HuskersGJ

Culture is the biggest thing. I think we had common culture with everyone from Oklahoma north, but once the Texas schools showed up, the culture changed dramatically, and we no longer fit. Colorado never really fit, either - they're far more a West Coast school than a Midwest school. They'll prosper in the Pac-12. We'll prosper in the Big Ten, if for no other reason than the fact that we're so very much like Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Sparty, Ohio State, etc. We're unlike PSU and Northwestern, but not so terribly much so that we can't find common ground. It seemed like, no matter what happened, we just could not get on the same page as Texas, Texas Tech or Baylor. A&M was somewhat like us, but not tremendously so, either. Could you explain the culture fit more? Do you consider Texas Tech and Baylor to fit with the Oklahoma schools? As for Colorado, I think the Pac 12 is as culturally diverse as the Big 12, maybe more. I think Colorado and Oregon or the Arizona schools fit quite well. Neheisel didn't last long at Colorado but IMO he "fit" there (I don't mean that in a negative way against CU). And that guys is as California football as you can get. Point is, Pac12 is diverse, i agree. but for Colorado, they have more in common with those schools than they did with ANYONE in the Big 12. I agree with the initial thread as well. Except for A&M the other SWC schools never really felt like the same conference. but honestly, the divisions felt like two different conferences. OU and OSU started to become one of "them" instead of "us".

"these days?" Warren Powers (Mizzou)? Gayle Sayers(KU)? Ben Gregory(CU)? Turner Gill(KU)? There's plenty others. Most of them forgotten, as Cody Green will probably be eventually. veI'll give ya credit for putting out an opinion you knew you'd get flak for but I think you may be longing for days that never really existed. Now...If were still playing in the Big 12 then it'd be a little messed up because of what information he could share... but we don't even play KSU anymore so who cares? I don't have high expectations for him, but prove me wrong, Cody! Good Luck!

So, Missou is "happy" now? Or they just know they're stuck in a bad marriage and can't say a damn thing now. The Tigers sure seemed to have a lot of love for the big 12 when they thought they were a guarantee to leave it last May. A&M will be "happy" as long as they get their money. As will Texas. Kansas/KSU/ISU/Baylor are happy just to have a conference. Oh, and Colorado doesn't exist. This is desperate push to put on a happy face and make the best of where they are now. In the conference alignment, the Big Ten made a huge gain and the Big 12 is lucky they still exist. The only way they can make this a "win" is to re-write history. Doesn't matter how well known the actual events were at the time, if they repeat their version enough times, it will become the truth for many.

IIRC Nebraska was favored by something like 2 or 3 in Vegas but EVERY talking head "expert" picked Florida with some warning that a Gator blowout was possible. Agreed, Tommie was the greatest player never to win the Heisman.

Uh oh.... Here's a future controversey. IMO they're not bad but not great either. I don't mind flashy gloves but don't know about the idea of making them work only when you put both hands together. I'd rather see the defense Throw the Bones and cross their arms than put their hands up to show a trademarked logo- no matter how much I like that logo. Regardless though, if they're going to make a drastic uniform change I'd rather it be the gloves than the helmet or the pants/jerseys!

He puts a question mark after it, saying "all 11 starters?" so i don't know if he's serious. He may be, he's proven himself to be a complete idiot aside from that. here was the lineup from early in that season: Jay Moore Barry Cryer Ola Dagunduro Adam Carriker Stewart Bradley Corey McKeon Bo Ruud Andre Jones Tierre Green Andrew Shanle Cortney Grixby This includes two guys that played a down in an actual NFL regular season game (NFL Starters Stewart and Carriker). With all due respect to Jay Moore who had season ending injuries. With the exception of Andre Jones (as far as I know), all other players at least earned minicamp invites. but many didn't even survive long enough to play in the preseason.

Sorry but if Bleacher Report has any respect for itself (which they don't) they'll suspend this guy from posting articles. He's just making a joke of himself at this point. This is whiny message board BS he's posting as actual articles. This is a guy who went off in the comments because someone had the nerve to point out that the Big 10 is no longer connected to the Alamo Bowl... He has a make believe bloated resume and clearly a VERY high opinion of himself. Let it go, dude. Let it go.

