Everyone is happy and the future is extremely bright. Winning is an amazing stimulant. The Golden Age of NU football without a doubt.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Agreed. I used to be pretty happy that we just made a bowl, but the losses, whether heartbreaking (Auburn, Mizzou) or ass beatings (Tenn) lasted all.winter, spring and summer) Even the 7-6 season w a win over Pitt felt good.Everyone is happy and the future is extremely bright. Winning is an amazing stimulant. The Golden Age of NU football without a doubt.
Yeah, it really did seem like we'd end up with a season similar to 2016 after the tough start. We'd fight our way to a bowl at 6-6 or 7-5, and then hopefully send the seniors off on a high note. Did not think we would end up with an 8-1 division title and a bowl win of this quality.Agreed. I used to be pretty happy that we just made a bowl, but the losses, whether heartbreaking (Auburn, Mizzou) or ass beatings (Tenn) lasted all.winter, spring and summer) Even the 7-6 season w a win over Pitt felt good.
Things looked pretty bad after Akron. I figured we'd turn it around like we'd done before, but not to this level.
How many games were won with Fitz Ball? I know it's not entertaining to watch our team go into turtle mode but it seems Fitz has gotten real good at taking the air out of our opponents in close games. I don't think Fitz gets enough credit.
He’s possibly being interviewed by an NFL team. He’s getting credit.
I have thought this, and said it, for years. Especially when we had the terrible 0-9 bowl streak going, and in 2012 some fans were worried about bowl picking order and wanting us to play in the highest ranked, most prestigious bowl possible against the highest ranked team possible. Some people that year were actually rattling that 8-4 Mississippi State (4-4 in the SEC) wasn’t a worthy enough opponent for our 9-3 team who was seconds away from going undefeated that year. But nobody remembers or talks about Mississippi State’s 2012 resume. It’s irrelevant. All that is remembered is that we won.
All we have heard since Monday is that this is NU’s “third bowl win in a row” and “NU’s fourth bowl win in the last five games”. WINNING your bowl game is all that matters for momentum and a strong send off to end the season, and for how the season overall is remembered.
- Nobody remembers in what order the Big Ten teams were selected.
- Outside of the Rose Bowl, nobody remembers how prestigious the bowl game was considered that season.
- Nobody remembers the opponent you played or more accurately, how good they were considered that year.
(Hell, it’s not even really remembered/talked about much how bad of a regular season 2016 was, as we only went 6-6 and lost to ILLINOIS STATE (worse than losing to Akron IMO). It’s still remembered as a good year because of the Pitt, Pinstripe win. Conversely, the 6-6 2004 team that had a better Big Ten record (5-3 vs. 5-4) and BEAT OHIO STATE, is not remebered as such a great year, I maintain, because we didn’t even go bowling).
Getting selected over/ passed over by teams for a top tier bowl game doesn’t resonate past selection Sunday. That’s especially true if you get pantsed in the game. You just look like you were undeserving of the attention and respect you’d received to that point, and the season ends sour. Look at ND. Making the CFP is going to be far less talked about than what happened to them in that game, and all we’ve heard is that they were really undeserving and are evidence the CFP ranking system needs an overhaul.
Not once has anyone mentioned that Iowa was selected ahead of us for Outback Bowl this year. Nobody has mentioned that we were passed over for more prestigious bowls in 2012. Nobody remembers that Kentucky was only 7-5 last year before the bowl game, 4-4 in conference and unranked.
Just win the game and everything is sunshine and unicorns! Lose it, and all the these other things that were concerning before kickoff become irrelevant anyway.
Is it elixir enough to help you forget your dislike for CT?
Agreed. I used to be pretty happy that we just made a bowl, but the losses, whether heartbreaking (Auburn, Mizzou) or ass beatings (Tenn) lasted all.winter, spring and summer) Even the 7-6 season w a win over Pitt felt good.
Things looked pretty bad after Akron. I figured we'd turn it around like we'd done before, but not to this level.
Yeah, I've also said that especially in "good years" where we have a shot to finish in the top 25 with a bowl win or finish outside with a loss; those are the years where the bowl win is especially important.I have thought this, and said it, for years. Especially when we had the terrible 0-9 bowl streak going, and in 2012 some fans were worried about bowl picking order and wanting us to play in the highest ranked, most prestigious bowl possible against the highest ranked team possible. Some people that year were actually rattling that 8-4 Mississippi State (4-4 in the SEC) wasn’t a worthy enough opponent for our 9-3 team who was seconds away from going undefeated that year. But nobody remembers or talks about Mississippi State’s 2012 resume. It’s irrelevant. All that is remembered is that we won.
