I would say the Big Ten has more solid middle teams than the Big 12 has. More consistent and less fluky. If you really think about it we were the North when we were good. Mizzou, Colorado, and K-State had flashes of good teams but nothing to sustain them. The South had pretty much been a two horse race.I like this "The Big Ten might not have a Texas or Oklahoma now that Ohio State is in trouble, but the conference is far better from top to bottom"...How's he figure? I don't care what conference we are in, but in no way is the Big10 better than the Big12 was...I just don't see it
I think just based on the defense we've had the last few years the coaches poll is realistic and there is a strong case to be made that the huskers could beat about 5 teams ranked higher (or lower by number, if you want to get technical). But it's preseason CFB, we don't actually know s***. It's all projections from last year, with a new crop of players.24 sounds realistic.
I don't even remember what sport we're talking aboutDid you people watch the same team I watched
Now that's shocking! Fox? No wayMeh, not to surprising coming from fox sports, even disregarding the Big12 relationship. A classmate of mine did a research study comparing fox sports and SI (seriously) and his conclusion was that while SI tended to make rational observations and analysis, fox tended to make bold statements and predictions that were more for shock value than anything. Just like having Michigan at #25....
Where the hell were you??45 FUMBLES MY GAWD
I think I blocked it out. I knew we fumbled a lot, but that number just seems made up.Where the hell were you??45 FUMBLES MY GAWD
Everytime T-mart put one on the turf, my TV's life expectancy decreased