Apparently we have no shot at beating Nebraska...

FSU was ranked 19th when Miami beat them on the road in 2009. Since then the canes are 0-5 on the road vs Ranked teams (2009 VT, 2010 Ohio State, 2011 VT, 2012 Kansas State and 2013 FSU) .. So I would really love to meet the person who said we've lost 22 straight road games vs Ranked opponents
 
Advertisement
Pulled these stats from a thread on Canesport... not sure how accurate they are so take it for what it's worth...

- In 29 different occurences since 1960, opponents starting a TRUE Freshman QB in Lincoln vs. Nebraska are 0-29, and have only kept the margin of victory under 10 points once....

- In 35 night games, at home in Lincoln vs. Non Ranked Opponents, Nebraska is 36-0 since they first added lights in 1987. Nebraska has only lost ONE game, 36-1 all time vs. a team ranked outside the top 10.

- Nebraska has only lost 6 games total at home, under the lights, and 4 of those 6 losses came to teams ranked #1.

- The 2014 Miami Hurricanes are converting 23% on 3rd down

- The Miami Hurricanes have lost 22 straight road games vs ranked opponents.

- In Miami's last three Non Con trips to the Central Time Zone they've lost by an average of 51 - 17.

Go canes?

22 straight road losses to ranked opponents? **** if true
5 straight road losses to ranked opponents don't believe the internet
 
Also Canes beat Clemson on the road in 2005 when Clemson was ranked.. Take away the FSU win in 2009 the losing streak would've been at 14 on the road vs ranked opponents... Have no clue where anyone got 22.. Just throwing **** and see if sticks I guess
 
I believe the ranked opponent thing is what they finished at the end of the season, same way the UF win last year isnt counted even though they were ranked at the time we played them
 
I believe the ranked opponent thing is what they finished at the end of the season, same way the UF win last year isnt counted even though they were ranked at the time we played them

Even if that's the case in 2005 Clemson finished the season ranked. So the losing streak would be at 14.. Don't know where 22 came from
 
Advertisement
Stats wise it does not look good for us.

Especially considering Golden's record against teams who finish the year with less than 5 losses.

That said, we have the talent to win. Question is, do we have the coaching?

The six million dollar question.
 
I believe the ranked opponent thing is what they finished at the end of the season, same way the UF win last year isnt counted even though they were ranked at the time we played them

Even if that's the case in 2005 Clemson finished the season ranked. So the losing streak would be at 14.. Don't know where 22 came from
Must be one of those internet rumors, kinda like "Golden develops hidden gems into NFL players"
 
Oh please, anyone who thinks a stadium win games are delusional. Nebraska lost at home last season to Iowa and UCLA. They also need a HailMary to beat Northwestern at home. Nothing about Saturday's night game will be determined by what happen in 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's. People put stats out like to make themselves feel better.

For example, Phil Jackson was 9-0 in NBA Finals before he got his *** beat by the Pistons.
Stadiums don't win games. Nebraska has a distinct home field advantage Saturday. That doesn't mean they can't lose or that the stadium wins games.

But, we will lose Saturday.


I wonder how that home field advantage help them against Iowa? Stadiums are nothing more than a place that holds people. And, we may lose on Saturday, we are the underdogs in the game, but you don't ****, and you saying it doesn't make it true.

Bull****. If you were a UM fan during the '80s - early 2000s, you would realize that the Orange Bowl was a huge advantage. In big games the noise was beyond deafening, and Little Havana and the decrepit condition of the stadium intimidated the **** out of opposing players and fans. The place was electric, and created a decided advantage for the Canes.

That stadium played a role in our record 58 game winning streak, which included huge games against top-ranked teams, including national championship bowl games.
 
The argument isn’t about the stats; numbers are what they are.

The argument is:
A) Do you hope for Miami to beat Nebraska, (and others), so that the U is showing signs of getting better? If you hope for this than you also have to accept that the coaching staff will stay in place. You also might have to admit you are wrong (if you are a “mope”) on an internet message board. You still can ***** about the coaches and wish things would change when they lose.

B) Or, do you hope that Miami loses because you assume the coaches will be fired and then, and only then, things will improve? I suppose this hinges on the idea that the next coach will be a dynamite recruiter who coaches with passion and is able to bring the U back to national prominence. The biggest potential down side is you don’t know who the next coach will be. You don’t care about the short term impact on recruiting because you figure anyone, including Donald Duck, is better than “Folden”.

