Paperback Writer

In my opinion, Nebraska isn't going to be invited to join the Big10. But I agree that Missouri leaving the Big12 to join the Big10 is scary. That's why I hope that the Big10 adds either Notre Dame or Rutgers. Preferably, Notre Dame because the Big East is already damaged with the departure of Miami, FSU, and VT. Also, think Colorado is headed to the PAC10 along with Utah and BYU will take Colorado's spot in the Big12. I think the Big12 can survive losing Colorado as long as BYU replaces them. Not a fair swap as far as market share goes but BYU has been more competitive in football and Men's Basketball than Colorado at the moment and is at least Colorado's equal in terms of facilities. In my opinion, it's the best scenario for the Big12 as I think Colorado's departure is almost certain while Missouri's departure is somewhat iffy. Like most, I want what's best for Nebraska and I think it's future is in the Big12. I don't see Nebraska being invited to the Big10 for academic reasons. What's hurt the Big12 North is the demise of Colorado and Nebraska. With Nebraska back, Colorado out, and BYU in: the Big12 North gets a couple of Top 25 team in Nebraska and BYU. With Missouri on the fringe of the Top 25, and a possible successful Kansas under Gill or a resurgent KSU under Snyder - that might be enough for a return of Big12 North respectability. With the continued strength of the Big12 South, that puts 5-6 teams in the Top25 by my calculations and that's a decent conference. A major assumption is that BYU will reamin in the Top 25 (like they have for the past 4 seasons) in the Big 12. Even with a tougher conference schedule in the Big 12, I think BYU is capable of it.

And I would add that BYU is Big12 bound. There's no way the Utah politicans will allow Utah to leave the MWC without a good landing spot for BYU. And the PAC10 is not going to invite BYU. Although losing the Denver/Colorado market will hurt somewhat, I can't think of a better repacement than BYU for the Big12 in terms of competitiveness in multiple programs, facilities, fan base, etc. And NU fans won't have the fear of a drunken student section yelling obscenities and throwing urine bombs when they come to visit. I've heard among all the expansion chatter the past couple of months that BYU would NEVER accept an invitation to the Pac-10 because of their political differences. Supposedly the Pac-10 is too liberal for BYU's taste. Also I've read that their religious affiliation is a turn off to the Pac-10 as well. Among that same chatter, they said BYU is a better fit in the Big XII, politically speaking. BYU would accept a PAC10 invite if offered; in fact, the PAC10 would be their first choice. But the feeling is not mutual. The PAC10, specifically Cal-Berkeley, would not allow a conservative, religiously affilated school like BYU to join the PAC10. And the PAC10 voting has to be unanimous for conference expansion. But the powers that be don't have to go down that road of why BYU should or shouldn't be included in the PAC10 because they don't have to. The schools that the PAC10 want are Colorado and Utah. With Colorado's departure, the Big12 needs a replacement and there's no better alternative than BYU. And the Mormon political power in Utah can block Univ. of Utah from joing the PAC10 unless BYU has an acceptable BCS landing spot. From a cultural standpoint, the Big12 is a better fit for BYU as they already have a private, religiously affilated school in Baylor. In short, it is correct that BYU is a better fit, politically speaking, in the Big12 than the PAC10. But BYU's first choice would be the PAC10 but it's not going to happen. BYU will be happy to join the Big12 and the Big12 will be happy to have them in the wake of Colorado's departure. I just hope Missouri will stay in the Big12 so the conference can stay more-or-less intact.

