LandOf10: Iowa-Nebraska series sizzling toward rivalry status

Do you personally consider Nebraska v. Iowa a rivalry?

  • Total voters
    113
I rationalize it all by calling them an insignificant rival. I don't mean that as an insult to us or them - insignificance refers to all the variables impacting the two teams.

The game honestly just hasn't meant much (for both teams) on a consistent basis. There's also a serious divide between both fan bases as to whether or not call this a rivalry, not just Nebraska. I know several Iowa fans who dislike Nebraska yet feel that this "rivalry" business is being influenced by outside forces more so than the programs and their fans.

Another variable I weigh is national relevance. Using BRB's list, every single one of those teams listed is a nationally recognized rivalry by fans in the sport, and most of them span back through decades upon decades of games. Iowa/Nebraska is not a nationally relevant rivalry in this sense.

I think the biggest challenge here is that "rival" can mean a number of different things and exist on a variety of levels to people. There's no unified check list. Therefore, it's incredibly minor on my radar.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enhance89 said:
I rationalize it all by calling them an insignificant rival. I don't mean that as an insult to us or them - insignificance refers to all the variables impacting the two teams.

The game honestly just hasn't meant much (for both teams) on a consistent basis. There's also a serious divide between both fan bases as to whether or not call this a rivalry, not just Nebraska. I know several Iowa fans who dislike Nebraska yet feel that this "rivalry" business is being influenced by outside forces more so than the programs and their fans.

Another variable I weigh is national relevance. Using BRB's list, every single one of those teams listed is a nationally recognized rivalry by fans in the sport, and most of them span back through decades upon decades of games. Iowa/Nebraska is not a nationally relevant rivalry in this sense.

I think the biggest challenge here is that "rival" can mean a number of different things and exist on a variety of levels to people. There's no unified check list. Therefore, it's incredibly minor on my radar.
Click to expand...
Sure there are varying degrees of rival as it pertains to national relevance and fan fervor. You say everyone on my list is nationally recognized. However, when Cubs vs. Cardinals rivalry started, I'm pretty sure someone sitting in California or Texas didn't give a rip about them being a rival....heck, they still might not. I'm pretty sure right now most people in the US other than those in Oklahoma and Texas don't give much thought to the Red River Rivalry. I know I personally don't. Do people around the country really care about Alabama vs. Auburn other than in a passing thought of...."wow...those fan bases hate each other"? I know I don't.

I don't sit down and make sure I watch any of these games unless a team I'm a fan of is playing in them. BUT.....those fan bases think they are the biggest thing since pockets on a shirt.

I don't give a rip what the rest of the country thinks about the Nebraska vs. Iowa or Nebraska vs. Wisconsin games.

If that's what we are going to base this on, we should be polling all the non-Husker and Hawkeye fans instead of the fans themselves.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
Sure there are varying degrees of rival as it pertains to national relevance and fan fervor. You say everyone on my list is nationally recognized. However, when Cubs vs. Cardinals rivalry started, I'm pretty sure someone sitting in California or Texas didn't give a rip about them being a rival....heck, they still might not.
Click to expand...
I can't speak to that, but I don't think you followed the point I was trying to make, or I didn't articulate it well enough. That particular rivalry has been decades in the making to the point that it is a nationally relevant rivalry among baseball fans. Assuming one believes Nebraska/Iowa is a rivalry, it's a fetus by comparison.
I'm pretty sure right now most people in the US other than those in Oklahoma and Texas don't give much thought to the Red River Rivalry. I know I personally don't. Do people around the country really care about Alabama vs. Auburn other than in a passing thought of...."wow...those fan bases hate each other"? I know I don't.
Click to expand...
I think you're projecting your personal opinions a bit too much. The Red River Rivalry and Auburn/Alabama are two of the biggest rivalries in all of sports, in addition to being of major interest to many college football fans. They're two of the most watched regular season games every year. That's not some accident.
I don't give a rip what the rest of the country thinks about the Nebraska vs. Iowa or Nebraska vs. Wisconsin games.
Click to expand...
Again, you may not, and that's fine. But national relevance means more than just whether or not some dude in Tennessee cares about the game. I'm also talking about whether or not the outcome bears weight on the conference championship race and, subsequently, the national championship race. This game has been inconsistently important since Nebraska joined the B1G which further supports my own check list that this is an insignificant "rivalry."

