Do you miss the Big 12?

[passranch]

dammit @Ostateman take this s#!t to LandThieves, nobody here gives a flying crap about re-hashing all of this stuff ad infinitum...we've moved on...you all should too.  Big 12 is a fine conference for what it is.  Revel in it.  But don't expect to go trolling for regret on forums of schools that left and get what you want.

[Kiyoat Husker]

43 minutes ago, passranch said:

dammit @Ostateman take this s#!t to LandThieves, nobody here gives a flying crap about re-hashing all of this stuff ad infinitum...we've moved on...you all should too.  Big 12 is a fine conference for what it is.  Revel in it.  But don't expect to go trolling for regret on forums of schools that left and get what you want.

 

Hold your horses.  Ostateman has been very respectful.  All he did was ask a question.  He got his answer, said thanks, and then the rest of us turned this into a two-page thread about the history of the Big 12.  I thoroughly enjoyed it, but that is beside the point.

 

He comes back to (respectfully) disagree with the 1-second game, and then you blow up.  Obviously this is a sore subject for some of us, but don't try to run off a good poster with your idiocy.

[Woody Tressel]

On 9/20/2017 at 9:32 PM, BoneyardHusker said:

What is one of the great things about college football is the tradition, rivalries, pageantry, history, etc. and that is what I miss about the Big 12. I don't necessarily miss being in that conference, but I do miss the history that came with Nebraska being in the Big 12/8. We are still too new in the B1G that I don't get the same inclusion with the conference as I did with the Big12. But I understand as years go on, season after season, tradition starts to build and Nebraska starts to be more involved within the historical story of the Big Ten Conference.

 

Right now the only team I feel we have any sort of rivalry with is Wisconsin. It feels Nebraska is isolated from much of the conference and I still forget that Maryland and Rutgers are in the Big Ten. All this will become more natural with time and eventually, years from now, the Big Ten will feel like home for Nebraska.

This is really well said!  

[KCBuc]

I sure don't miss those frozen aluminum (?) benches at Lawrence after an ice storm and Colorado ..cant get much pass the sensor...(pretty much still hate CU). If the Big 10 took Mizzou instead of NU, we would be screwed like a whore on a sailor's payday. NU was never going to the SEC and not sure the Pac 10 wanted NU at all. Pearlman and Osborne played it right. . The Big 10 network is great. The money is good now. NU has a voice. The rivalries will come once NU starts beating ranked teams.  I'm thankful NU is where it is, in a stable conference that listens to the schools. NU doesn't have to worry about Michigan or Ohio State leaving like they would if Texas started to tinker with the idea of bolting.

[passranch]

2 hours ago, Kiyoat Husker said:

 

Hold your horses.  Ostateman has been very respectful.  All he did was ask a question.  He got his answer, said thanks, and then the rest of us turned this into a two-page thread about the history of the Big 12.  I thoroughly enjoyed it, but that is beside the point.

 

He comes back to (respectfully) disagree with the 1-second game, and then you blow up.  Obviously this is a sore subject for some of us, but don't try to run off a good poster with your idiocy.

 

Point taken.

 

It's just conference realignment talk is just so tedious and boring to me.  I don't know if you visit other message boards that have active realignment discussions - I lurk on a couple and they are absolute cesspools of ignorance mostly and while this poster has (so far) come in what appears to be good faith, you can see that he's starting to edge on the danger zone of completely false memes in the realignment discussion arena.  Namely, "Nebraska left the Big 12 because Texas won the 2009 championship".  To even think that's in any way even a remotely decent reason to leave a conference is so terribly feeble-minded I can't even begin to describe.  I'd only imagine there's more to come.

 

But, I digress...carry on.

[Kiyoat Husker]

30 minutes ago, passranch said:

 

Point taken.

 

It's just conference realignment talk is just so tedious and boring to me.  I don't know if you visit other message boards that have active realignment discussions - I lurk on a couple and they are absolute cesspools of ignorance mostly and while this poster has (so far) come in what appears to be good faith, you can see that he's starting to edge on the danger zone of completely false memes in the realignment discussion arena.  Namely, "Nebraska left the Big 12 because Texas won the 2009 championship".  To even think that's in any way even a remotely decent reason to leave a conference is so terribly feeble-minded I can't even begin to describe.  I'd only imagine there's more to come.

 

But, I digress...carry on.

 

I occasionally read some other message boards.  I think you'll find the mods here are pretty fair as far as stopping any actual trolling, but allowing heated discussion to happen as long as its respectful.  There are some pretty intelligent and enlightening discussions on here occasionally, too.

 

Some places will run you off and ban you simply for arguing against the groupthink.  This isn't one of those places.

 

As for Ostate, I didn't read anything from him that said the 09 game was why we left.  He just said the ref's call was good, and didn't understand why "some" NU fans still think they got screwed there.  Which I don't necessarily disagree with.

[Hingle McCringleberry]

5 hours ago, Ostateman said:

I'm curious as to how a few of your fans can continue to dispute the UT game ruling?

 

 

 

For me it was never the ruling, it's the feeling (maybe fact) that had the roles been reversed the play would've never been reviewed.  Also, I believe the review of that play was outside the bounds of what was reviewable by the Big 12 at that time, although it's been so long I can't remember if that was true or not at this point.

 

 

[passranch]

58 minutes ago, Kiyoat Husker said:

 

I occasionally read some other message boards.  I think you'll find the mods here are pretty fair as far as stopping any actual trolling, but allowing heated discussion to happen as long as its respectful.  There are some pretty intelligent and enlightening discussions on here occasionally, too.

 

Some places will run you off and ban you simply for arguing against the groupthink.  This isn't one of those places.

 

As for Ostate, I didn't read anything from him that said the 09 game was why we left.  He just said the ref's call was good, and didn't understand why "some" NU fans still think they got screwed there.  Which I don't necessarily disagree with.

 

If we hadn't committed pass interference and had a horse collar tackle on that final drive, none of it would have even come up.

 

Maybe there are some NU fans that honestly believe the Huskers got screwed there - I don't personally know any - but any rational Husker fan would readily agree we gave that game away long before the "review" came into play.  We were playing on our heads that night anyway and the luck just ran out, IMO.  Texas was easily the better team in that game (even though we had the best player) so it was kind of a miracle we were even in the position to win anyway.

 

But he did say he thinks there are NU fans that claims that game was "one of the reasons" for leaving:

 

6 hours ago, Ostateman said:

I'm curious as to how a few of your fans can continue to dispute the UT game ruling?

The replay showed that the refs made the right call. Video evidence supported that ruling, yet, a few NU fans still claim that was one of the reasons for leaving the Big 12.

We all can point the finger at UT's Deloss Dodds for destroying a once great conference. I don't hate Texas for trying to better themselves, but Dodds went too far and almost blew it all to hell.

In fact, we (OSU) were resigned to join the PAC-12 with UT, TT, OSU and ou joining Arizona and Arizona State for one division. Yet, instead of just letting the conference unplug the life support machine, some wiseguy gave the BIg 12 the defibrillator. 

The conference talked of expansion, yet passed and missed on adding teams when it could have. Now we're stuck with Big <12 and long for the days when NU, CU and Mizzou was a natural rivalry (give or take). 

But, love them or hate them, UT beat you guys fair and square.

 

...which is what kind of set me off I guess.  It's a tired old retread talking point that was never even remotely accurate.

[Guy Chamberlin]

On 9/20/2017 at 5:50 AM, dvdcrr said:

The Big 10 is more of a meat grinder of a conference.  Harder to come out unscathed and on top.  

More physical play?  More parity?

 

If we're being totally honest, it was probably a lot easier to notch 9 wins every season in the old Big 8. 

[HuskerNBigD]

3 hours ago, passranch said:

 

If we hadn't committed pass interference and had a horse collar tackle on that final drive, none of it would have even come up.

 

Maybe there are some NU fans that honestly believe the Huskers got screwed there - I don't personally know any - but any rational Husker fan would readily agree we gave that game away long before the "review" came into play.  We were playing on our heads that night anyway and the luck just ran out, IMO.  Texas was easily the better team in that game (even though we had the best player) so it was kind of a miracle we were even in the position to win anyway.

 

But he did say he thinks there are NU fans that claims that game was "one of the reasons" for leaving:

 

 

...which is what kind of set me off I guess.  It's a tired old retread talking point that was never even remotely accurate.

 

Didnt we kick it out of bounds too? Pretty sure they started at the 35

[brophog]

3 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

If we're being totally honest, it was probably a lot easier to notch 9 wins every season in the old Big 8. 

 

Of course it was, just as it was in any conference in those days. Most of your competition didn't care that much until football became a big money sport.

[WoodyHayes1951]

Nostalgia for the Big XII is 95% because of current state of the program. No one is going to be missing the Big XII if/when Nebraska is playing Bizzarro Nebraska(aka Wisconsin) for Big Ten  West Titles on a consistent basis.

[Nebhawk]

On September 21, 2017 at 7:54 AM, jaws said:

Nebhawk never misses a chance to compare Ohio State and Michigan to Texas and Oklahoma. The comparisons are baseless but they are still made.

Did Michigan and Ohio St have there annual game moved around in the next Big 10 scheduling in 2020 or 2021?  Were threatened to lose our Black Friday game.  Watch a little closer.  Things are skewed towards Michigan and Ohio St for football.  Look at the scheduling in the past and now moving into the future.  Its OK.  That how most conferences are.  Thats why they are called Power 5.

[jaws]

26 minutes ago, Nebhawk said:

Did Michigan and Ohio St have there annual game moved around in the next Big 10 scheduling in 2020 or 2021?  Were threatened to lose our Black Friday game.  Watch a little closer.  Things are skewed towards Michigan and Ohio St for football.  Look at the scheduling in the past and now moving into the future.  Its OK.  That how most conferences are.  Thats why they are called Power 5.

Why would they break a tradition like OSU and Michigan in football? It would not make sense for the big ten nor would the schools allow it. I don't think OSU or Michigan had anything to do with your black Friday game. Please base you OSU/Mich and Texas/OU comparisons on something a little more than that. Also, if everyone in the B1G thought that OSU and Michigan controlled the conference, don't you think that you would hear about it. I mean ONE team (Chicago) has ever left the big ten since 1896 (if you don't count Mich leaving for 10 years). Outside OSU and Michigan always playing the last regular season game in football, are schools like Purdue and Michigan State treated differently? 

[Hayseed]

The question to me isn't 'why did we leave the Texas dominated Big 12' , it's why did we join the Big Ten?

The other question I have for the guy with all the stats..... we knew all these things about the Big 12 from the beginning.... why did we join and why did we stay so long?