Here's my take on how Big10 and PAC10 conference expansion will play out. Big10: Notre Dame finally accepts invite and joins the Big10. I think a lot of the postering going on is to reach acceptable conditions for ND fans and alumini so that they finally swallow the pill and join. If that can't be done, I think the Big10s second choice after ND is Rutgers. That's really bad news for an already weakened Big East. I think Missouri is a distant third choice even though the Tigers want desperately to join the Big10 and get a piece of the action (Big10 TV contract). I just think Rutgers market share in NJ is a lot more attractive than KC/St. Louis. Academically (which is very important to the Big10), I think either school would be acceptable. Boths schools have their academic strong points. PAC10: Colorado is gone. If given the choice, the Buffs would choose the PAC10 over the Big12 and they are the PAC10's first choice. Utah will be the other school to be offered a PAC10 invitation. The Utes will accept on the condition that... Big12: BYU gets offered an invitation to take Colorado's spot in the Big12. MWC and WAC undergo some type of merger. I also see the PAC10 and Big12 working together on a combined TV contract. Neither conference by itself has enough market share to get what the Big10 and SEC get from their TV contracts. Perhaps the PAC10 and Big12 negotiating toghether could get a better deal than either conference could get individually. That could also lead to additional bowl games between the two conferences and take some sting out of the Colorado for BYU swap which isn't an even trade from a market share and TV revenue standpoint even though BYU's major sports programs have been more competative than CU's have been the last few years.

It's good to see the MWC get some recognition. However, I think before the MWC gets invited to join the BCS party, the PAC10 and Big12 will pluck Utah and BYU from the MWC. The MWC could invite Boise St. to leave the WAC but the MWC will still be weakened significantly if Utah and BYU leave it.

And I would add that BYU is Big12 bound. There's no way the Utah politicans will allow Utah to leave the MWC without a good landing spot for BYU. And the PAC10 is not going to invite BYU. Although losing the Denver/Colorado market will hurt somewhat, I can't think of a better repacement than BYU for the Big12 in terms of competitiveness in multiple programs, facilities, fan base, etc. And NU fans won't have the fear of a drunken student section yelling obscenities and throwing urine bombs when they come to visit.

I just don't see the case for adding more than one school to the Big10. With 12 schools the Big10 gets the added revenue of a conference championship game. However, all the TV revenue is split 12 ways (the Big10 splits $$$ evenly). So a case can be made that although the pot is being split more ways, there's the added revenue from a championship game. What is the reasoning behind adding additional teams beyond 12? Unless the Big10 gains a significant TV market like Texas and aTm (and they are staying in the Big12), the dilution of revenue split 14 or 16 ways won't make up for any added revenue gained from new TV markets. I just don't see the money being there for anything beyond 12 teams. Not to mention the scheduling difficulties for football in a 14 or 16 team conference. It doesn't add up.

I agree 100% and the bolded area is going to be the biggest challenge. CSU could very well be the place of choice for CO in-state kids if CU continues to slide. And if CU goes to the PAC 10, we need to get CSU into the B12 North. IMO, a better replacement for CU in the Big12 is BYU. And I think it's actually going to happen. PAC10 inviting CU and Utah and BYU moving to the Big12. CSU just doens't have the facilities needed for the Big12 and the Rams ability to compete in the Big12 is questionable.

Agree that Nebraska is below Texas on the OU rival depth cart and maybe even below OK St as mentioned. As much as I would like an annual NU-OU game, it's not in the cards. As much as Mizzou wants to join the Big10, I think they are the 3rd choice behind Notre Dame and Rutgers which means they would stay in the Big12. However, I think you're right in that Colorado already has one foot out the door. I think there's a good chance BYU replaces CU in the Big12 while Utah and CU join the PAC10. Nothing against TCU, it's just that the Big12 already has the Texas TV markets with UT, aTm, and Tech. Boise St. would either join the MWC or some type of merged MWC/WAC conference with TCU and other SW and Western schools. Boise St. is not a good match for the Big12 and I question whether TCU really is. In conjunction with this conference re-alignment, I see the PAC10 and Big12 working out some type of joint TV contract since neither conference by itself have the markets and viewership to command what the Big10 and SEC are getting from the networks. If that plays out, the BYU-Utah rivalry would continue and would potentially open up a few other PAC10-Big12 matchups on a regular basis. If that occurs, does Big Red Nation continue with the NU-CU game? Or do they pursue something like home-and-away series with Washington or Arizona St? Personally, I'd rather have BYU on the schedule every year and never play CU unless it's in the Holiday Bowl.