All we have heard since Monday is that this is NU’s “third bowl win in a row” and “NU’s fourth bowl win in the last five games”. WINNING your bowl game is all that matters for momentum and a strong send off to end the season, and for how the season overall is remembered.
- Nobody remembers in what order the Big Ten teams were selected.
- Outside of the Rose Bowl, nobody remembers how prestigious the bowl game was considered that season.
- Nobody remembers the opponent you played or more accurately, how good they were considered that year.
(Hell, it’s not even really remembered/talked about much how bad of a regular season 2016 was, as we only went 6-6 and lost to ILLINOIS STATE (worse than losing to Akron IMO). It’s still remembered as a good year because of the Pitt, Pinstripe win. Conversely, the 6-6 2004 team that had a better Big Ten record (5-3 vs. 5-4) and BEAT OHIO STATE, is not remebered as such a great year, I maintain, because we didn’t even go bowling).
Getting selected over/ passed over by teams for a top tier bowl game doesn’t resonate past selection Sunday. That’s especially true if you get pantsed in the game. You just look like you were undeserving of the attention and respect you’d received to that point, and the season ends sour. Look at ND. Making the CFP is going to be far less talked about than what happened to them in that game, and all we’ve heard is that they were really undeserving and are evidence the CFP ranking system needs an overhaul.
Not once has anyone mentioned that Iowa was selected ahead of us for Outback Bowl this year. Nobody has mentioned that we were passed over for more prestigious bowls in 2012. Nobody remembers that Kentucky was only 7-5 last year before the bowl game, 4-4 in conference and unranked.
Just win the game and everything is sunshine and unicorns! Lose it, and all the these other things that were concerning before kickoff become irrelevant anyway.
Totally agree. I was at the Alamo Bowl in 2000 and that was a real downer. The team had blown a great chance at the Rose Bowl by losing to a sub-500 Iowa team and then got a bad matchup with pre-season #1 ranked Nebraska. As I remember it, that team had been passed over for the Outback, which had a much more winnable game vs. South Carolina.his year will go down as better than the 2000 season for me. I'll take an 8-1 division title + top 25 ranking + bowl win over quality opponent over a 6-2 Big Ten co-champ title with an unranked finish any day.
I HAVE been at odds with many, both on this board and in person, who see Thorson as some type of QB God
This is really, really significant. I would go so far as to say that aside from the national champion and some of the top spots, no one remembers where teams finished in final rankings, either.
- Nobody remembers in what order the Big Ten teams were selected.
- Outside of the Rose Bowl, nobody remembers how prestigious the bowl game was considered that season.
- Nobody remembers the opponent you played or more accurately, how good they were considered that year.
Narrative wise, I think ranked finishes typically get divided into two catch-all categories: top 10 and top 25.This is really, really significant. I would go so far as to say that aside from the national champion and some of the top spots, no one remembers where teams finished in final rankings, either.
This is really, really significant. I would go so far as to say that aside from the national champion and some of the top spots, no one remembers where teams finished in final rankings, either.
Agreed. How many times have we heard that Willingham was 11-1 in bowl games going into Monday? There was zero mention of:
Winning is the only thing that resonates through the off season and beyond.
- Utah’s end of season rankings those years
- The bowl games in which they played (even though as members of the Mountian West prior to 2012, they weren’t in many prestigious games)
- The quality of their bowl opponents each year
As for preseason rankings, I don’t think those matter much at all either and largely take care of themselves. Aside from 1996, there has been no season I recall when we were ranked in the preseason and didn’t fall on our faces. And I don’t remember any season where any aspect of our end of season results/standing/success was based in any way on our preseason raking.
