ADVERTISEMENT

Name another Bue Blood Program Down

Nov 28, 2016
2,223
2,796
113
Name another Blue Blood program that has been down in mediocrity as long as us.

Texas A&M comes to mind but not as bad. We might be the one with the longest dry spell of not getting a Conference Championship or National Championship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huskred01
Name another Blue Blood program that has been down in mediocrity as long as us.

Texas A&M comes to mind but not as bad. We might be the one with the longest dry spell of not getting a Conference Championship or National Championship.
Texas A&M is not a blue blood. FSU comes to mind but they had a good two year stretch. Miami is probably the most comparable.
 
Name another Blue Blood program that has been down in mediocrity as long as us.

Texas A&M comes to mind but not as bad. We might be the one with the longest dry spell of not getting a Conference Championship or National Championship.
A&M is not a blue blood. Never was. Tennessee is a step below.

Only program is Miami. Everything else is just cyclical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huskred01
Not currently, obviously, but Oklahoma and Alabama looked like they would never be good again for a long stretch until they finally got the right coach. They aren’t too shabby right now.
I remember Oklahoma being down in the 90’s until Stoops came along in ‘99?? So not quite 10 years for them. Not sure how long for Alabama that they were down before Saban came along??

We are close to 20 years of being stuck in the ‘where are they now?’ file. Last Conference Championship in ‘99. Last played for the National Championship in 2001. That is too long given the money behind the program, the facilities, and passionate fanbase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huskred01
A&M is not a blue blood. Never was. Tennessee is a step below.

Only program is Miami. Everything else is just cyclical.
Not sure why A&M is not considered a Blue Blood program. They have a lot of tradition.

Or Tennessee even. They won a NC in 1998. Good example of them being down just like us.

Miami is also a good example. Not sure what their excuse is (or FSU for that matter) given the abundance of talent in their own State.
 
Name another Blue Blood program that has been down in mediocrity as long as us.

Texas A&M comes to mind but not as bad. We might be the one with the longest dry spell of not getting a Conference Championship or National Championship.
"Blue Blood?" lol Is Army still a "Blue Blood" program that's just down??!
 
we are an extreme outlier when looking at recent history of other blue bloods

blue bloods are expected to be elite .. there has to be more than just total wins, most of which are meaningless

I defined an elite season (worthy of blue blood status) as a top 10 finish or major bowl appearance (NY6 equivalent)

The last blue blood worthy season Nebraska has had dates all the back to 2001 (nearly 2 decades)

Listed is what other blue blood programs have accomplished since that time (2001)

Texas - 7 top 10s, 5 major bowls, 1 nat title
USC - 9 top 10s, 9 major bowls, 2 nat titles
Alabama - 12 top 10s, 9 major bowls, 5 nat titles
Michigan - 5 top 10s, 6 major bowls
OSU - 15 top 10s, 14 major bowls, 2 nat titles
ND - 3 top 10s, 5 major bowls
OU - 11 top 10s, 13 major bowls
Penn State - 5 top 10s, 4 major bowls


Nebraska is the only program without an elite season in the past 5 years
Nebraska is the only program without an elite season in the past 10 years
Nebraska is the only program without an elite season in the past 15 years


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

when it comes to blue bloods and winning we hear things are cyclical quite often

List of longest streaks (cycles) without a top ten finish or major bowl appearance by a blue blood (+ Penn State)
1960 - current

Michigan - 4 years
Alabama - 5 years
OSU - 6 years
USC - 7 years
ND - 7 years
Texas - 8 years
PSU - 8 years
OU - 12 years
Nebraska - 18 years and counting

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
we are hoping that Frost gets us back to that elite status ... it didn't take very long for other blue bloods when they got their coach

Blue Blood programs and time to elite status. In parenthesis is the number of wins the program had in the 3 years prior to being hired. Jury is out for some - Harbaugh and Herman. Urban took over a team already performing at an elite level so I did not include him. Kept the list to the 90s onward.

