9-3 baby, just like coach Osborne
- Thread starter GBRhuskers
- Start date
- Status
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Here are the seasons in which Tom Osborne went 9-3:
1974: Losses to 7-4 Wisconsin by 1 point, 7-4 Mizzou by 11 points, #1 Oklahoma by 14 points
1976: Losses to #17 Mizzou by 10 points, 8-3 ISU by 9 points, #8 OU by 3 points
1977: Losses to 6-5 WSU by 9 points, 8-4 ISU by 3 points, #3 OU by 30 points...Also beat #4 Alabama, #7 Colorado, and #14 North Carolina
1979: Losses to #1 Alabama by 17, 8-4 Mizzou by 4, and #4 OU by 7 (after beating them in regular season)
1981: Losses to 8-4 Iowa by 3, #3 Penn State by 6, #1 Clemson by 7.
1985: Losses to #17 Fla State by 4, #5 OU by 20, #5 Mich by 4.
1990: Losses to #9 Colorado by 15, 8-3 OU by 35, #2 GA Tech by 24.
1992: Losses to #2 Washington by 15, 4-7 ISU by 9, #3 Fla State by 13.
Worst season in that span is 1990 with our biggest losses. Worst loss is 1992 Iowa State by 9.
In his career Tom Osborne won 3 National Championships and won 10 or more games 15 times.
Also, it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to point out that in the years he "only" won 9 games, they only played 11 regular season games unlike the 12 we play now. This is why I thought it was total B.S. when Blo fans claimed "9 wins just like Tom!" and now Riley apologists doing the same.
Let's also not forget that in those seasons Tom did not have Fresno State on the schedule for a guaranteed win. Don't try to feed me crap about the Big 8--it was a MUCH better conference than we give it credit for...Nebraska and Oklahoma were just that good and it skews the overall results of the conference. Having two of the bets teams in the nation in your 8 team conference year in and year out doesn't bode well for anyone else.
Also, Tom never won less than 9 games. That would include FIVE win seasons.
In that time we also have plenty of wins against what are now power 5 conference schools on our non-conference schedule. Games like the one with Oregon were not unique back then--they were the NORM.
In conclusion, you are a piece of work to even try to compare this 30 point loss to an Iowa team that lost to NDSU with ANYTHING Tom Osborne did. It was PATHETIC, plain and simple. Inexcusible.
1974: Losses to 7-4 Wisconsin by 1 point, 7-4 Mizzou by 11 points, #1 Oklahoma by 14 points
1976: Losses to #17 Mizzou by 10 points, 8-3 ISU by 9 points, #8 OU by 3 points
1977: Losses to 6-5 WSU by 9 points, 8-4 ISU by 3 points, #3 OU by 30 points...Also beat #4 Alabama, #7 Colorado, and #14 North Carolina
1979: Losses to #1 Alabama by 17, 8-4 Mizzou by 4, and #4 OU by 7 (after beating them in regular season)
1981: Losses to 8-4 Iowa by 3, #3 Penn State by 6, #1 Clemson by 7.
1985: Losses to #17 Fla State by 4, #5 OU by 20, #5 Mich by 4.
1990: Losses to #9 Colorado by 15, 8-3 OU by 35, #2 GA Tech by 24.
1992: Losses to #2 Washington by 15, 4-7 ISU by 9, #3 Fla State by 13.
Worst season in that span is 1990 with our biggest losses. Worst loss is 1992 Iowa State by 9.
In his career Tom Osborne won 3 National Championships and won 10 or more games 15 times.
Also, it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to point out that in the years he "only" won 9 games, they only played 11 regular season games unlike the 12 we play now. This is why I thought it was total B.S. when Blo fans claimed "9 wins just like Tom!" and now Riley apologists doing the same.
Let's also not forget that in those seasons Tom did not have Fresno State on the schedule for a guaranteed win. Don't try to feed me crap about the Big 8--it was a MUCH better conference than we give it credit for...Nebraska and Oklahoma were just that good and it skews the overall results of the conference. Having two of the bets teams in the nation in your 8 team conference year in and year out doesn't bode well for anyone else.
Also, Tom never won less than 9 games. That would include FIVE win seasons.
In that time we also have plenty of wins against what are now power 5 conference schools on our non-conference schedule. Games like the one with Oregon were not unique back then--they were the NORM.