Eh, disagree, but we've had this argument before. Do you hear anyone saying that Wisconsin had a good season when they limped to the Pinstripe and beat a trash Miami team? The reason people remember the Pitt win is because we played a ranked team there and beat them. The Kentucky win was nice, though not huge because they were an okay not great team, in a decent bowl at the Music City. The Utah win was probably the best one we've had to-date (excluding the Rose Bowl way back win) - because we beat another ranked team in a high profile game.I have thought this, and said it, for years. Especially when we had the terrible 0-9 bowl streak going, and in 2012 some fans were worried about bowl picking order and wanting us to play in the highest ranked, most prestigious bowl possible against the highest ranked team possible. Some people that year were actually rattling that 8-4 Mississippi State (4-4 in the SEC) wasn’t a worthy enough opponent for our 9-3 team who was seconds away from going undefeated that year. But nobody remembers or talks about Mississippi State’s 2012 resume. It’s irrelevant. All that is remembered is that we won.
All we have heard since Monday is that this is NU’s “third bowl win in a row” and “NU’s fourth bowl win in the last five games”. WINNING your bowl game is all that matters for momentum and a strong send off to end the season, and for how the season overall is remembered.
- Nobody remembers in what order the Big Ten teams were selected.
- Outside of the Rose Bowl, nobody remembers how prestigious the bowl game was considered that season.
- Nobody remembers the opponent you played or more accurately, how good they were considered that year.
(Hell, it’s not even really remembered/talked about much how bad of a regular season 2016 was, as we only went 6-6 and lost to ILLINOIS STATE (worse than losing to Akron IMO). It’s still remembered as a good year because of the Pitt, Pinstripe win. Conversely, the 6-6 2004 team that had a better Big Ten record (5-3 vs. 5-4) and BEAT OHIO STATE, is not remebered as such a great year, I maintain, because we didn’t even go bowling).
Getting selected over/ passed over by teams for a top tier bowl game doesn’t resonate past selection Sunday. That’s especially true if you get pantsed in the game. You just look like you were undeserving of the attention and respect you’d received to that point, and the season ends sour. Look at ND. Making the CFP is going to be far less talked about than what happened to them in that game, and all we’ve heard is that they were really undeserving and are evidence the CFP ranking system needs an overhaul.
Not once has anyone mentioned that Iowa was selected ahead of us for Outback Bowl this year. Nobody has mentioned that we were passed over for more prestigious bowls in 2012. Nobody remembers that Kentucky was only 7-5 last year before the bowl game, 4-4 in conference and unranked.
Just win the game and everything is sunshine and unicorns! Lose it, and all the these other things that were concerning before kickoff become irrelevant anyway.
Eh, disagree, but we've had this argument before. Do you hear anyone saying that Wisconsin had a good season when they limped to the Pinstripe and beat a trash Miami team? The reason people remember the Pitt win is because we played a ranked team there and beat them. The Kentucky win was nice, though not huge because they were an okay not great team, in a decent bowl at the Music City. The Utah win was probably the best one we've had to-date (excluding the Rose Bowl way back win) - because we beat another ranked team in a high profile game.
Now I'm not saying I would have wanted us to go up against Georgia this year as that would've been a bad matchup for us (disregarding how flat they came out), but I'd certainly rather play in a higher profile bowl against an opponent that is at least on par with us in terms of quality. I was much happier going to the Holiday to play Utah, vs I dunno maybe the Redbox bowl or something.
I heard the same 11-1 Willingham stat that someone else mentioned a whole bunch this past week as well... but I think that's mostly just pundits trying to guess who would win the bowl game. I don't think that the program was getting any more respect because of that. It's not like their great bowl record has translated to Utah being highly touted in preseason rankings over the last 5-10 years, I think they've generally been an under the radar team just as much as we are. Stanford and Oregon get all the love and hype out of the Pac12 North (to the extent there is any).
Paragraph 1 you argued tangential to my point, paragraph 2 you pretty much missed my point that the bowl records in itself are almost entirely viewed as applicable to the pending bowl season rather than indicative of long-term program prestige (unless you win a high profile bowl over a high profile opponent), paragraph 3 you didn't really rebut the claim you just called it ridiculous and insane.Think you’re wrong on almost every front here. The reason you don’t hear about Wisconsin having a great year this year is because they were projected to win the Big Ten West, and be in the Championship Game for the SIXTH time in eight seasons of existence. In that light, which doesn’t apply to NU yet, the Pinstripe Bowl is a disappointment.