Of the 10 coaches listed (not including Frost)

6/10 - elite season in year 2
9-10/10 - elite season by year 3 - can debate Mack Brown

6/9 had won a national title by yr 3 (excluded Herman)
7/9 had played for a national title (above 6 + Kelly)


Blue Blood + Great Coach = elite program by years 2-3 (modern era)




Mack Brown - yr 3 - 7 -1 in conference top 15 -- yr 4 top 10 - (22 combined wins the 3 yrs prior)

Tom Herman
- year 2 NY6 win -- (16 wins 3 yrs prior)

Pete Carrol - year 2 top 5 -- Nat Title yrs 3-4 -- (19 wins the prior 3 yrs)

Lloyd Carr - year 3 nat title (25 wins prior 3 years)

Jim Harbaugh - year 2 - top 10 + major bowl (20 wins the prior 3 years)

Jim Tressel - year 2 nat title (25 wins the prior 3 years)

Bob Stoops - year 2 - nat title (12 wins the prior 3 years)

Lou Holtz - year 3 national title (19 wins the prior 3 years)

Brian Kelly - year 3 nat title game (16 wins the prior 3 years)

Nick Saban - year 2 ranked 6th - year 3 nat title (22 wins the prior 3 years)

Scott Frost - ????????????? (19 wins the prior 3 years)
 
Nebraska is not a "Blue Blood" program. End of discussion.

Nebraska is a blue blood based on history ... much like the Aztec and Roman Empires are amongst the greatest civilizations of all time but few, if any, expect them to regain the prominence they once held
 
  • Like
Reactions: 250vertical
Texas A&M is not a blue blood. FSU comes to mind but they had a good two year stretch. Miami is probably the most comparable.
Neither FSU or Miami are either. OU and Alabama had stretches of bad football recently, but they didn’t stretch on this long.
 
Texas A&M is not a blue blood. FSU comes to mind but they had a good two year stretch. Miami is probably the most comparable.

dead on brotha. Texas AM hasn’t even been close to Blue Blood status. The other ones that have struggled some are Notre Dame, USC, Texas, Michigan and then Huskers . Those are the other Blue Bloods that have been on the struggle some along with our Huskers. Huskers being the ones that’s struggled the longest and the most as of recent. Michigan being a close 2nd.
 
dead on brotha. Texas AM hasn’t even been close to Blue Blood status. The other ones that have struggled some are Notre Dame, USC, Texas, Michigan and then Huskers . Those are the other Blue Bloods that have been on the struggle some along with our Huskers. Huskers being the ones that’s struggled the longest and the most as of recent. Michigan being a close 2nd.

LOL. Michigan has three 10 win seasons and an 8 win season in last 4 years . A NY6 Bowl win over FLA in 2016 and a BCS win in Sugar Bowl in 2012.

"Down" at Michigan would be the best decade at Nebraska in the last 30 years.
 
LOL. Michigan has three 10 win seasons and an 8 win season in last 4 years . A NY6 Bowl win over FLA in 2016 and a BCS win in Sugar Bowl in 2012.

"Down" at Michigan would be the best decade at Nebraska in the last 30 years.
Another idiotic first post. Well done.
 
LOL. Michigan has three 10 win seasons and an 8 win season in last 4 years . A NY6 Bowl win over FLA in 2016 and a BCS win in Sugar Bowl in 2012.

"Down" at Michigan would be the best decade at Nebraska in the last 30 years.

I suggest you review the 90s and redo your math (30 years) - or it is going to get real ugly real soon for you
 
  • Like
Reactions: headcard
Guys let's start with a refresher of the blue-bloods:

Alabama
Oklahoma
Ohio State
Texas
Michigan
Notre Dame
Nebraska
USC

One the outside looking in are schools like: Tennessee and PSU.

