knapplc

I wish Cody would disabuse himself of the notion of going to the NFL as a QB. You can't make it into the NFL simply by being a nice guy and a good teammate. Much as we all love Cody, he's not an NFL QB.

Nobody is taking offense to questions about Nebraska. It's only natural that you guys would be curious, and not as informed as we, the Husker fans, are. The only offense that's being taken is to the implications that Nebraska is somehow inferior to the rest of the Big Ten. Wouldn't you take offense to someone coming to your message boards and calling Iowa inferior? I can guarantee you that such comments would not be welcomed with pleasure.

The violence in North O has now involved former Husker safety Tony Veland, a key player on the 1994 and 1995 Championship teams. LINK

I have no doubt that the bold is true, which is why I think Nebraska and Nebraska Fans will fit in very well to the Big Ten culture. We're just as rabid about football as you guys, and many of us (myself included) have followed Big Ten football reasonably closely, for an outside group. Big Ten football has probably been the closest thing to the old Big 8 football that most of us grew up with over the last decade, so I have been keeping tabs on you guys for quite a while. And The Game has always been a must-watch event as well, so I have a decent outsider's perspective of that rivalry, too.

Cody has a chat with Sipple about many things, including Bubba, Martinez, his future and the new offense. Here's part of the conversation about the new offense: LINK Green is very complimentary towards Marty, and we can put the notion that Sipple has negative energy toward Cody to rest. That was clearly a misunderstanding by people reading that article a week or so ago. The vibe I get from Green's comments about Starling make me think Starling will take the MLB contract, so we're going to be really raw behind Martinez this year. If he goes down again, Carnes is going to have to turn into a Man overnight. Cody had good things to say about Martinez' development later in the article. Seems like Martinez is progressing. It just remains to be seen how much, and how much better he can be delivering the ball and making decisions. Carnes, allegedly, has the tools. If he has the mental part down and Martinez falters, it'll be interesting to see if they give Carnes the ball.

I apologize for hurting your feelings. Let's start over. Which Big Ten team do you root for, biggie?

All I'm hearing is, "blah, blah, blah I sprained my vagina." I have not disrespected you or your team. Hell, buddy, I don't even know which team you root for. You're posting from Minneapolis/St. Paul, but you can't be a Golden Gophers fan because one of them expatriated to Chicagoland for work and the other died when his shack fell through the ice while fishing last year. So maybe you're a Penn State fan or maybe you're just an ad hoc Big Ten fan, but whatever you are, you won't find me being disrespectful to any Big Ten team. That ain't how I roll.

And how did you become the expert on Nebraska's strong and weak points? I know this school inside and out. I know where our strengths lie and our weaknesses. The fact that I'm dispelling BS myths you're proposing doesn't in any way mean that I, or any other Husker fan posting here, doesn't know what's wrong with this school, this football program, this basketball, baseball, volleyball, track, bowling, and softball team. When it comes to Nebraska Sports, you're the neophyte here, not us. If you want to know where our weaknesses lie, ask us. But don't be so arrogant as to presue to tell us. You don't know jack about this team, this program or this school like we do.

He also had a damned good return against Colorado a couple of years back. But that was in college, so take it for what it's worth.

Here's the thing - you're not the arbiter of our self-esteem. Whether you approve or disapprove, like or don't like, appreciate or don't appreciate, respect or disrespect Nebraska doesn't matter one bit. Whether you think Nebraska is a quality program or a good school or a "get" or whatever term you want to use is irrelevant. Your appreciation for our school doesn't make us like Nebraska more, or respect it more, or root for it more. We've taken a stab at dispelling some of the myths you present, but frankly, we don't care if you believe us or not. The fact is that Nebraska is on par with the very best the Big Ten has to offer, and will only get better over time. I'm done trying to explain that to you. Take it or leave it.

Wouldn't that dispel the notion that Nebraska is not a top program? Sure, we'll likely bung it up somehow and fall short of expectations, but we're not chopped liver. We're not Indiana or Minnesota. We're on par with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State, although we've been down for the better part of a decade. We're rebuilding - everyone knows this - but we have the potential to be great again, and there's no reason to expect we won't be.