In conclusion, you are a piece of work to even try to compare this 30 point loss to an Iowa team that lost to NDSU with ANYTHING Tom Osborne did. It was PATHETIC, plain and simple. Inexcusible.
I just made the point in another thread that I quit watching Osborne's teams because they rolled through a patsy early schedule, got my hopes up and then lost to the only good teams on schedule to end the year.....year after year after year.
And he gave out just about AS MANY scholarships as he wanted every year and STILL had to use walk ons in his offensive line....TO's schedules were a CAKE WALK until he got to the end of the season and he failed year after year after year. Tom never won less than 9 games because he had an incredible depth chart and a weak schedule filled with teams that couldn't attract talent. That isn't the case anymore.... Great coach but he failed early on too.
Patsy early schedule? Have even looked at his non-conference schedules?
Tom Osborne was 255 and 49 not 108 and 90. No comparison to coach Osborne.
@huskerfan1414 I feel really bad for you so I'll give in, my intention [title] of this thread is a joke; nothing more, less or in the middle. I had no idea someone would bite as hard as you did, kind of figured we'd need some laughs after watching that embarrassment.
Poor timing on my part, yikes.
Poor timing on my part, yikes.
At least those teams played hard. Weak effort today.
Dude, Osborne didn't inherit this team. He took over for a Devaney squad that was Top 10 . Enough with the bs. Every Husker fan would celebrate 9 wins at the beginning of the year. Here we are with the possibility of a ten win season. Coach Riley is good for NU.
Last edited:
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Stop. Stop putting words into my mouth. You are the worst at this.
I pointed out that it is asinine to compare Riley and Osborne. It is.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
All my years on Scout, many posters actually made the comparison. It was tiring to read it year after year. Part of my feels like joining the site again to find all the old posts and bring them back to the first page.
Dirk C had a good reality check article the other day on the "9-win crowd". It's 3+ years too late though.
1973 non conference 10 UCLA win, 14 NC state win, Wisconsin win, Minnesota win
I'm not gonna do every year you can look yourself, but here's a few more:
LSU and Miami in the same year, beat #4 Alabama, #1 Alabama, California, penn state a few times, ranked FSU a few times, auburn a few times, UCLA, ranked Illinois, Iowa, ranked AZ state a few times, ranked Texas A&M, ranked Washington, West Virginia, mich state, and many of those teams multiple times. Look up year by year and compare it to year by year of the past fifteen years.
Osborne didn't play a non major school until 1992, and even then he only faced three in his career. Looking at his 11 game schedules vs today's 12 game schedules would lead anyone with a brain to the conclusion that he had it way tougher and 9 wins means a considerable more then than it does now. A coherent being would also be further amazed at what he was able to accomplish with his teams rather than try to minimize it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. Idiot.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
No but I do know that you are one of the most consistently butt hurt posters on this board. Run along, everyone here knows your childish game.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Did you live through losing every year to OU and many years to Missouri and CU? I sure as hell did so don't give me your ignorant BULLSH##. Tom ROUTINELY lost to good teams and built up his win total on the rest of his games. Sure he won a few non-con games but often those "name" teams weren't very good when he beat them. Just the way it was. Not saying Riley is going to be Osborne (because he won't have time to be) but for heaven's sake the guy has to have time to at least build a team. Our roster was a mess when he took over and it takes more than one full class to turn it over.
I feel like you're trying to make an argument that isn't there. Nobody was comparing the two until you brought it up.
Reminds me of Ron White's bit where in a debate tournament he responded with "Oh yeah. Well F### you." He thought he had won because "they were speechless".
No, you are absolutely asinine and my post above proves it. To even put tom and Riley in the same category is stupid, plain and simple. To say tom played cupcakes is stupid, plain and simple. Tom made unranked teams like Iowa look like shit, and in the three times he lost to teams like this in 25 years, he didn't get completely blown out the way we did today. And in those seasons he beat actual real, ranked teams, something Riley hasn't done this year.
Go ahead and vouch for Riley getting more time I have no problem with that nor am I calling for him to get fired...no no. But your argument is stupid.
You're a dumbass. Plain and simple. History proves it.
Reminds me of Ron whites bit...they were speechless.
Nice comeback, hypocritical dumbass
If you have the ability please close it, my intention wasn't this. I apologize, lesson learned.
- Status
Similar threads