This has been the consensus list for a long time. Not sure I see anyone on there who has been down for nearly 20 years like we are now. I know things got bad for OU in the 90's and Bama too, but this is getting rough.
 
we are an extreme outlier when looking at recent history of other blue bloods

blue bloods are expected to be elite .. there has to be more than just total wins, most of which are meaningless

I defined an elite season (worthy of blue blood status) as a top 10 finish or major bowl appearance (NY6 equivalent)

The last blue blood worthy season Nebraska has had dates all the back to 2001 (nearly 2 decades)

Listed is what other blue blood programs have accomplished since that time (2001)

Texas - 7 top 10s, 5 major bowls, 1 nat title
USC - 9 top 10s, 9 major bowls, 2 nat titles
Alabama - 12 top 10s, 9 major bowls, 5 nat titles
Michigan - 5 top 10s, 6 major bowls
OSU - 15 top 10s, 14 major bowls, 2 nat titles
ND - 3 top 10s, 5 major bowls
OU - 11 top 10s, 13 major bowls
Penn State - 5 top 10s, 4 major bowls


Nebraska is the only program without an elite season in the past 5 years
Nebraska is the only program without an elite season in the past 10 years
Nebraska is the only program without an elite season in the past 15 years


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

when it comes to blue bloods and winning we hear things are cyclical quite often

List of longest streaks (cycles) without a top ten finish or major bowl appearance by a blue blood (+ Penn State)
1960 - current

Michigan - 4 years
Alabama - 5 years
OSU - 6 years
USC - 7 years
ND - 7 years
Texas - 8 years
PSU - 8 years
OU - 12 years
Nebraska - 18 years and counting

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
we are hoping that Frost gets us back to that elite status ... it didn't take very long for other blue bloods when they got their coach

Blue Blood programs and time to elite status. In parenthesis is the number of wins the program had in the 3 years prior to being hired. Jury is out for some - Harbaugh and Herman. Urban took over a team already performing at an elite level so I did not include him. Kept the list to the 90s onward.

Of the 10 coaches listed (not including Frost)

6/10 - elite season in year 2
9-10/10 - elite season by year 3 - can debate Mack Brown

6/9 had won a national title by yr 3 (excluded Herman)
7/9 had played for a national title (above 6 + Kelly)


Blue Blood + Great Coach = elite program by years 2-3 (modern era)




Mack Brown - yr 3 - 7 -1 in conference top 15 -- yr 4 top 10 - (22 combined wins the 3 yrs prior)

Tom Herman
- year 2 NY6 win -- (16 wins 3 yrs prior)

Pete Carrol - year 2 top 5 -- Nat Title yrs 3-4 -- (19 wins the prior 3 yrs)

Lloyd Carr - year 3 nat title (25 wins prior 3 years)

Jim Harbaugh - year 2 - top 10 + major bowl (20 wins the prior 3 years)

Jim Tressel - year 2 nat title (25 wins the prior 3 years)

Bob Stoops - year 2 - nat title (12 wins the prior 3 years)

Lou Holtz - year 3 national title (19 wins the prior 3 years)

Brian Kelly - year 3 nat title game (16 wins the prior 3 years)

Nick Saban - year 2 ranked 6th - year 3 nat title (22 wins the prior 3 years)

Scott Frost - ????????????? (19 wins the prior 3 years)


The last part of your post is what I have pointed out on a few occasions. By year 2-3 you had better see a marked improvement in a programs record, and the quality of wins that come along with that.

There have been several coaches that came from group of 5 programs to power five programs and have flamed out. What is even scarier is that in some of those instances the coaches at least had 7-9 wins in year 2 or 3. There is still time left for that, and I hope it doesn't happen, but this is kind of looking like a Butch Jones, Charlie Strong, Larry Fedora, Dan Hawkins type of situation.

I think how this season finishes out is huge for Frost and company in how this thing looks in 3 more years.
 
Washington comes to mind as a potential blue blood that was down for a long time. I'm not claiming they were ever us, and their blue blood status is debatable, but Don James had em rolling for a long time and they were down for a long time.
 