And the 11-1 Willingham bowl record was mentioned multiple times DURING the game and has been so afterwards as well. This was not at all used as just as a means to predict the outcome. And even if it was, it was used as a reason to predict a Utah victory, a sign of the respect for Utah for which we strive as a program. And regardless of why it was used, there were no astericks around it, clarifying who they played or the pecking order of the bowl in which they played. Only the Ws were reflected, just as only our Ls were reflected prior to 2012. Never in describing those Ls did anyone qualify it by saying how marquee the games were, how close the scores or the strength of the opponents we played. Just that we lost.
Finally, the statement “the reason people remember the Pitt win is because we played a ranked team there and beat them,” I don’t even know where to begin on the ridiculousness of that claim. (Incidentally, they were 22nd in the AP, NOT RANKED in the coaches, and 23rd in the CFP prior to the game). Even if that statement was not blatantly insane as why the Pinstripe Bowl win is mentioned as part of NU’s three game bowl winning streak, the Pitt rankings at that time are hardly what makes that win relevant.
Beating a ranked team in a bowl game is all that people remember. Not which bowl.
In this age of information overload, I think a lot of casual fans will be satisfied with the narrative of NU having won 3 straight bowl games, the B1G West championship, and Fitz being Coach of the Year.
That said, there's still a lot of work left to be done before we can fully shed the image of the program from the Dark Ages, especially for the older generation.
To be fair, it's not about specifically remembering who finishes ranked and where or not, but that people remember teams that are ranked at the end of the season if they are often there.I had to step back a second. Let's take a mid-level program in another big conference. Say, Auburn or Oregon or West Virginia. I cannot tell you over the last 10 or even 5 or even 3 years how many bowls they won, whom they played, whom they beat or lost to, whether the opponent was ranked, and whether or where any of these schools were ranked at the end of the season. And I actually follow college football.
Just saying I think there is a perception among the rabid here that people remember a lot more about our program than they actually do.
Honestly, if one day we start kicking dOSU's asses every year, I'm not sure what I would do with myself.
Paragraph 1 you argued tangential to my point, paragraph 2 you pretty much missed my point that the bowl records in itself are almost entirely viewed as applicable to the pending bowl season rather than indicative of long-term program prestige (unless you win a high profile bowl over a high profile opponent), paragraph 3 you didn't really rebut the claim you just called it ridiculous and insane.
So, no sense in going in circles here, agree to disagree. I would be more than happy to continue playing evenly matched or even slightly better teams than us in higher profile bowls, you would prefer to play teams that we are favored against in lower profile bowls. It's simply a difference of opinion.
You don’t remember Auburn’s national championship? It was featured prominently on all the sports shows the season after we played them in the Outback Bowl.I had to step back a second. Let's take a mid-level program in another big conference. Say, Auburn or Oregon or West Virginia. I cannot tell you over the last 10 or even 5 or even 3 years how many bowls they won, whom they played, whom they beat or lost to, whether the opponent was ranked, and whether or where any of these schools were ranked at the end of the season.
I had to step back a second. Let's take a mid-level program in another big conference. Say, Auburn or Oregon or West Virginia. I cannot tell you over the last 10 or even 5 or even 3 years how many bowls they won, whom they played, whom they beat or lost to, whether the opponent was ranked, and whether or where any of these schools were ranked at the end of the season. And I actually follow college football.
Just saying I think there is a perception among the rabid here that people remember a lot more about our program than they actually do.
You know who probably can tell you how many bowl games they've won? Or better said, how many compared to some other schools? The recruits who are walked by the trophy case when they visit and see the word "Champions" and a year written on each big audacious piece of hardware inside of it. Are there articles for them to read describing how marquee the game was considered that year or the opponent, what their ranking was in each of a multitude of polls of varying respect from year to year? Nope. It is called hardware for a reason. It lasts forever (as opposed to a ranking that is only relevant until the next week of games is played), and its meaning is as clear as it is permanent......Champions.
Beating a ranked team in a bowl game is all that people remember. Not which bowl.
But that ranking is what they are ranked currently, not what they were ranked at the time of the game.
I’m somewhat confused as to why you are so militant and close minded about this topic.Nobody remembers what teams were ranked going into a bowl game. Frankly, I don’t think people remember what rankings are prior to the current rankings ever. As an example, when a team’s record is evaluated at the end of the season, they talk about how many ranked teams they beat. But that ranking is what they are ranked currently, not what they were ranked at the time of the game.
I’m somewhat confused as to why you are so militant and close minded about this topic.
How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?