I wouldn't bother trying to convince me that Iowa/Nebraska should be more relevant than it is. To me, it's a divisional conference foe and a game we need to win. I don't consider them a real rival.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Really????

Red River Rivalry TV ratings:

2015 - 3.7

2016 - 2.0

Nebraska/Iowa

2015 - 3.9

2016 - 2.4

Alabama/Auburn was higher but it has Alabama which was in the NC hunt. That naturally is going to draw more TV sets....not necessarily because everyone cares about the rivalry.

2016 - 4.5

As a comparison, some other Alabama games that wouldn't be considers such a rivalry.

Alabama/aTm - 5.0

Alabama/Tennessee - 3.9

Alabama/Arkansas - 2.5

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Record audience for Iron Bowl leads ESPN to its most viewed regular season Saturday from 2014

Alabama-Auburn game draws overnight TV ratings that's 2nd highest in college football from 2013

Alabama/Auburn also drew a 4.5 rating in 2016. You suggest discrediting it because Alabama is in the NC hunt, but that's part of my point. They're relevant. Is Nebraska? Is Iowa?

Furthermore, consider the context of what you just posted. NU/Iowa is one of only a few games on Black Friday - a holiday weekend. The RRR takes places on a normal college football Saturday. Those data points are not 1:1.

Edit - you added the Alabama information after your OP. Either way, what are you trying to argue exactly? That Nebraska/Iowa is as relevant as the RRR or Iron Bowl?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enhance89 said:
Fine, Texas/OU may be down, but you've conveniently ignored the Iron Bowl.

Record audience for Iron Bowl leads ESPN to its most viewed regular season Saturday from 2014

Alabama-Auburn game draws overnight TV ratings that's 2nd highest in college football from 2013

Alabama/Auburn also drew a 4.5 rating in 2016.

Furthermore, consider the context of what you just posted. NU/Iowa is one of only a few games on Thanksgiving. The RRR takes places on a normal college football Saturday. Those data points are not 1:1.

Edit - you added the Alabama information after your OP. Either way, what are you trying to argue exactly?
Click to expand...
And...all of those Iron Bowl games had one of the teams in the NC hunt. It wasn't because everyone around the country is saying...."OMG....THE IRON BOWL IS ON, I NEED TO SIT DOWN AND WATCH IT!!!"

 
Last year:

Michigan/MSU - 2.9

Oklahoma/OSU - 3.1

Those are soooo much better ratings than we have had the last couple of years.

 
So, Nebraska/Iowa is a "rivalry" equivalent to other major rivalries in all sports, particularly the RRR, because it beat the RRR in your imperfect TV ratings comparison.

And the Iron Bowl doesn't count because it had NC contenders in it.

Right.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
So, Michigan vs. Michigan State isn't really a rivalry because Michigan State hasn't had the level of success Michigan has had.

So, Oklahoma vs. Oklahoma State isn't really a rivalry because Oklahoma State hasn't had the level of success Oklahoma has had.

So, Alabama vs. Auburn isn't really a rivalry because Auburn hasn't had the level of success Alabama has had.

So, Texas vs. aTm isn't really a rivalry because aTm hasn't had the level of success Texas has had.

So, Cardinals vs. Cubs isn't really a rivalry because the Cubs haven't had the level of success the Cardinals have had.

So, the Yankees vs. Mets really isn't a rivalry because the Mets haven't had the level of success the Yankees have had.

So, back when Texas sucked and OU and Nebraska were ruling college football, UT vs. OU wasn't really a rivalry because UT sucked.

I know Husker fans who believe Missouri was a rival. They didn't have anywhere close to the success we have had.