Frankly, the most likely outcome, given Golden’s long term contract and media presence, is that the U will muddle on and finish on the fringes of national relevance (7-5) and no one will be happy. Except for Pete because that will drive traffic to the site (see above argument) and canesinsight will be selling more ad space.

Me, I know the stats are crap and I hate the prospect of mediocrity. I root for the U no matter what mostly because these are JUST kids with pretty simple dreams; they just want to win. I also look at how many freshman are playing key role key roles (Kayaa, Berrios, Jenkins, Yearby etc) and think we should see steady improvement no matter what others opine about the coaching.

Bottom line I’d rather have hope vs rooting for them to lose just so Golden gets canned.

Interesting how this post has gone so un-noticed. Pretty much spot on. The guys that want us to lose truly would rather pump their chest to be right then see this staff actually put it together and win. I just put too much ******* time in to following this team, via message boards like this one, than to worry about being right and hoping this team loses a bunch of games. If we lose, the rest will take care of itself. I am sure between the outrage on Twitter by ex players, the local media and the administration that if we continue to lose games like this one, this staff will be gone...
 
Advertisement
The argument isn’t about the stats; numbers are what they are.

The argument is:
A) Do you hope for Miami to beat Nebraska, (and others), so that the U is showing signs of getting better? If you hope for this than you also have to accept that the coaching staff will stay in place. You also might have to admit you are wrong (if you are a “mope”) on an internet message board. You still can ***** about the coaches and wish things would change when they lose.

B) Or, do you hope that Miami loses because you assume the coaches will be fired and then, and only then, things will improve? I suppose this hinges on the idea that the next coach will be a dynamite recruiter who coaches with passion and is able to bring the U back to national prominence. The biggest potential down side is you don’t know who the next coach will be. You don’t care about the short term impact on recruiting because you figure anyone, including Donald Duck, is better than “Folden”.

Frankly, the most likely outcome, given Golden’s long term contract and media presence, is that the U will muddle on and finish on the fringes of national relevance (7-5) and no one will be happy. Except for Pete because that will drive traffic to the site (see above argument) and canesinsight will be selling more ad space.

Me, I know the stats are crap and I hate the prospect of mediocrity. I root for the U no matter what mostly because these are JUST kids with pretty simple dreams; they just want to win. I also look at how many freshman are playing key role key roles (Kayaa, Berrios, Jenkins, Yearby etc) and think we should see steady improvement no matter what others opine about the coaching.

Bottom line I’d rather have hope vs rooting for them to lose just so Golden gets canned.

Interesting how this post has gone so un-noticed. Pretty much spot on. The guys that want us to lose truly would rather pump their chest to be right then see this staff actually put it together and win. I just put too much ******* time in to following this team, via message boards like this one, than to worry about being right and hoping this team loses a bunch of games. If we lose, the rest will take care of itself. I am sure between the outrage on Twitter by ex players, the local media and the administration that if we continue to lose games like this one, this staff will be gone...
I can assure you in my case it has nothing to do with beating my chest about being right about Folden. There were guys who gave up on him after the first play of the Maryland game looking to cement their spot as the first to call it on Folden being a bum. They win the "I called it first" sweepstakes.

Believe it or not, Foldenites, some of us actually want your hero fired because we know he sucks and he's dragging the program into the trough with him and his pig face. We want him out because we won't win with him no matter how much you disciples chant and hope and cross your fingers.
 
Pellini ain't no Osborne. I don't give a flying **** what happened in 1984 before these players were born.
 
BxnmmISIcAEHtgt.jpg:large
 
The argument isn’t about the stats; numbers are what they are.

The argument is:
A) Do you hope for Miami to beat Nebraska, (and others), so that the U is showing signs of getting better? If you hope for this than you also have to accept that the coaching staff will stay in place. You also might have to admit you are wrong (if you are a “mope”) on an internet message board. You still can ***** about the coaches and wish things would change when they lose.

B) Or, do you hope that Miami loses because you assume the coaches will be fired and then, and only then, things will improve? I suppose this hinges on the idea that the next coach will be a dynamite recruiter who coaches with passion and is able to bring the U back to national prominence. The biggest potential down side is you don’t know who the next coach will be. You don’t care about the short term impact on recruiting because you figure anyone, including Donald Duck, is better than “Folden”.

