• 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.

State of the program

Busker

Recruit
Illinois and Minny also each need to drop a game, since they have tie breaker against us (head to head). That's a big ask, but...

It's good to be in the running for a B1G championship on the last day of the season.
Not quite sure what I was looking at, but you are correct. We definitely lost both those series...
 

ShortSideOption

All Big 10
10 Year Member
Stats are fun. You could also say we've made Regionals 12 times and won 28 NCAA tourney games in the last 20 years.

How does football look without the aberrations of Tom Osborne and Johnny Rodgers? Nebraska produces enough baseball talent to be competitive if not occasionally really good.
Are you asking how Nebraska football would look if it wasn’t for the 70s, 80s, and 90s?
 

Iowama Red

Recruit
2 Year Member
Are you asking how Nebraska football would look if it wasn’t for the 70s, 80s, and 90s?
I'm asking what it would look like without counting our best coach and best player from a different coach.

Edit: See Basil's argument that we shouldn't expect to be good since we've only been good when we had good players/coaches.
 
Last edited:

ShortSideOption

All Big 10
10 Year Member
I'm asking what it would look like without counting our best coach and best player from a different coach.
I’m not sure if you are being serious or not but I’ll play along. Nebraska football had something like 45 conference titles before the year 2000. Nebraska baseball had 3 before 2000/Van Horn showing up. Nebraska football was good thru multiple coaches, multiple local heisman winners, and multiple decades. Nebraska baseball was garbage before an 8 year run.

Compare baseball to basketball. For how terrible everyone thinks our basketball is, they actually had more NCAA tourney births and conference titles than baseball before Van Horn showed up. The football comparison isn’t even close.
 

Iowama Red

Recruit
2 Year Member
I’m not sure if you are being serious or not but I’ll play along. Nebraska football had something like 45 conference titles before the year 2000. Nebraska baseball had 3 before 2000/Van Horn showing up. Nebraska football was good thru multiple coaches, multiple local heisman winners, and multiple decades. Nebraska baseball was garbage before an 8 year run.

Compare baseball to basketball. For how terrible everyone thinks our basketball is, they actually had more NCAA tourney births and conference titles than baseball before Van Horn showed up. The football comparison isn’t even close.
The point wasn't to compare our baseball and football history. It was to show that it doesn't make sense to exclude the best players and coaches of a program's history when you're defining a good season, especially if you're going to act like what we did in the 1940s is relevant.

If you think there is any room for improvement in the baseball program, winning a couple regional games isn't a huge leap. We've made it to regionals 3 out of 5 years and will probably make it this year, so let's win a couple games and raise the bar. I'm not calling for anybody to get fired or anything. I'd just like to win another regional game or 2 and don't think it's impossible because of our poor conference.
 

Elwood von Kiowa

Grad Assistant
5 Year Member
I'm asking what it would look like without counting our best coach and best player from a different coach.

Edit: See Basil's argument that we shouldn't expect to be good since we've only been good when we had good players/coaches.
NU FB was one of the top programs nationally from about 1892 to 1940.

Ed Weir, Guy Chamberlain, George Sauer, Link Lyman, Clarence Swanson, DX Bible, Biff Jones, Jumbo Stiehm, Fielding Yost, ... Plenty of football tradition before WW II. None such for baseball.
 

Elwood von Kiowa

Grad Assistant
5 Year Member
The point wasn't to compare our baseball and football history. It was to show that it doesn't make sense to exclude the best players and coaches of a program's history when you're defining a good season, especially if you're going to act like what we did in the 1940s is relevant.

If you think there is any room for improvement in the baseball program, winning a couple regional games isn't a huge leap. We've made it to regionals 3 out of 5 years and will probably make it this year, so let's win a couple games and raise the bar. I'm not calling for anybody to get fired or anything. I'd just like to win another regional game or 2 and don't think it's impossible because of our poor conference.
Note: My previous post was made before I read this ^^.

Agreed, let's win some games and raise the bar!
 

ShortSideOption

All Big 10
10 Year Member
The point wasn't to compare our baseball and football history. It was to show that it doesn't make sense to exclude the best players and coaches of a program's history when you're defining a good season, especially if you're going to act like what we did in the 1940s is relevant.

If you think there is any room for improvement in the baseball program, winning a couple regional games isn't a huge leap. We've made it to regionals 3 out of 5 years and will probably make it this year, so let's win a couple games and raise the bar. I'm not calling for anybody to get fired or anything. I'd just like to win another regional game or 2 and don't think it's impossible because of our poor conference.
I read ya... I think Erstad needs to be able to win a post-season game or two here in the next couple years and get to that next step. I just think super regionals is tough as an expectation when there's only 2 coaches who have been once each in the conference. I do think there are some things Erstad could do better and get us even better results, and I don't have a problem with wanting regional wins. I can respect that. I do have a problem with some people on the board thinking we need to "move on from Erstad" when the Dodgers and an SEC team were coming after him before he won coach of the year and brought a conference title here as if what is happening isn't good enough. Makes zero sense to anyone in the baseball world, and luckily makes zero sense to who it matters to (Moos). There are 4 or 5 things he can do better and I think we could really elevate our play, but firing a coach dominating our conference with a 1st or 2nd place finish 4 of the last 6 years isn't the answer.
 
Last edited:

Busker

Recruit
Minnesota helped today, and the Huskers are doing their part. See what Illinois and Indiana do this evening...
 

Husker Eponymous

Scout Team
10 Year Member
I read ya... I think Erstad needs to be able to win a post-season game or two here in the next couple years and get to that next step. I just think super regionals is tough as an expectation when there's only 2 coaches who have been once each in the conference. I do think there are some things Erstad could do better and get us even better results, and I don't have a problem with wanting regional wins. I can respect that. I do have a problem with some people on the board thinking we need to "move on from Erstad" when the Dodgers and an SEC team were coming after him before he won coach of the year and brought a conference title here as if what is happening isn't good enough. Makes zero sense to anyone in the baseball world, and luckily makes zero sense to who it matters to (Moos). There are 4 or 5 things he can do better and I think we could really elevate our play, but firing a coach dominating our conference with a 1st or 2nd place finish 4 of the last 6 years isn't the answer.
I love the Dodgers and SEC arguement. <<<rolling eyes>>> the guy has one win over Binghamton in 7 full years as head coach, and the SEC wants him?

This is the same SEC that ran out Smoke Laval after making the CWS. Word of advice for all, just cuz SSO says it, don't make it true.

Baseball is about the postseason, not about finishing high up in the Big 10 conference. Don't let the sycophants and pollyanna's convince you otherwise.
 
Top