• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Devaney and Frost

Technology certainly has a place but I would not consider it THE reason. Heck TO was welcoming Florida State and Bobby Bowden to Lincoln to showcase his organization. FSU copied everything and went onto a glorious run of success ... done well before the internet age.

IMO to address the question ... THE reason for the differences is television ... more specifically the money generated from television. Back in the days of Devaney there were only 3 dozen teams actively playing high level collegiate football. It simply was not worth the amount of investment required to field a team that made money. The money they made back then paled in comparison to today's environment. Back then no one heard to Boise State or UCF or Utah or K-State or Troy or Northern Illinois ... so on and so forth. Nowadays the list of colleges with teams capable of competing for the top 25 is huge.

Biggest difference is ... money (more specifically money generated by television revenues).

Yeah isn't what you are describing parity? GFOA doesn't think it exists and for the top 8-10 teams it doesn't. There are a lot more good teams than their used to be. In the 70's and 80's Nebraska had 6 gimmies most years in the Big 8. ISU, OSU, KSU, KU, CU, and MU were not very good most of the time, they might take turns being decent for a while, but nothing sustained. Everyone of those teams now is decent expect KU. You better show up to play or you will lose to those teams. That is parity. Same goes for the B1G. RU and Illinois are the only true dogs in the bunch.
 
If HCSF is going to bring Nebraska back to winning our division, playing for Big championships and moving up in the rankings he's going to need a serious talent upgrade imo. It's going to be interesting the next several years to watch what happens. If after a couple of recruiting cycles we're suddenly in the hunt we can revisit the talent issue........
1000% agreed

My point is we currently have better talent than 0-6 record indicates. Truthfully the only game so far that we've been out-talented is Michigan.
 
Yeah isn't what you are describing parity? GFOA doesn't think it exists and for the top 8-10 teams it doesn't. There are a lot more good teams than their used to be. In the 70's and 80's Nebraska had 6 gimmies most years in the Big 8. ISU, OSU, KSU, KU, CU, and MU were not very good most of the time, they might take turns being decent for a while, but nothing sustained. Everyone of those teams now is decent expect KU. You better show up to play or you will lose to those teams. That is parity. Same goes for the B1G. RU and Illinois are the only true dogs in the bunch.
Back in 1970 ... there were MAYBE 25 or 30 teams capable of breaking into the Top 20.

Today there are probably 50+ teams capable of breaking into the Top 25 ... that is parity.

To GFOA's point ... going into this season there were maybe 8-10 teams legitimately capable of winning the NC. We've become top heavy. The rich are becoming richer. The middle class is growing (thus more parity) but the truly elite teams are still few and far between.
 
Back in 1970 ... there were MAYBE 25 or 30 teams capable of breaking into the Top 20.

Today there are probably 50+ teams capable of breaking into the Top 25 ... that is parity.

To GFOA's point ... going into this season there were maybe 8-10 teams legitimately capable of winning the NC. We've become top heavy. The rich are becoming richer. The middle class is growing (thus more parity) but the truly elite teams are still few and far between.

I agree completely with what you are saying. There is still an elite end of college football, but there are a lot more good that even the elite have to take seriously.
 



1000% agreed

My point is we currently have better talent than 0-6 record indicates. Truthfully the only game so far that we've been out-talented is Michigan.
Don't believe we're far apart on this one... OMG is that remotely possible? Just kidding... We do have some talent and we shouldn't be 0-6. I've been unhappy with some play calling and clock management. Had we milked the clock I think NW might have run out of time before they could have tied the game...
 
Last edited:
Sorry you are bothered by the comparison.

In Jennning's four years at Nebraska he was 15-34-1 (.310). Clearly there was no winning culture. In Devaney's first year he was 9-2 with a win in the Gotham Bowl.

I think it is legitimate to compare the first years of Devaney and Frost and ask what accounted for Devaney's immediate success. It is not a knock on Frost. He seems to be struggling, yet I imagine that he will have success. Just not as quickly as Devaney. Whether his success will ever include a NC, well, who knows.
And the trolling continues. Why not compare how Solich would do as a RB in today’s game as well? It’s about as relevant.
 