Frankly, the most likely outcome, given Golden’s long term contract and media presence, is that the U will muddle on and finish on the fringes of national relevance (7-5) and no one will be happy. Except for Pete because that will drive traffic to the site (see above argument) and canesinsight will be selling more ad space.

Me, I know the stats are crap and I hate the prospect of mediocrity. I root for the U no matter what mostly because these are JUST kids with pretty simple dreams; they just want to win. I also look at how many freshman are playing key role key roles (Kayaa, Berrios, Jenkins, Yearby etc) and think we should see steady improvement no matter what others opine about the coaching.

Bottom line I’d rather have hope vs rooting for them to lose just so Golden gets canned.

Interesting how this post has gone so un-noticed. Pretty much spot on. The guys that want us to lose truly would rather pump their chest to be right then see this staff actually put it together and win. I just put too much ******* time in to following this team, via message boards like this one, than to worry about being right and hoping this team loses a bunch of games. If we lose, the rest will take care of itself. I am sure between the outrage on Twitter by ex players, the local media and the administration that if we continue to lose games like this one, this staff will be gone...
I can assure you in my case it has nothing to do with beating my chest about being right about Folden. There were guys who gave up on him after the first play of the Maryland game looking to cement their spot as the first to call it on Folden being a bum. They win the "I called it first" sweepstakes.

Believe it or not, Foldenites, some of us actually want your hero fired because we know he sucks and he's dragging the program into the trough with him and his pig face. We want him out because we won't win with him no matter how much you disciples chant and hope and cross your fingers.

I don't think anyone needs to root for losses. They will happen on there own given that Folden isn't a very good coach and the better teams (and Duke) will take him to task.
 
Advertisement
Oh please, anyone who thinks a stadium win games are delusional. Nebraska lost at home last season to Iowa and UCLA. They also need a HailMary to beat Northwestern at home. Nothing about Saturday's night game will be determined by what happen in 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's. People put stats out like to make themselves feel better.

For example, Phil Jackson was 9-0 in NBA Finals before he got his *** beat by the Pistons.
Stadiums don't win games. Nebraska has a distinct home field advantage Saturday. That doesn't mean they can't lose or that the stadium wins games.

But, we will lose Saturday.


I wonder how that home field advantage help them against Iowa? Stadiums are nothing more than a place that holds people. And, we may lose on Saturday, we are the underdogs in the game, but you don't ****, and you saying it doesn't make it true.

Bull****. If you were a UM fan during the '80s - early 2000s, you would realize that the Orange Bowl was a huge advantage. In big games the noise was beyond deafening, and Little Havana and the decrepit condition of the stadium intimidated the **** out of opposing players and fans. The place was electric, and created a decided advantage for the Canes.

That stadium played a role in our record 58 game winning streak, which included huge games against top-ranked teams, including national championship bowl games.

It was an awesome stadium for the phins as well. Doggie hawser did a good write up on it as well. The data is there.
 
Oh please, anyone who thinks a stadium win games are delusional. Nebraska lost at home last season to Iowa and UCLA. They also need a HailMary to beat Northwestern at home. Nothing about Saturday's night game will be determined by what happen in 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's. People put stats out like to make themselves feel better.

For example, Phil Jackson was 9-0 in NBA Finals before he got his *** beat by the Pistons.
Stadiums don't win games. Nebraska has a distinct home field advantage Saturday. That doesn't mean they can't lose or that the stadium wins games.

But, we will lose Saturday.


I wonder how that home field advantage help them against Iowa? Stadiums are nothing more than a place that holds people. And, we may lose on Saturday, we are the underdogs in the game, but you don't ****, and you saying it doesn't make it true.

Bull****. If you were a UM fan during the '80s - early 2000s, you would realize that the Orange Bowl was a huge advantage. In big games the noise was beyond deafening, and Little Havana and the decrepit condition of the stadium intimidated the **** out of opposing players and fans. The place was electric, and created a decided advantage for the Canes.

That stadium played a role in our record 58 game winning streak, which included huge games against top-ranked teams, including national championship bowl games.

It was an awesome stadium for the phins as well. Doggie hawser did a good write up on it as well. The data is there.

Both the Fins and the Canes have suffered unbelievably bad with the move to Son Lifeless. Historically bad. The stadium literally takes away home advantage and turns it into a negative. Cant be a coincidence for both teams.
 
