3 team by 25 points. Very few teams in the AP poll era (1936 to present) have put up those kinds of numbers. And the few that have never finished #2.

I worked my brain overtime on this first fix, but really it's a no-brainer: Nebraska moves to #1, and Michigan drops to #2."

lol, common opponents scored FORTY FIVE points on you and SIX on us. Give up man, you lost.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

I'm cool with that if it's all booty short pics.

Is there really any other pics needed of women’s volleyball?

 

[BigRedMoe]

Is there really any other pics needed of women’s volleyball?

Well, their tops are usually pretty tight too.