About the only liability that Coach Leach incurred with that locker room ramble is he made it diffult for his alma mater to ever hire him. But BYU isn't in the market for a HC right now. I agree he will be awarded a nice sum from Tech in the eventual settlement. After that, it will be interesting to see what his next coaching opportunity will be. Mike Leach strikes me as an opposite side of the coin to Bo Pelini in that Leach really knows the offensive side while Pelini is an expert on the defensive side. I do like Coach Leach's tendency to speak his mind on occasion. A candid bit of fresh air from the usual coach speak but that can also backfire. That also reminds me of Coach Pelini. Would like to sit at a dinner table with both of them and listen to an uncensored football conversation. On second thought, would settle for a conversation about just about anything: theology, pirates, you name it.

My expereince is far different as I encounter Texas fans everyday and most know their football. They certainly have a solid understanding of the game as many enroll their kids in youth leagues starting in 2nd grade. It might be hard for Husker Loyalists to imagine but football is bigger in Texas than in Nebraska (I've lived in both states for 20+ years each). So a typical Texan who has played football starting in 2nd grade all the way through High School (where football is a year round endevor), watches the local High School team on Friday night, roots for UT, aTm, Tech or whoever on Saturday afternoon, and then tunes in for the Cowboys on Sunday, and then might even help coach his son's youth league team...suddenly lacks an understanding of the game itself??? If one still thinks that, read or watch the book/film Friday Night Lights and tell me that Texans don't know their football. There's a reason why every big-time football program (including Nebraska) recuits Texas. It's not just because of the large population, it's because Texas has a large population where football is very much a part of the cultural landscape. The reason some Texans may come across as arrogont is not because they are ignorant about the game itself. Mack Brown's teams may have underachieved in the past but not so much lately. In the past 5 seasons, the Longhorns have won a NC and played for another. They won the Big12 both those years and arguably should have played in a third Big12 playoff in 2008. Hopefully, Nebraska will soon enjoy that kind of success.

I don't see the 1993-94 and 2009-10 comparison. Especially on offense. There is just too much improvement needed on the O-line and playmakers to be developed or found at the skill positions. The 1993 O-line was very good. Frazier and Phillips had the makings of at least becomming all-conference performers. I'm glad to see the defense is now fixed. For puposes of comparison, I always thought the 1981-82 was similar to 1993-94. The overall talent level was improved over the proceeding years and the parts seemed to be falling in place for conference and perhaps national titles. On offense, the O-Line was solid with some standouts (Rimington/Steinkuhler/Theiss) and (Shields/Stai/Wiegert). A talented, young QB had emerged in Turner Gill and Tommie Frazier. And a proven IB to carry the pigskin with Rozier and Phillips. It's important to remember that the 1982-83 teams came very close to accomplishing what the 1994-95 teams did. The 1981 and 1993 teams were the foundation of that success and both teams nearly won a MNC in the Orange Bowl only to be denied in the 4th quarter. Now that I think about it. The 2010 Huskers have so much improvement to make on offense before even being in a discussion with the 1994 (and 1982) teams. Hopefully, I'm wrong and Cody Green is the next Turner Gill or Tommie Frazier and Roy Helu or Rex Burkhead can be productive IBs in the mold of Rozier or LP. But that's quite a leap.

I think the vast majority of it is based on his results in High School against some pretty fierce competition in Texas. He was a star in a very tough league. His highlight reels were pretty good. That's where most of this is coming from, I think. Combine that with Lee's lackluster performance and that natural tendency to favor the second-stringer becomes even more pronounced, I think. Cody Green did play against some tough competition in Texas. But Dayton HS is class 4A and the top class in Texas is 5A so Green and Dayton HS didn't play against the toughest competition in Texas. One of the differences between classes is team speed and the complexity of schemes on defense. Playing in 4A probably added to his highlight reel and might explain some of his early tendencies like locking onto a primary receiver that a 4A defense might not have been capable of taking away. I think a lot of the expectation for Cody Green to break out in 2010 and become the starting QB is really just hope. However, it is a hope I share after the angst of Zac Lee in 2009.