This idea that Iowa can't be a rival because they don't have the past success or that the games don't have national consequences is laughable and there are examples all over sports of great rivals between teams that are uneven in past success. Many great rivalries are built on totally illogical reasons....many times based on things that don't even happen on the playing field.
Click to expand...
I didn't say Iowa COULDN'T be a rival. Just that they currently aren't IMO.
Funny how all your examples are long running series with tons of history involved. That is nowhere near the case for Nebraska-Iowa.

I've got no problem if some people want to view it as a rivalry but don't expect everyone to. Hell, some people still won't acknowledge that CU was ever our rival. I can respect that but I feel differently living in Colorado. I too resisted it for a long time because for so long it was completely lopsided and they were just another team we routinely trounced. That changed they became competitive and put the hurt on us a few times. Of course their asshat fans and the nastiness of the whole Sal Aunesse deal helped contribute. Similar to the way Switzer and the Sooner were often thorns in our side. I sense nothing remotely like that currently with Iowa. It could change but some made up, hoky trophy or decree by the B1G doesn't make it so.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
El Diaco said:
BigRedBuster said:
So, Michigan vs. Michigan State isn't really a rivalry because Michigan State hasn't had the level of success Michigan has had.

So, Oklahoma vs. Oklahoma State isn't really a rivalry because Oklahoma State hasn't had the level of success Oklahoma has had.

So, Alabama vs. Auburn isn't really a rivalry because Auburn hasn't had the level of success Alabama has had.

So, Texas vs. aTm isn't really a rivalry because aTm hasn't had the level of success Texas has had.

So, Cardinals vs. Cubs isn't really a rivalry because the Cubs haven't had the level of success the Cardinals have had.

So, the Yankees vs. Mets really isn't a rivalry because the Mets haven't had the level of success the Yankees have had.

So, back when Texas sucked and OU and Nebraska were ruling college football, UT vs. OU wasn't really a rivalry because UT sucked.

I know Husker fans who believe Missouri was a rival. They didn't have anywhere close to the success we have had.

This idea that Iowa can't be a rival because they don't have the past success or that the games don't have national consequences is laughable and there are examples all over sports of great rivals between teams that are uneven in past success. Many great rivalries are built on totally illogical reasons....many times based on things that don't even happen on the playing field.
Click to expand...
I didn't say Iowa COULDN'T be a rival. Just that they currently aren't IMO.
Funny how all your examples are long running series with tons of history involved. That is nowhere near the case for Nebraska-Iowa.

I've got no problem if some people want to view it as a rivalry but don't expect everyone to. Hell, some people still won't acknowledge that CU was ever our rival. I can respect that but I feel differently living in Colorado. I too resisted it for a long time because for so long it was completely lopsided and they were just another team we routinely trounced. That changed they became competitive and put the hurt on us a few times. Of course their asshat fans and the nastiness of the whole Sal Aunesse deal helped contribute. Similar to the way Switzer and the Sooner were often thorns in our side. I sense nothing remotely like that currently with Iowa. It could change but some made up, hoky trophy or decree by the B1G doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it was the most heated or even a long standing rivalry. I simply believe that it is one along with Wisconsin.

The CU rivalry is a good one as an example. It was a rivalry. We played each other probably as long as OU. Sure, they didn't have near the success we had historically....and...it wasn't nearly as nationally watched as OU. But, it still was a rivalry. But, a lot of Husker fans refuse to accept it because...you know....they aren't anywhere close to our level of program.

 
And....to say Iowa and Nebraska don't have a long standing history is not really accurate. Prior to joining the Big Ten, we had already played 41 times. There were long periods where we played each other every year and at least one year where we played twice.

 
If this years game is say a 10 win team vs an 11 win team showdown to decide the Division Champion and the game is an absolute barn burner, will THAT be enough to push this over the edge towards "Rivalry" status?

 
34 of those 41 meetings were WWII-era or before. Prior to joining the Big Ten, the Huskers played Iowa a total of six times in 65 years.

In the 30 years prior to 2011 we played Wyoming and Colorado State more frequently than we played Iowa.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top