Name another Blue Blood program that has been down in mediocrity as long as us.

Texas A&M comes to mind but not as bad. We might be the one with the longest dry spell of not getting a Conference Championship or National Championship.
Did some quick research? Looked back to about the 30s and 40s. Us and Michigan are very similar. From a conf championship standpoint most schools don't go more than 10 years in between a conf championship. As far as a NC we are in the same ball park as many other blue bloods. So those that think that Neb is down for good just because we have been down for 20 years is idiotic. Football goes in 15-30 year cycles.

Texas-
12 years is the most with no conf championship
24 years for a NC

Okla-
13 years no conf championship
19 no NC (current streak)

Alabama
10 years no conf championship
17 no NC

ND
31 years no NC (current streak)

Ohio St
9 years no conf championship
32 years no NC

USC
9 years no conf championship
23 no NC

Michigan
15 years no conf championship (current streak)
49 years no NC, currently on a 22 year streak

Nebraska
23 years no conf championship, currently on a 20 year streak
23 years no NC currently on a 22 year streak.
 
Did some quick research? Looked back to about the 30s and 40s. Us and Michigan are very similar. From a conf championship standpoint most schools don't go more than 10 years in between a conf championship. As far as a NC we are in the same ball park as many other blue bloods. So those that think that Neb is down for good just because we have been down for 20 years is idiotic. Football goes in 15-30 year cycles.

Texas-
12 years is the most with no conf championship
24 years for a NC

Okla-
13 years no conf championship
19 no NC (current streak)

Alabama
10 years no conf championship
17 no NC

ND
31 years no NC (current streak)

Ohio St
9 years no conf championship
32 years no NC

USC
9 years no conf championship
23 no NC

Michigan
15 years no conf championship (current streak)
49 years no NC, currently on a 22 year streak

Nebraska
23 years no conf championship, currently on a 20 year streak
23 years no NC currently on a 22 year streak.


these are good data -- I would argue that while conf and national championships are the ultimate goal - top 10 finishes and major bowls are also indicative of blue blood status

no other blue blood's down cycle has lasted more than 5 years without a top 10 finish or major bowl game birth
 
The last part of your post is what I have pointed out on a few occasions. By year 2-3 you had better see a marked improvement in a programs record, and the quality of wins that come along with that.

There have been several coaches that came from group of 5 programs to power five programs and have flamed out. What is even scarier is that in some of those instances the coaches at least had 7-9 wins in year 2 or 3. There is still time left for that, and I hope it doesn't happen, but this is kind of looking like a Butch Jones, Charlie Strong, Larry Fedora, Dan Hawkins type of situation.

I think how this season finishes out is huge for Frost and company in how this thing looks in 3 more years.
When looking back at history of coaches who have long term success and those that don't. I came across a stat that basically said. If a HC doesn't at the very least win their division by year 4 the odds to ever win a conf championship or NC are slim to none.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Top_Gun_ and jlb321
these are good data -- I would argue that while conf and national championships are the ultimate goal - top 10 finishes and major bowls are also indicative of blue blood status
Agree, I would bet when looking at the average end of year rankings over the last 20 years we would be towards the bottom of other blue blood programs. It has been a rough 2 decades there is no denying that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Top_Gun_
Agree, I would bet when looking at the average end of year rankings over the last 20 years we would be towards the bottom of other blue blood programs. It has been a rough 2 decades there is no denying that.

yes - this is why I don't like the overall record argument at the complete expense of looking at elite seasons

I have posted before I would much rather cycle through 7-7-12-7-7-12 win seasons versus 9-10-9-10-9-10 win seasons .. in the first scenario your overall record isn't nearly as good but at least you have an elite season and are nationally relevant every few years
 
yes - this is why I don't like the overall record argument at the complete expense of looking at elite seasons

I have posted before I would much rather cycle through 7-7-12-7-7-12 win seasons versus 9-10-9-10-9-10 win seasons .. in the first scenario your overall record isn't nearly as good but at least you have an elite season and are nationally relevant every few years
Good point. We know what 9 and 10 win season looked like under Bo. Beat the teams would should, get blown out by top 25 teams. With no real shot to ever play for a NC or really even Conf championship.
 