Yes, Texas is arrogant. And yes, Nebraska fans can be delusional someitmes. Both Texas and Nebraska have great football traditions and living in Texas for the past 20+, most of the locals do acknowledge that Nebraska is a worthy foe. Most of their venom is reserved for OU and most of their condescending behavior is reserved for aTm. That said, Texas will continue to be the most talented team in the Big12 for the forseeable future. There isn't any better prep football talent in the country than in Texas and the Longhorns get to hand pick the best of it. That doesn't mean that talent will always be developed or that Texas can't be out-coached or out-played on the gridiron. The current situation reminds me of the Osborne vs Switzer years in the Big8. Most of those years, OU had the better talent. Some years were an even match where OU got the breaks and won. A few years, NU had the better talent and won. The fact that the Huskers played the Sooners close most of those years is a testament to Osborne and staff's coaching and the effort put forth on the field. I can't wait for a little payback on Bevo and the Longhorns. But I don't anticipate Nebraska defeating Texas year-in and year-out anytime soon. At least not until Bo Pelini comes closer to the stature of Tom Osborne and Nebraska wins another national championship in the Big12. Even then it will be an uphill battle to play toe-to-toe with Texas.

I think what saved Osborne in the mid/late 1970's is that his teams never had a 2002 or 2007 season. Sure Osborne felt the heat for not beating OU but the Sooners were a monster back then; arguably the best program of that era along with Bama and USC. A couple of those loses to OU were to MNC teams (1974-75) and a couple of others were to an OU team that might have been the best (1977-78). And then there was "Sooner Magic" in several close games lost in the closing minutes. Many fans like myself figured (hoped) that in an upcoming season the ball would finally bounce the right way or the Huskers would catch a break during bowl season like in 1970. It was only a matter of time when Osborne and the Big Red would have another MNC. I never thought it would take until 1994; but the 1982-83 seasons where Nebraska was the best team in the country changed everything. Husker fans knew Osborne and the Big Red had arrived.

1) How long have I been a member of Husker Nation? Since I was 12 after my family moved to Lincoln from Buckeye country. 2) What led me to The Nation? Had a locker room argument on my first day of school after moving to Nebraska from Ohio on whether Nebraska/Oklahoma or Ohio St./Michigan was the better college football. My wise father informed me that “We’re not in Ohio anymore”. 3) Where am I from originally? I claim Lincoln 4) Where do I live now? Dallas area 5) Favorite Husker Memory? 11/11/78 NU: 17 OU: 14 Stood the entire game in East Stadium 6) Worst Husker Memory? 11/18/78 NU: 31 Missouri: 35 I just knew Nebraska would beat undefeated Penn St. in the Orange Bowl for Tom Osborne’s first national championship. Wilder, Winslow, and Bradley had other plans. 7) Number of home games attended? Every home game from 1975 through 1981. Since leaving Lincoln to go off to college, I’ve only managed to attend a few OU games. 8) Number of away games attended? Far too few: 1981 OU in Norman. Texas A&M in 2002 and again in 2006. Alamo Bowl after the 2005 season and the Cotton Bowl after the 2006 season. 9) Favorite Husker apparel? My Nebraska baseball jersey I wear for gameday. 10) Favorite place to watch a Husker game? Besides Memorial stadium which distance precludes, it’s on my big screen plasma. I really need to get out more. 11) Favorite all time player? My childhood idols: IB Rick Berns, WR Tim Smith, and TE Junior Miller. 12) WCO or Option? WCO 13) Pederson or Byrne? Neither. I do like the current AD though. 14) Lil Red or Herbie Husker? Herbie 15) Favorite Husker play? Play action pass down the middle of the field to the TE 16) Favorite game day beverage? Diet Pepsi 17) How did I find HuskerBoard? Mr. Google