Ah, makes sence. But they do go by ten years, best of 80's 90's 2000's. So there should be something for 2010 to 2020. I would have no problem with that. But your right that list wont come out until 2020. So what your saying is to make the fans of Penn and Nebraska happy it's ok to disrespect the kids who did actually play in the B10? Or are you saying it's ok to go against 70% of the other teams fans to satisfy those two teams fans? Cake and eat it to, sound familure? I dont see how you can be on a B10 list when you NEVER played a down of football in the B10. This. Gotta say I agree with the view that we shouldn't be included in decade list for a decade we were in the Big 12. If they want to include Nebraska so bad then have some kind of honorable mention for Husker players but don't actually rank them. For a 2020 list we only miss 2010 players. So i guess Prince won't be eligible. For the sake of making an entertainment tv show on a network: The BTN has been touting how they want to include Nebraska, and they did. They want Nebraska fans to tune in. Its wrong to the rest of the BIG but for ratings, and ratings only, maybe the right decision? I agree from the standpoint of running a network it is the right thing and we do really want you all to feel welcome. I have had a pot of coffee and am wound for sound, so take my post for what they are. I personally dont feel disrespected as I was'nt going to make the list anyway. It's more of a history thing for me. Kind of like saying Columbus discovered america. I am sure you all will make your mark in the B10, but it should be earned, not givin. The network thing and the counter-argument made about if the Big 12 should include Huskers (eating the cake, too) got me thinking. This is two fold for me. If the Big 12 released a list on a website, voted by fans, the league, whatever. I would be angry if they didn't include Husker players and we know Husker message boards would LIGHT UP with more anti-Big 12 threads over such a thing... At the same time, if the fictional Big 12 Network did a list solely for a TV program... It would seem odd if Nebraska players were featured in it. It would be a show aimed at current Big 12 fans anyway. I think the argument just gets kind of awkward when you consider the angle of trying to entertain fans of your league through a TV show.

Now wait. I know what the original post says but is this a list honoring the stadium itself or Husker home games in general? Personally I would love to see Nebraska Field games at least be up for argument. They may not make the list since none of us remember them but it doesn't seem right not at least trying to honor great games played by our Huskers pre-1923.

Ah, makes sence. But they do go by ten years, best of 80's 90's 2000's. So there should be something for 2010 to 2020. I would have no problem with that. But your right that list wont come out until 2020. So what your saying is to make the fans of Penn and Nebraska happy it's ok to disrespect the kids who did actually play in the B10? Or are you saying it's ok to go against 70% of the other teams fans to satisfy those two teams fans? Cake and eat it to, sound familure? I dont see how you can be on a B10 list when you NEVER played a down of football in the B10. This. Gotta say I agree with the view that we shouldn't be included in decade list for a decade we were in the Big 12. If they want to include Nebraska so bad then have some kind of honorable mention for Husker players but don't actually rank them. For a 2020 list we only miss 2010 players. So i guess Prince won't be eligible. For the sake of making an entertainment tv show on a network: The BTN has been touting how they want to include Nebraska, and they did. They want Nebraska fans to tune in. Its wrong to the rest of the BIG but for ratings, and ratings only, maybe the right decision?

Loved Veland when he played- He always seemed like a good guy. I'm so glad to hear he's alright and that this didn't end in tragedy. even though he's been "shaken", at least he's alive and out of the hospital! BTW, he didn't just play in the Super Bowl, he caused caused a fumble on a kickoff vs the Packers that was recovered by the Broncos.

Tirade? maybe. A&M-like tirade? NO. 1) because he was scolded for it and I would like to think he's learned and 2) because that particular Big 12 crew won't be reffing any Nebraska games this year (fingers crossed that this includes a bowl game). I honestly think he went in to that game hot, with an even shorter fuze than usual (scary thought) knowing his team was also going up against that crew. as much as I want to like Martinez, and i hate to say this, but i wouldn't be surprised if he pulled some kind of similar BS this year.

You think your squad has a shot at making the title game? Do they have a shot? Of course, but reality sets in about 5 seconds after thinking that. They are going to be talented and Fickell will coach well but the title game is a stretch for them for sure, there are so many things being talked about in that locker room, they don't have the senior leaders the need to make a run this year. The only reason I picked PSU over Nebraska was I figure Nebraska wins the first match up but Penn State comes back in the title game, as you know hard to beat a team twice in college football. I was thinking Wiscy might be a possible repeat opponent. *If* we win our division the chance of a repeat is pretty high anyway since we play PSU, OSU, and Wiscy. I mean no offense to Ill, Indiana, and Purdue but.... As far as OSU, IMO its not a stretch at all that the Big Ten/NCAA might ban thm from the title game. How bad would the conference look if tOSU won the championship (maybe unlikely but not impossible) then couldn't represent the league in a bowl game?

