90% of your post is correct except for this part. They weren't just good from 1994-1997. Their run actually lasted from 1993-2001. They won three national championships, played in five national championship games, and was one loss away from playing for two more national titles (1996, 1999). They finished in the top 10 eight times in nine years from 1993-2001. That's really impressive.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Zamoro10

Member since Jul 2008

14743 posts

Posted on 12/16/13 at 12:14 am to Bench McElroy

quote:
Bench

I'm not saying their run wasn't impressive in the 90's.

But I grew up with Nebraska in the 80's - they were known as the overrated program that couldn't get it done against the big boys.

If 80's Nebraska were playing today...SEC fan would make fun of them worse than Ohio State.

They lost way more in big bowl games than Ohio State...just were outclassed with speed.

But SEC fan adores Nebraska in the 90's because SEC overrates SEC 90's football and Nebraska demolished Florida - who owned the SEC in the 90's.

Ergo...Nebraska must be the best.

It's a fallacy stemming from SEC fandom and young SEC fans thinking SEC football in the 90's was remotely akin to the last 7 years.

It wasn't. There's a reason Florida dominated the conference...SEC football wasn't that good. I know, I saw it.

And Nebraska's 90's run did coincide with their biggest rival in their small conference...being WAY down. Oklahoma.

It would be like if Auburn and LSU suddenly totally stunk in the SEC West for Alabama to flourish.

This post was edited on 12/16/13 at 12:17 am

1 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board