Is Nebraska chasing 'ghosts'?
- Thread starter NikkiSixx
- Start date
That is the popular perception, but I'm not sure that it is exactly accurate. Part of the problem was that we played a pre-conference schedule with big-time programs (Alabama, Penn St. Miami, etc.). I looked at a few of those years, here are wins over teams who finished the season in the top 20:
76 - CU #16, Okie St. #14
77 - Alabama #2, North Carolina #17
78- Mizzu #15, OU #3
79- Penn St. #20
80- Penn St. #8, Miss St. #19
81- Iowa St. #18, Mizzu #19, OU #20 (lost to #1 Clemson and #3 Penn St)
Won't be popular but I think it came apart when Frank was named successor. Never thought he had the attitude to project as HC.
Sure, I guess when it is framed as chasing ghosts, I don't like the connotation that brings.. it sounds bad, and it probably is bad. So it makes me question if that's what we sometimes do as fans. It's been a good discussion with lots of good view points.
For me, it makes me wonder if we are so hell bent on the original formula, that we have actually lost sight of what Nebraska football should mean.
For some, it doesn't even bring joy anymore.
I wonder if chasing those old ghosts, actual undermines our own best intentions.
Again, Glad to see lots of good discussion.
Calling those teams "above average" is revisionist history. Good but not great? Fair enough. The Big Eight through '76 was the toughest conference in the country because they gave out more scholarships than anybody else. Their OOC and bowl records bear that out. NU tended to be about .500 vs. elites teams not named Oklahoma. Osborne won 4 of his first 5 bowl games, including wins over Texas and Florida. TO split a series with Alabama in the 70's and went 3-2 vs Penn State, each of whom won national championships during years when we played them. Those were solid, substantial reasons for NU to regard itself as elite, as it was holding its own against the best programs in the country. NU usually pounded UCLA, split its first four games vs FSU, and won every Kickoff Classic it played in. The excellence, not above averageness, was not a mirage.
Except for the team he fielded in 1999 was maybe the best team in the country that year. They lost a head scratcher at Texas and avenged it with a statement in the conf. championship.
I think if that team had won it all, history would look at Solich differently.
I still have nightmares of losing that Texas game. Stupid Buckhalter fumbling on the Texas one inch line.
Yes. Of course. However, we know that he was doing it with Osborne's players. Once they ran out we became 2nd tier. Solich not only couldn't recruit, but he couldn't innovate his offense. It was sad. That '01 team was good enough if they had 1999's defense. Some good teams for sure. It's around 2002 that we were wondering where the leadership was on the field, was Solich going to look at anyone (anyone) other than Lord (maybe he was all we had). Even with the addition of Pelini we were getting throttled by the good teams on our schedule.
Someone has to go down that path and suggest that the only bad thing was firing two 9-win a year coaches, insinuating that the only bad was Callahan and that he single-handily set the program down the road to destruction. We can argue who was the worst until the cows come home. And I'd be happy to do that due to my nature. But instead of dredging up all that muck maybe we can agree that we had it very good under Coach Osborne and Devaney. Those days are gone. What we have today is a well disciplined staff that is professional and represents our university well. Riley will get another 2-3 years to show progress. I'm still optimistic and until that feeling goes away I will support the staff. Here's to a great year!
I'm not so sure. He made his bones on Osborne recruits. I know he was part of the Staff but he never projected a HC image. Funny part is my Brother said, when he was hired, he will never work out because he is too short to project a HC authority image. I think stature had a bit to do with it. He also was not very well spoken t seemed. The whole image just seemed off. I think kids look to strong leadership traits and he just seemed to be missing those intangibles.
Will anyone remember the ISU HC that won at Auburn and flamed out? Hell, I forgot his name typing this.
I've said this before but I felt he introduced a defeatist attitude. It irked me to no one no when we would go to ISU and he would harp about how difficult it is to play there. That attitude trickled down and rotted away the kick your ass mindset.
Oz, while respectful, would say he expects we will play well and win.
Once mental toughness is gone, it's hard to recover.
When a schlub like me can sit on the couch and call the QB draw on every3rd and long when we go 5 wide, you KNOW you've lost any innovation. I agree with all of the above. It really became apparent when we became a one man team in the Heisman year.
And I loved Crouch. Imagine him behind the pipeline that Frazier enjoyed and his stable of backs. Eric deserved that Heisman for sure.