Nebraska is a blue blood based on history ... much like the Aztec and Roman Empires are amongst the greatest civilizations of all time but few, if any, expect them to regain the prominence they once held

I'm afraid that's a good analogy.
 
Did some quick research? Looked back to about the 30s and 40s. Us and Michigan are very similar. From a conf championship standpoint most schools don't go more than 10 years in between a conf championship. As far as a NC we are in the same ball park as many other blue bloods. So those that think that Neb is down for good just because we have been down for 20 years is idiotic. Football goes in 15-30 year cycles.

Texas-
12 years is the most with no conf championship
24 years for a NC

Okla-
13 years no conf championship
19 no NC (current streak)

Alabama
10 years no conf championship
17 no NC

ND
31 years no NC (current streak)

Ohio St
9 years no conf championship
32 years no NC

USC
9 years no conf championship
23 no NC

Michigan
15 years no conf championship (current streak)
49 years no NC, currently on a 22 year streak

Nebraska
23 years no conf championship, currently on a 20 year streak
23 years no NC currently on a 22 year streak.

ND has never won a conference championship!

But seriously, very good info. Thanks for looking it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: husker2612
Nebraska
23 years no conf championship, currently on a 20 year streak
23 years no NC currently on a 22 year streak.
Great take, but we won the Big XII in 1999. This will be our 20th year without a conference championship.

That written, think about the simple mathematic reality of winning a conference championship in an eight-team conference versus a 14-team conference. That alone changes these data slightly.

Winning a six- or seven-team division title in this era of parity AND NO CO-CHAMPIONS is equivalent to winning a conference championship in an eight-team conference that included Kansas State (before Snyder) or a 10-team conference that included historically awful programs such as Northwestern (before Barnett), Indiana (after Pont), Minnesota (after Warmath) and Wisconsin (before Alvarez).

Nebraska alone claimed conference titles in the following years despite not beating the team in tied with, seasons that we wouldn't be allowed to claim as titles under the current set-up:
  • 1969 (Missouri)
  • 1972 (Oklahoma)
  • 1975 (Oklahoma)
  • 1984 (Oklahoma)
  • 1991 (tie game with Colorado)
By the same token, we didn't get credit for a division title in years where we tied for first in six-team divisions because only the winner of the game got to play in the conference title game, seasons that under past policies, we could have claimed as titles:
  • 2000 (Kansas State)
  • 2001 (Colorado)
  • 2008 (Missouri)
The simple math says that in an era where eight or nine power conferences crowned a total of at least eight or nine champions (and often more, in the case of ties — see "Iowa"), it was easier to win a conference championship.

TLDR: Conference championships and the length between them should be measured differently before 1992 (SEC), 1996 (Big XII), 2005 (ACC), and 2011 (Pac-12 and Big Ten).
 
Last edited:
Great take, but se won the Big XII in 1999. This will be our 20th year without a conference championship.

That written, think about the simple mathematic reality of winning a conference championship in an eight-team conference versus a 14-team conference. That alone changes these data slightly.

Winning a six- or seven-team division title in this era of parity AND NO CO-CHAMPIONS is equivalent to winning a conference championship in an eight-team conference that included Kansas State (before Snyder) or a 10-team conference that included historically awful programs such as Northwestern (before Barnett), Indiana (before Mallory) and Wisconsin (before Alvarez).

