Yeah, I get what you're saying. And as I stated in previous posts, absolutely, Nebraska has had good teams in the modern era.
It's interesting you bring up 2010. Iowa was rated that year preseason Top 10 as well. They dropped a non-conference game to a Top 25 Arizona team (if you know anything about the modern history of Iowa football, the Hawks lay an egg about every game played in the Pacific time zone), lost by one at home to Wisconsin (the infamous fake punt game I believe), and ended up losing 3 really close games at the end of the season before winning the Insight Bowl over Missouri. So, in short, Iowa could have had another Top 10 season that year with a break or two going differently. The point is they didn't. Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. So, while Nebraska was close to Top 10 status that season (and i mean finishing), the results were not Top 10. Because, in fairness, a lot of teams in college football could make the same or similar case you are making every year. Regardless, I'm not sure if semantics are involved in terms of debating "relevance," but I won't argue with you about Nebraska being relevant in 2010. And, as I said before, they've had competitive teams throughout the modern era, just none that ended up something like 11-2 or 12-1, so a legitimate Top 10-caliber team.
Oh, and yes, officiating. Lol. Most times, officials, while far from perfect, are consistent and call a fair game. Occasionally, though, you're right. There are a few total screw jobs. It's been a long time since I felt Iowa got completely screwed over by the officiating. But in 2005, the game against Michigan was a joke. And the bowl game later that year vs. Florida was a total one-sided, screw job that probably hasn't been duplicated in college football since. So, I feel ya.