Oh please, anyone who thinks a stadium win games are delusional. Nebraska lost at home last season to Iowa and UCLA. They also need a HailMary to beat Northwestern at home. Nothing about Saturday's night game will be determined by what happen in 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's. People put stats out like to make themselves feel better.

For example, Phil Jackson was 9-0 in NBA Finals before he got his *** beat by the Pistons.
Stadiums don't win games. Nebraska has a distinct home field advantage Saturday. That doesn't mean they can't lose or that the stadium wins games.

But, we will lose Saturday.


I wonder how that home field advantage help them against Iowa? Stadiums are nothing more than a place that holds people. And, we may lose on Saturday, we are the underdogs in the game, but you don't ****, and you saying it doesn't make it true.

Bull****. If you were a UM fan during the '80s - early 2000s, you would realize that the Orange Bowl was a huge advantage. In big games the noise was beyond deafening, and Little Havana and the decrepit condition of the stadium intimidated the **** out of opposing players and fans. The place was electric, and created a decided advantage for the Canes.

That stadium played a role in our record 58 game winning streak, which included huge games against top-ranked teams, including national championship bowl games.

It was an awesome stadium for the phins as well. Doggie hawser did a good write up on it as well. The data is there.

I will never forget being on the sideline in 1989 for UM-ND. The loudest, most hostile environment I've ever experienced for an opposing team. It was phenomenal. Nothing like beating the smug Lou Holtz.
 
Advertisement
Oh please, anyone who thinks a stadium win games are delusional. Nebraska lost at home last season to Iowa and UCLA. They also need a HailMary to beat Northwestern at home. Nothing about Saturday's night game will be determined by what happen in 1960's, 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's. People put stats out like to make themselves feel better.

For example, Phil Jackson was 9-0 in NBA Finals before he got his *** beat by the Pistons.
Stadiums don't win games. Nebraska has a distinct home field advantage Saturday. That doesn't mean they can't lose or that the stadium wins games.

But, we will lose Saturday.


I wonder how that home field advantage help them against Iowa? Stadiums are nothing more than a place that holds people. And, we may lose on Saturday, we are the underdogs in the game, but you don't ****, and you saying it doesn't make it true.

Bull****. If you were a UM fan during the '80s - early 2000s, you would realize that the Orange Bowl was a huge advantage. In big games the noise was beyond deafening, and Little Havana and the decrepit condition of the stadium intimidated the **** out of opposing players and fans. The place was electric, and created a decided advantage for the Canes.

That stadium played a role in our record 58 game winning streak, which included huge games against top-ranked teams, including national championship bowl games.

It was an awesome stadium for the phins as well. Doggie hawser did a good write up on it as well. The data is there.

The '85 Bears only loss was in the Orange Bowl. It's laughable that people claim a true home field advantage doesn't matter.
 
Stadiums don't win games. Nebraska has a distinct home field advantage Saturday. That doesn't mean they can't lose or that the stadium wins games.

But, we will lose Saturday.


I wonder how that home field advantage help them against Iowa? Stadiums are nothing more than a place that holds people. And, we may lose on Saturday, we are the underdogs in the game, but you don't ****, and you saying it doesn't make it true.

Bull****. If you were a UM fan during the '80s - early 2000s, you would realize that the Orange Bowl was a huge advantage. In big games the noise was beyond deafening, and Little Havana and the decrepit condition of the stadium intimidated the **** out of opposing players and fans. The place was electric, and created a decided advantage for the Canes.

That stadium played a role in our record 58 game winning streak, which included huge games against top-ranked teams, including national championship bowl games.

It was an awesome stadium for the phins as well. Doggie hawser did a good write up on it as well. The data is there.

Both the Fins and the Canes have suffered unbelievably bad with the move to Son Lifeless. Historically bad. The stadium literally takes away home advantage and turns it into a negative. Cant be a coincidence for both teams.

Why was Miami so terrible prior to 1983? They were playing in the Orange Bowl all those years.

The common thread of why Miami and the Dolphins have been bad since being in Sunlife is they have both had terrible coaches during that time.

Poor coaching is why Miami has suffered, has nothing to do with the Orange Bowl. Do you think Golden, Shannon and Coker become better coaches if they played their home games in the Orange Bowl? Of course not.
 
Nebraska has played the following teams with their total defense ranking:

McNeese State (FCS)
Florida Atlantic (124th)
Fresno State (125th)

LOL
 
Advertisement
Back
Top