What baggage does Nebraska bring? A program likely falling under severe NCAA penalties? A program reeling from four years of THE WRONG coach, not to mention their own NCAA sanctions? Those are the Big Ten's two flagship programs, Ohio State and Michigan. Penn State's last ten years have been marginally better than Nebraska's, and that's during two major coaching upheavals over here. Wiscy has flirted with success but has yet to break through, Iowa is about the same, and the remainder of the Big Ten has been mediocre - nothing you wouldn't see in any other conference. Nebraska doesn't walk into the Big Ten taking a back seat to anyone. We'll be respectful of the conference and the fans, but if anyone thinks we're coming in as something other than a top program, they're sorely mistaken. I think the point trying to be made is Nebraska is not a top program. Not in football anymore and not academically. According to forbes list of best colleges Nebraska comes in at 442 out of 610 and has since fell out of the AAU. That is above some B10 schools, but nothing to boast about. As for football even your post shows they barely cracked the 2000's with a game in 02, which was against Miami, we all know Miami is a huge draw as well. Plus that year the Rose was the NC. Another good reason for the draw. That said yes Nebraska is a good addition to the B10, but was not the only car on the lot. Nebraska is ranked 47th in US News & World Report's college rankings, which is a far better benchmark than Forbes. In fact, it is the publication in such rankings. I think that would still put us in the bottom 25% of the current Big Ten, if not dead last, but guess what? That's where Penn State was ranked in 1990, before joining the Big Ten. Look at them now, and you'll see where Nebraska will be ranked in ten-fifteen years. Are we a top program in football? Depends on what metric you're looking at. We haven't won jack squat in a decade, but we've played for more national championships in the past decade than Michigan, Iowa, Michigan State, Penn State, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin and Northwestern combined. Further, Nebraska is being picked by several publications to win the Big Ten this year. If we're not a top football program, what does that say about the Big Ten?

Do you really think your conference acquired Nebraska so we would deliver the Omaha and Lincoln markets? We're a national draw, man. Where did I say Nebraska isn't a National draw? The conference makes a lot more money with the BTN and expanding it into larger population bases. There are other reasons than TV market share in play for the overall decision to add Nebraska into the Big 10. If they were going on market share, they would have added a school like Rutgers. Rutgers doesn't get good ratings in New York, let alone the rest of America. Their ability to deliver the East Coast is at best wishful thinking, and they were never a serious candidate. Nebraska delivers the sun belt market because - shockingly! - our climate sucks, and a huge portion of our citizens move south, especially later in life. I have several members of my family retired in Arizona and New Mexico. We have large representation from California to Texas and in Florida. We'll deliver those eyeballs like Rutgers never, ever could.

Do you really think your conference acquired Nebraska so we would deliver the Omaha and Lincoln markets? We're a national draw, man.

What baggage does Nebraska bring? A program likely falling under severe NCAA penalties? A program reeling from four years of THE WRONG coach, not to mention their own NCAA sanctions? Those are the Big Ten's two flagship programs, Ohio State and Michigan. Penn State's last ten years have been marginally better than Nebraska's, and that's during two major coaching upheavals over here. Wiscy has flirted with success but has yet to break through, Iowa is about the same, and the remainder of the Big Ten has been mediocre - nothing you wouldn't see in any other conference. Nebraska doesn't walk into the Big Ten taking a back seat to anyone. We'll be respectful of the conference and the fans, but if anyone thinks we're coming in as something other than a top program, they're sorely mistaken.

