[Husker] What If

[Steve Reichenbach]

> Nebraska hasn't beaten a team rated higher than 19th since Oct. 2001.
> Since then Nebraska is 0-21 against teams rated 19th or higher.

I guess the #19 was selected to exclude victories this year over #20
OU and #24 Missouri, as well as victories over ranked teams in 2006,
2005 (two), and 2003.  That has something of the ring of the drumbeat
about Osborne's inability to beat OU in the 1970s or the string of
bowl losses in the 1980s/90s without acknowledgment of the successes
NU had otherwise.  If that's all you look at, then that's all you see.

> I hope we start a new trend this Saturday, but I don't blame the rest
> of the world for thinking this streak will continue. 

Yes, NU is an underdog to one of the top 1-3 teams in the country on
what is nearly their home turf.  Every other team in the country would
be an underdog against this Texas team in Dallas (with a couple of
possible exceptions).  This isn't about "lack of respect" or "blaming
the rest of the world".  Texas has a talented team, led by a talented
and experienced QB, that is playing great football.  That's no cause
to worry about lack of respect for NU, blaming the rest of the world,
or bemoaning a carefully selective historical record.

I see a great opportunity for NU to test itself against the best in a
difficult environment.  If NU plays hard (which I feel certain they
will) and loses, it's no shame; and if NU wins, it will be exciting.
"Not the victory, but the action; Not the goal, but the game; In the
deed the glory." [Hartley Burr Alexander]  That has meaning for me.

Of course, I wish NU won every game, but if that's the standard,
then disappointment will be nearly constant.  As a long-time fan,
I think if you can't be happy about this year, you're in for many
unhappy years.