Last edited:
Technology certainly has a place but I would not consider it THE reason. Heck TO was welcoming Florida State and Bobby Bowden to Lincoln to showcase his organization. FSU copied everything and went onto a glorious run of success ... done well before the internet age.
LOL, really? Enough with the revisionist history baloney. Florida State was winning big a year after BB got there. They came to Lincoln in 1980 and beat us at home. The previous year they had a better record and outranked us in the AP final poll after being beaten by Oklahoma in the Orange bowl. BB built his own program and built a great one...TO gets plenty of credit, there's no reason for all the deification...he doesn't get credit for what Devaney built and did, and he doesn't get credit for Bowden either...his greatness can stand on its own without made up stuff.
 
Last edited:
And
And the trolling continues. Why not compare how Solich would do as a RB in today’s game as well? It’s about as relevant.

You called the guy out as trolling, by trolling. Why is this behavior supposed to be acceptable? WB has a clear and concise message that doesn't deserve this condescending response.
 



You called the guy out as trolling, by trolling. Why is this behavior supposed to be acceptable? WB has a clear and concise message that doesn't deserve this condescending response.
Trolling isn’t something derived from a single post, it’s based on a pattern of posts. A simple review of numerous efforts to impune the current staff’s every decision, going so far as to lob out some absurd comparison to a coaching change from 55 years ago, suggest trolling. Other than the fact this was a HOF coach at Nebraska, is there really anything that makes a comparison from 55 years ago relevant to today’s football environment? Why not pull out Joe Kuharich, a successful coach and former ND player, who came back to lead the Irish? Most would consider that equally inconsequential.

The fact you jump to his defense is further proof that birds of a feather indeed do flock together.
 
Last edited:
I see a healthy conversation going on in this thread without your unnecessary vitriol.
 
Don't believe we're far apart on this one... OMG is that remotely possible? Just kidding... We do have some talent and we shouldn't be 0-6. I've been unhappy with some play calling and clock management. Had we milked the clock I think NW might have run out of time before they could have tied the game...

But this is the Catch 22. If you play it safe, go with the basic running plays, run the clock down, and then hope the D can hold, you can be accused of playing not to lose. Burning the clock is great, but you know what also burns clock? Another set of downs. You know what can make another set of downs easier to get? Pushing a team that’s starting to gas. I can assure you, an extra 15 seconds of resting when you are gassing is your new best friend.

The staff knew we were seriously in the weeds in the secondary with several guys going down during the game, and I hate to speak for them, but I think there was a lack of faith we could stop them from going down the field. Get the first down, and we can run the clock out. Any time left might have been too much time.
 
Yeah isn't what you are describing parity? GFOA doesn't think it exists and for the top 8-10 teams it doesn't. There are a lot more good teams than their used to be. In the 70's and 80's Nebraska had 6 gimmies most years in the Big 8. ISU, OSU, KSU, KU, CU, and MU were not very good most of the time, they might take turns being decent for a while, but nothing sustained. Everyone of those teams now is decent expect KU. You better show up to play or you will lose to those teams. That is parity. Same goes for the B1G. RU and Illinois are the only true dogs in the bunch.
Yep. Didn't we literally have win streaks of over 30 consecutive games at one point against OSU, KU and KSU? Not sure in ISU. The Big Eight wasn't real challenging other than OU. MU would have a competitive team every once in while.
 



Yep. Didn't we literally have win streaks of over 30 consecutive games at one point against OSU, KU and KSU? Not sure in ISU. The Big Eight wasn't real challenging other than OU. MU would have a competitive team every once in while.

That's true of the '80s, although the Pat Jones coached Okie St. teams with Larry Coker at OC had several 10- win seasons.

The '90s was a different story. In 1995, Nebraska of course won the MNC. Colorado, KSU and Kansas all went 10-2 and finished in the Top 10. When half your league finishes Top 10, it's plenty challenging.
 
That's true of the '80s, although the Pat Jones coached Okie St. teams with Larry Coker at OC had several 10- win seasons.

The '90s was a different story. In 1995, Nebraska of course won the MNC. Colorado, KSU and Kansas all went 10-2 and finished in the Top 10. When half your league finishes Top 10, it's plenty challenging.
Crowder and Mallory had some solid seasons at CU in the 70's as well.
 


GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top