Don't kid yourself. Nebraska was a huge "get" for the Big Ten. Penn State was a huge get. Penn State added all the same things as Nebraska, plus better academics, bigger TV markets and better recruiting areas. Nebraska is still a good addition but there are drawbacks as well. Have a clue what you're talking about before you disrespect Nebraska on this forum. Penn State was, academically, about where Nebraska is now prior to Big Ten (and CIC) admission. Penn State is ranked higher academically than Nebraska now, but that's after more than 15 years of CIC money. In 15 years, we'll be about where Penn State is now. It's all about the Benjamins. Penn State as a TV draw wasn't that big of a factor back in 1992, ten years prior to the BTN. They were a national brand, sure, but they didn't bring any markets to the Big Ten that Ohio State and/or Michigan didn't already deliver. Ratings-wise, Penn State was a blip. Nebraska, on the other hand, has played in more top-rated televised games than Penn State, and (I believe) any other Big Ten school. I have those numbers on my other computer and I'll post them tomorrow. Nebraska walks in the door with three Heisman trophy winners to Penn State's one. Nebraska has five national championships, Penn State has two. I could go on with major trophy winners, conference championships (since 1993), etc, etc, etc. Penn State was a huge get for the Big Ten. Nebraska was a huge get for the Big Ten. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise. I have been completely respectful. If anything you're being a little too sensitive. I guess saying Nebraska is a "good addition" isn't enough around here. Go figure at a Nebraska message board that you should speak respectfully about the Huskers. Maybe that comes as a shock to you? Calling Nebraska a "good addition" while in the same breath saying we come with "drawbacks" and claiming Penn State was a "slam dunk" is not going to go over well. Use some common sense, for crying out loud. Meanwhile, I had those all-time TV ratings numbers on this computer and I wanted to update you. Nebraska has five of the top 20 most-viewed football games of all time: Year Game Share Homes Viewers 1996 Fiesta 31 18.03 27.9 1995 Orange 31 18.031 30.0 1994 Orange 31 16.768 28.8 2002 Rose 22 14.548 21.6 1992 Orange 18 10.13 16.6 Those are the nos. 3, 4, 5, 17 & 18 games. By contrast, the rest of the Big Ten, combined, has four in the top 20: Michigan in the 1998 Rose Bowl (#2 all time) and Ohio State three times: 2003 Fiesta Bowl, 2007 BCS National Championship Game, and the 2008 BCS National Championship Game. Those were the nos. 8, 12 & 15 games, respectively. Notably absent from that top 20 is your horse, Penn State. Just this past season, Nebraska played in the fourth highest-watched regular season game (not counting bowl games) when we played Oklahoma in the Big XII Championship game. No other Big Ten team made the top ten. Still think Penn State is a bigger draw than Nebraska? Got anything to back that up with?

I'm skeptical that this has anything to do with the Big Ten Network as well, but I figured we have no exposure here. Even if this had nothing to do with BTN and was just a thread to kill time in the offseason, it's at least interesting to talk about.

He did that in college. He doesn't have NFL speed for kickoffs.

Don't kid yourself. Nebraska was a huge "get" for the Big Ten. Penn State was a huge get. Penn State added all the same things as Nebraska, plus better academics, bigger TV markets and better recruiting areas. Nebraska is still a good addition but there are drawbacks as well. Have a clue what you're talking about before you disrespect Nebraska on this forum. Penn State was, academically, about where Nebraska is now prior to Big Ten (and CIC) admission. Penn State is ranked higher academically than Nebraska now, but that's after more than 15 years of CIC money. In 15 years, we'll be about where Penn State is now. It's all about the Benjamins. Penn State as a TV draw wasn't that big of a factor back in 1992, ten years prior to the BTN. They were a national brand, sure, but they didn't bring any markets to the Big Ten that Ohio State and/or Michigan didn't already deliver. Ratings-wise, Penn State was a blip. Nebraska, on the other hand, has played in more top-rated televised games than Penn State, and (I believe) any other Big Ten school. I have those numbers on my other computer and I'll post them tomorrow. Nebraska walks in the door with three Heisman trophy winners to Penn State's one. Nebraska has five national championships, Penn State has two. I could go on with major trophy winners, conference championships (since 1993), etc, etc, etc. Penn State was a huge get for the Big Ten. Nebraska was a huge get for the Big Ten. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

I'm saying, if you're going to believe one article from the horse's mouth, you need to believe the next article from same said mouth. You can't pick and choose what you want. I believed it was possible back then and hoped it wasn't. It was found to be false according to the NCAA investigation and internal investigation. Once the NCAA cleared it, I believed it was false. Now Clarrett himself said it was false. Where did he say this? http://sports.ap.org/college-football/story?id=pdda4c159f21e4fa98def39b35acaa79e Clarrett isn't saying such things are not available, he's saying there isn't an organized effort on the part of coaches or the administration to provide such things. But for OSU to be culpable, there doesn't have to be that direct effort, there just has to be a willingness to ignore it. Clarrett's statement doesn't exonerate Coach Tressel or the football program.

Don't kid yourself. Nebraska was a huge "get" for the Big Ten.

I didn't get that impression from Gilmore. I think his statement is a little self-serving, and it supports a player he obviously liked, but I don't recall Gilmore ever being a problem, or saying things that would cause problems. Maybe I'm just letting time erase those memories...?

There's a public timeline and there's a private, real timeline. I doubt the real timeline ever comes out.

Where are you reading this stuff about Niles off the field? I don't see it in this thread and I don't recall reading much, if anything, about Niles' character around here. He took some grief (rightfully) with his DUI, but that has never been the focus of the Niles Paul dissent. It's always been about his performance on the field.

The Game of the Century was played in Norman.