They once said USC was chasing ghosts before Carrol arrived. They said OU was chasing ghosts before Stoops arrived. Notre Dame before Kelly... heck they said Bama would never catch the ghost of the Bear and than Saban showed up.
All top programs who have had greatness end up chasing ghosts, but they also don't stop till they catch one.
All top programs who have had greatness end up chasing ghosts, but they also don't stop till they catch one.
True. Crouch's supreme talent masked the downward turn of recruiting and other aspects of the program under Solich's watch.
I consider it chasing excellence, not chasing ghosts. If we're chasing ghosts then we are chasing something we can never have again in national relevance.
If true, what's the point of being a fan?
If true, what's the point of being a fan?
Chasing excellence is good and should be an expectation of a blueblood program like Nebraska. But chasing the past and demanding everything is done exactly like it was last time were we great, because that is the only way we will be great again, can be counterproductive. IMO
Last edited:
I agree. There are a lot of ways to achieve excellence. I don't care what we run so long as we win.
Exactly!
I remember watching Alabama play when Shula was the coach there and the commentators were talking about the demise of Alabama. That "it isn't a good job anymore" that "they can't recruit great players anymore" that "fans should accept this is how it is now, there are too many other good SEC teams for Alabama to be dominate again". Alabama was garbage and everyone was saying they were dead and to be forgotten. Funny how the *RIGHT* coach can change all that.
Nothing keeps any program down other than poor coaching. Tom Herman went 13-1 last year at Houston and finished with a win over Florida State, while the 3 previous seasons Houston went 21-17.
Look at what Urban Meyer did at Bowling Green and Utah. Ron Zook lost 5 games each year he was at Florida, despite all the talent you could ever want. Urban Meyer turned that around in a hurry.
Pete Carroll took over a USC team that despite tons of top California talent, was only 1 game above .500 the 3 previous seasons.
Football is 100% coaching folks. Because it is 100% on the coach to not only recruit and bring in talent, but that coach then has to develop and win with that talent. Talent alone isn't a guarantee, otherwise Muschamp would still be at Florida, Blake would still be at Oklahoma, Kiffin would still be at USC, Shula would still be at Alabama, Mack Brown would still be at Texas and so on and so forth.
Will Riley get it done at Nebraska? I have no clue and honestly, no one does. Should Nebraska let apathy set in and "accept" never being good or great again? Absolutely f*cking not!! Because the *RIGHT* coach can dramatically change all that very quickly and people need to understand it might take going through many coaches (Nick Saban was Alabama's fifth coach in just ten years) to find that right one.
Just my opinion. If national championships are a job requirement while running the option with a bunch of homegrown Nebraska kids playing, that's chasing ghosts. Is it chasing ghosts to think you should be in the discussion for a conference championship? Maybe, how much time, money, effort is being spent on Nebraska football.
Paranoia must be setting in on me, because it looks like quite a few people want to make the "good enough" argument. 7 wins good enough isn't it? 8 wins good enough? How bout 6 wins with no blowouts (because no blowouts is more important than winning)? Good is the enemy of great, at least that's what people smarter than me have said.
National recruiting analysts think you have to recruit the best to finish the best. Kind of like a roofing contractor inspecting your roof and then telling you it needs to be replaced. But I tend to agree (with the recruiting analysts not the roofer). A few weeks back I brought up Urban Meyer getting talent from all over the place. People wanted to argue that the state of Ohio has laden with talent. That's not the point. If Meyer can go all over the country to get talent, other people can too.
It's a matter of having the right recipe and the right cook.
Paranoia must be setting in on me, because it looks like quite a few people want to make the "good enough" argument. 7 wins good enough isn't it? 8 wins good enough? How bout 6 wins with no blowouts (because no blowouts is more important than winning)? Good is the enemy of great, at least that's what people smarter than me have said.
National recruiting analysts think you have to recruit the best to finish the best. Kind of like a roofing contractor inspecting your roof and then telling you it needs to be replaced. But I tend to agree (with the recruiting analysts not the roofer). A few weeks back I brought up Urban Meyer getting talent from all over the place. People wanted to argue that the state of Ohio has laden with talent. That's not the point. If Meyer can go all over the country to get talent, other people can too.
It's a matter of having the right recipe and the right cook.
"but..but..but....people who think we should be winning are nothing but hayseeds who want us to run the option 85 times a game with no one playing but walk-ons from Nebraska and are riley haters...."
Similar threads