Wait so...? TO always hated the Big 12 and so that's why Missouri whored itself to the Big 10, CU finally made it to the Pac 10 after years of looking West, and Texas was flirting with the (insert a conference/independency here)? Dagnabbit, Tom! couldn't you have just put your Big 12 hatred aside and waited until after the conference sank before you (and only you, not Harvey) went looking around for a lifeboat? F#%& 'em.

The RB position looks very good for the future! I really liked this kid from the first article I read after he committed. Good kid, good family background. Its one thing to look good on film on the field but it looks like he'll be an asset to the Huskers off it as well.

That too, but specifically I was referring to this: May 2010 rumors this report was the snowflake that rolled into a massive avalanche-like snowball by June 11, 2010. long before someone, whoever, at Texas was sneaking hourly reports to OrangeBloods, all the initial rumors were coming out of Kansas City. clearly someone at Mizzou was leaking these rumors. IMO this Tiger-backing blabber mouth (god bless him/her) is the reason we are playing in the Big 10 in 2011. and ironically also the reason Missouri is stuck with Big IIX for years to come. What's interesting in retrospect, is that obviously this person felt that Missouri and Nebraska to the Big 10 was a done deal. Even saying "Big 10 officials told Missouri...". but according to the OWH article months later, even Nebraska had only been in initial introductory talks with the league at that point. Still, I can't help but think that their officials had been to the same secret hideaway that Pearlman and TO visited with Delaney. What the Big 10 thought of their presentation, who knows.

hey give 'em credit, they left before we did. even if no one noticed! I guess I also don't see how "small market" or "national program" is a "spin" from Delaney. spinning what? Nebraska is just as small a market and just as much in the national spotlight now as they were a year ago when the league voted us in-- enthusiastically i might add. so what's the spin now vs what was said/known last year? If the article was only about the AAU thing, then it would make more sense. the comparrison of Delaney's comments last year vs this year show a spin, sure. so write your article on that if you need to meet your deadline. To those who argue we haven't done anything in the last ten years. no, we haven't. but as others have pointed out, 10 year accomplishments clearly weren't a prerequisite because: MICHIGAN and NOTRE DAME. as for tshirt counting. he mentions Washington, assuming he means DC and not the state? I rarely see Mich and ND stuff. Texas, yes. USC, not so much anymore. tOSU, are like ants at a picnic, they're Everywhere! Based on this criteria, even Badgers/WVU/LSU/Harvard > ND. but that too changes with the wind. If tOSU tanks next year i expect to see far fewer of those as well.

seemingly true on the surface but one only needs to look at the revenue sharing of the big ten vs the big iix. TEN seems to have a better understanding of the old adage "you're only as strong as your weakest member". Ten is also more of a Union to the Big IIX's confederacy. I think most people, certainly not just this article or Texas backers, seem to forget the primary motivation of why Nebraska left. As was said at the time, you don't make a decision like this simply because you don't get along with another member school. We all know this: For Nebraska, it was all too real to envision a scenario in the very near future where CU and Mizzou left, leading to Texas bolting and dragging 4 others along. Nebraska had a legitimate fear of being left without a lifeboat if the ship sank, and backroom whispers were that the USS Big XII was headed straight for an ice field. I still believe, that if Missouri hadn't initially leaked what now appears to have been overzealous speculation and wishful thinking (at least on their part), Nebraska would still be in the Big XII.

Delaney said, Nebraska=Green Bay because its small market with National internest. Period. What about that isn't accurate? If your just trying to make a comparison, then a Green Bay comparison works. I get what he's saying, no we aren't top 10 "at this moment in time" but Nebraska is in the Big Ten for the long haul, so a 15-minute "moment in time" is really irrelevent. Have we been there before? Yes. Do we have potential to be there again? as the the writer says, yes. Delaney didn't say Nebraska is top 10 according to bleacher reporters and the ever changing tides of top 10 lists. he said we are a small-market but national program. and again, what about that isn't true? Ndamukong Suh. 2009. ring any bells? Radio I can only base it off of listening to Sirius college football shows but that Big 12 championship game is what put Nebraska back on the map, consistantly, for the first time since '01. It seems like night and day how much Nebraska has been discussed since before that game. the conference switch was a bigger story because Nebraska is a national program. Do you think Missouri and Colorado leaving would have been anywhere near the same media circus? As far as the AAU. its been discussed and I think Delaney is downplaying its importance a year ago. but IMO Nebraska having been in it, and many feel still worthy of being in it, is much better than if they'd never been a member at all.