Nebraska alone claimed conference titles in the following years despite not beating the team in tied with, seasons that we wouldn't be allowed to claim as titles under the current set-up:
  • 1969 (Missouri)
  • 1972 (Oklahoma)
  • 1975 (Oklahoma)
  • 1984 (Oklahoma)
  • 1991 (tie game with Colorado)
By the same token, we didn't get credit for a division title in years where we tied for first in six-team divisions because only the winner of the game got to play in the conference title game, seasons that under past policies, we could have claimed as titles:
  • 2000 (Kansas State)
  • 2001 (Colorado)
  • 2008 (Missouri)
The simple math says that in an era where eight or nine power conferences crowned a total of at least eight or nine champions (and often more, in the case of ties — see "Iowa"), it was easier to win a conference championship.

TLDR: Conference championships and the length between them should be measured differently before 1992 (SEC), 1996 (Big XII), 2005 (ACC), and 2011 (Pac-12 and Big Ten).
Yet, we leave all those potential national championships on the table. While schools like Alabama claim them.
 
If fans think Nebraska was never down before they are wrong. I lived n Omaha in 1961 and went to a game with a Neb. fan. Believe it was North Dakota and the attendance was 10.000 not excited fans. We could sit just about anywhere we wanted to.
 
If fans think Nebraska was never down before they are wrong. I lived n Omaha in 1961 and went to a game with a Neb. fan. Believe it was North Dakota and the attendance was 10.000 not excited fans. We could sit just about anywhere we wanted to.
Decent memory! Glad you had a good time. Yes, we defeated North Dakota 33-0 on Sept. 23, 1961 at Memorial Stadium in Lincoln. It was the first game of a 3-6-1 season, the final year for coach Bill Jennings.

The attendance for that game is listed as 25,129. The stadium seated about 30,000 in those days, so there were empty seats. Just maybe not as many as you remember. For the rest of that losing season, Nebraska drew 34,721 against Arizona, 35,387 against Syracuse, 32,450 against Kansas, 28,106 in a driving rain against Colorado, and 26,139 against Oklahoma, Jennings' last game.

For comparison's sake, Iowa didn't play that day, but opened at home the next week with a 28-7 victory over California, the first win in a 5-4 season.

Finally, 1961 was Nebraska's sixth consecutive losing season, but it also marked Nebraska's last losing season until 2004, and 1961 marked Iowa's last winning season until 1981.

Also, Nebraska recorded only TWO losing seasons in the 51 seasons from 1890-1940. What you witnessed was the end of the 1941-1961 drought (17 losing seasons in 21). We're not anything close to that yet, but a losing year this season would be our fourth in five years — scary territory for us, but probably not so much for a long-time Hawkeye fan who has been through a lot of those.

You all are doing a good job of making up for lost ground the last four years.
 
Last edited:
Decent memory! Glad you had a good time. Yes, we defeated North Dakota 33-0 on Sept. 23, 1961 at Memorial Stadium in Lincoln. It was the first game of a 3-6-1 season, the final year for coach Bill Jennings.

The attendance for that game is listed as 25,129. The stadium seated about 30,000 in those days, so there were empty seats. Just maybe not as many as you remember. For the rest of that losing season, Nebraska drew 34,721 against Arizona, 35,387 against Syracuse, 32,450 against Kansas, 28,106 in a driving rain against Colorado, and 26,139 against Oklahoma, Jennings' last game.

For comparison's sake, Iowa didn't play that day, but opened at home the next week with a 28-7 victory over California, the first win in a 5-4 season.

Finally, 1961 was Nebraska's sixth consecutive losing season, but it also marked Nebraska's last losing season until 2004, and 1961 marked Iowa's last winning season until 1981.

You all are doing a good job of making up for lost ground the last four years.

I equate our status as a blue blood program to Sears in the retail world. Dominant at one time, but its been so long that only folks over a certain age remember that or have ever shopped there. Like Sears, when we do make news today its almost always for the wrong reasons. The last big positive news we got on the national level was hiring HCSF, but the luster has come off that as well - at least for now.

That said, while its hard to envision any future for Sears, I'm cautiously more optimistic for NU
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssmill777 and 9and4
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT