Iowa got their participation ribbons

They were good last year but missed a lot of mines from from the conference. That Stanford game was a wood shedding.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
21dk8ax.jpg
 
Iowa has had three 11+ win seasons and 5 top-10 finishes since the last time we had either.
I don't think that's the point.


I figured the point was to make Nebraska fan feel better that he isn't Iowa fan, even though Iowa fan has better accomplishments to celebrate over the last decade :shrug:
It's just Iowa patting themselves on the back for nothing in the end. Only champions should get rings IMO. So I guess if they want rings for Conference division champs then I suppose that's their prerogative, but luckily Nebraska didn't do that in 2009, 2010, 2012.

 
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Iowa has had three 11+ win seasons and 5 top-10 finishes since the last time we had either.
I don't think that's the point.


I figured the point was to make Nebraska fan feel better that he isn't Iowa fan, even though Iowa fan has better accomplishments to celebrate over the last decade :shrug:
It's just Iowa patting themselves on the back for nothing in the end. Only champions should get rings IMO. So I guess if they want rings for Conference division champs then I suppose that's their prerogative, but luckily Nebraska didn't do that in 2009, 2010, 2012.

We accepted trophies for divisional wins. Is that really much different?

Seems like an unnecessary and arbitrary distinction. A perfect undefeated regular season is a hell of an accomplishment and something that should be recognized and celebrated by anyone. Who cares?

 
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Iowa has had three 11+ win seasons and 5 top-10 finishes since the last time we had either.
I don't think that's the point.


I figured the point was to make Nebraska fan feel better that he isn't Iowa fan, even though Iowa fan has better accomplishments to celebrate over the last decade :shrug:
It's just Iowa patting themselves on the back for nothing in the end. Only champions should get rings IMO. So I guess if they want rings for Conference division champs then I suppose that's their prerogative, but luckily Nebraska didn't do that in 2009, 2010, 2012.

We accepted trophies for divisional wins. Is that really much different?

Seems like an unnecessary and arbitrary distinction. A perfect undefeated regular season is a hell of an accomplishment and something that should be recognized and celebrated by anyone. Who cares?
I guess we just disagree. I think it's kind of silly to get rings for nothing more than an undefeated regular season and division champs. You don't.

 
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Iowa has had three 11+ win seasons and 5 top-10 finishes since the last time we had either.
I don't think that's the point.


I figured the point was to make Nebraska fan feel better that he isn't Iowa fan, even though Iowa fan has better accomplishments to celebrate over the last decade :shrug:
It's just Iowa patting themselves on the back for nothing in the end. Only champions should get rings IMO. So I guess if they want rings for Conference division champs then I suppose that's their prerogative, but luckily Nebraska didn't do that in 2009, 2010, 2012.

We accepted trophies for divisional wins. Is that really much different?

Seems like an unnecessary and arbitrary distinction. A perfect undefeated regular season is a hell of an accomplishment and something that should be recognized and celebrated by anyone. Who cares?
I guess we just disagree. I think it's kind of silly to get rings for nothing more than an undefeated regular season and division champs. You don't.


That's cool and totally fine. But at least they've played for and put themselves in a position to possibly deserve rings lately. Unfortunately can't say the same for our program.

 
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Iowa has had three 11+ win seasons and 5 top-10 finishes since the last time we had either.
I don't think that's the point.

I figured the point was to make Nebraska fan feel better that he isn't Iowa fan, even though Iowa fan has better accomplishments to celebrate over the last decade :shrug:
It's just Iowa patting themselves on the back for nothing in the end. Only champions should get rings IMO. So I guess if they want rings for Conference division champs then I suppose that's their prerogative, but luckily Nebraska didn't do that in 2009, 2010, 2012.
We accepted trophies for divisional wins. Is that really much different?

Seems like an unnecessary and arbitrary distinction. A perfect undefeated regular season is a hell of an accomplishment and something that should be recognized and celebrated by anyone. Who cares?
I guess we just disagree. I think it's kind of silly to get rings for nothing more than an undefeated regular season and division champs. You don't.

That's cool and totally fine. But at least they've played for and put themselves in a position to possibly deserve rings lately. Unfortunately can't say the same for our program.
How have they've put themselves into position to get rings later?
Did you watch the Rose Bowl? Did you see them piss it down their leg against State for 8 minutes?

 
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
NebraskaHarry said:
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
Iowa has had three 11+ win seasons and 5 top-10 finishes since the last time we had either.
I don't think that's the point.

I figured the point was to make Nebraska fan feel better that he isn't Iowa fan, even though Iowa fan has better accomplishments to celebrate over the last decade :shrug:
It's just Iowa patting themselves on the back for nothing in the end. Only champions should get rings IMO. So I guess if they want rings for Conference division champs then I suppose that's their prerogative, but luckily Nebraska didn't do that in 2009, 2010, 2012.
We accepted trophies for divisional wins. Is that really much different?

Seems like an unnecessary and arbitrary distinction. A perfect undefeated regular season is a hell of an accomplishment and something that should be recognized and celebrated by anyone. Who cares?
I guess we just disagree. I think it's kind of silly to get rings for nothing more than an undefeated regular season and division champs. You don't.

That's cool and totally fine. But at least they've played for and put themselves in a position to possibly deserve rings lately. Unfortunately can't say the same for our program.
How have they've put themselves into position to get rings later?
Did you watch the Rose Bowl? Did you see them piss it down their leg against State for 8 minutes?


They played in the Rose Bowl. So they put themselves in a position to win the Rose Bowl.

They played in the B1G Championship game, giving themselves a chance to win the conference.

 
Now did they win those games? It's embarrassing to even buy your team a runner up ring especially when you get your a$$ handed to you in that said game.

We played in the B1G championship game in 12'. Would you feel comfortable with the University of Nebraska buying runner up rings for the team?

We get it you like Iowa too

 
Now did they win those games? It's embarrassing to even buy your team a runner up ring especially when you get your a$$ handed to you in that said game.

We played in the B1G championship game in 12'. Would you feel comfortable with the University of Nebraska buying runner up rings for the team?

We get it you like Iowa too

Of course I wouldn't, but if our team went undefeated, finished in the top 10, and had a great season, I'd be fine with it.

 
Back
Top