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting. I've never seen the University sell a Rozier or Gill Jersey or any other player. They sell #30 and #12 replica jerseys but they don't have the players names on them. agree. The jerseys are a completely different situation. Who is #30 for? Rozier? Green? You still see a lot of #7's around, are those for? I will say there do seem to be a lot of Jared Tomich fans around... what is the NFL's licensing rules on former players? I've seen Cowboys fans with Staubach jerseys's- who gets those royalties? but again, NFL=very different rules in this case.

a few random thoughts Whities: The only thing that keeps the '07 all-whites from looking repulsive are the pant stripes. All whites are still a NO for me but '07 was better than no stripe or '02. That said, what is our modern-era record in all whites again? something like just 1 or 0 wins isn't it? iirc its not a winning record or even close to one. so again, NO. Tighties: I'm not a fan of the way the tight jersey's *look*, especialy the way the skin sticks out of the arm holes on the bigger players. but if the players like the way they play in them then whatever. Alternates: I'm going to be in the minority but a black combat-like alternate probably wouldn't bother me. just as long as its rarely used (as in less than once a season). rare special occasions, that type of thing. I am a huge fan of throwbacks, though! I've posted this on uniform discussions here before but I would love to see a throwback to the '70s shoulder sripes. and somehow with pre-modern-era throwbacks, even f'ugly can look awesome! There are plenty of examples of this from NFL clubs. Here is a good PDF file with details on the uni's shown in a poster print that some may be familiar with: LINK I'm partial to throwbacks of the 1902, '29, '48, and '71 looks. Plus the university could do auctions on these like they did with the '62 jersey's = $$$ for the stadium project. even just marketing not-game-worn replicas.

I think the fascination comes from: -a little excitement of having a new "rival" to replace the non-rivalry vs Colorado. -our newness to the Big TEN concept of rivalries with names &/or trophies. -most importantly, its the offseason. all topics are going to be exagerrated. I like Farmagedden but anything works. As long as the name doesn't come from the same folk that came up with Legends/Leaders... Was it Sipple that suggested the "Corn Belt" as a reward? like a wrastlin' belt. I don't know what to think of that idea.

@knapplc Oh, please tell me that ring is just a photoshop and is not real! that is too sad for words. In 2001 I thought it was pathetic and sad when CU put the Nebraska score on their Big XII rings. but at least they really did win the conference title and kicked our ass that year. I think some fans actually went to their message boards a couple years ago and tried to claim we were co-champions. All the Husker fans that did that-- and were not being sarcastic about it-- should be slapped. If we got a trophy for '08 we should have sent it back and I hope we didn't display it publicly or in any main trophy area. Given that Tigger fans were saying they "won" the 2010 game after the 1st quarter, why would it not surprise me if they also claim 17-7* Missouri Bell Champs over Nebraska! Don't forget they also claimed they "really" won last year b/c Gabbert got hurt. Good thing we had that excuse this year but still managed to actually win on the scoreboard.

There's no bias, i'd think they were unaware of it actually. though knowing Husker fans I'm sure ESPN was made aware of it in the form of several million emails. I think the reason they don't show, say, 97 vs Tenn or 95 vs Florida is becasue those games were on CBS. I don't know for certain but I would assume ESPN may not have the rights to 1990s CBS games. 94 vs Miami was on NBC. since NBC is all Notre Dame now maybe they were more leniant with the broadcast rights. All just guessing on my part. Nearly all of our decent regular season televised games were on ABC of course. so plenty for ESPN to chose from there. As for Big 10 Network. They seem to be geared towards a Nebraska love-fest as we join the league (don't think that will last, so we should enjoy it!). so maybe they will dig up our SEC wins. what could be more endearing to big 10 fans than that?

Play vs the SEC is the one area where I have no interest in adapting to the Big 10. I'll be contect to keep our own track record against the big bad "SEC Conference", thank you very much. Hopefully we can show new brothers how its done. iirc, we're 4-1 if you stretch it back about a decade and a half. as for the tradition list, some interesting stuff in there, will be fun seeing it on TV and in person!