Caven

I think Nebraska will win one of the tOSU/Wisky games but drop a game to someone like Northwestern that they don't expect to lose. My prediction is 9-3 with the Iowa game being for the division crown (and of course Iowa winning it ) Iowa and Nebraska were both supposed to do much better this year than they ended up doing so it will be interesting to see how we both bounce back next year.

2 of those 5 DID win! The biggest problem was two of the co-champions losing - one badly and the other to a non-AQ team - and putting Nebraska into the mix below them wouldn't have changed that at all.

Ecstatic! Relieved. Already sick and tired of Mizzou fans whining about that overturned call even though they had a good angle on TV that clearly showed the ball bouncing around between his hands and his head as he slid out of bounds. Loving the fact that the game ended by taking a knee on the half yard line and saying - we could easily score again but we don't have to

So embarrased to be an Iowa fan right now. Hopefully we beat Mizzou and make some of the pain go away.

Well - kind of their best. It will be their first game back so they won't have 5 games worth of practice under their belt.

Delaney is currently on BTN talking about adding Nebraska and the future of the Big 10. Not watching it myself atm - but caught a few minutes as I was flipping past.

Question that some of the comments here made me think of. Which conference now gets to claim Nebraska's 5 NCs in football. Did the Big 12 claim them when they were talking about how many NCs the conference had or are the ones earned while in the Big 8 relegated to the annals of history as far as conference NCs are concerned?

The problem you are going to have with Iowa next year is that after this year and the number of players we lose we will be entering next year with no expectations and possibly unranked. That almost guarantees a 10-2 or 11-1 season for us! If we were being talked about as potential conference title contenders then this game would be a piece of cake for you! Not sure whether to or at the way our team handles expectations both good and bad.

Will you still feel that way the year that you end up with a TCU/Boise championship game (substitute the appropriate non-AQ teams now that TCU is going Big East) because the best team they played was ranked in the 60s but every conference team has 2 losses because the leagues were just that tough that year? I can see it now. Nebraska loses by 1 point in a night game at Ohio State early in the season and then drops a tight game to Iowa or Michigan who had some injury problems early in the season and lost 3 but have hit their stride and catch some breaks when they play Nebraska. Nebraska then goes on to smoke OSU in the rematch. In the SEC a 2 loss Alabama smokes a 1 loss Florida in the SEC title game. The Pac 12, Big East and Big 12 don't have anyone worth and so for the title game you have a smoking hot Nebraska team and a smoking hot Alabama team.... going to the Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl while the title game is a couple of crap teams who haven't played anyone. No thanks.

I have always been in favor of simplicity in the playoff. 8 team playoff. 6 conference champions and 2 at large. 1 at large is guarnteed to a non AQ team and the other is to the top ranked team not currently in. The first round of the playoffs is essentially your CCGs. Win those to get to the tourney. First round = home games for the top 4 ranked teams the week before Christmas. Second round = 2 games rotating between the 4 current major bowl sites. The other 2 bowl sites will have traditional bowl matchups with the 2nd place teams from their conferences. Rose bowl might even choose to sit out this round and go back to having B10/Pac12 game with the CCG losers as the reps. Third round = championship when it is currently played. Avoid missing any more school than currently because it all occurs over break. Only 1 game for most fans to travel to since lets face it - the title game will be full of corporate types and sold out before it is even known who the participants are.

And that is the exact reason that Delaney made all of those statements about the non-AQ schools and their access and the fact that they better just be happy with what they have because as far as he and the Pac-12 commissioner are concerned they have already massively screwed up the Rose Bowl. "The problem," Delany interrupted, "is your big stage takes away opportunities for my teams, to play on the stage they created in 1902." "The notion," Delany said, "that over time by putting political pressure on, it's just going to get greater access, more financial reward and more access to the Rose Bowl, I think you're really testing." "We gave up the Rose Bowl, the SEC gave up access to the Sugar Bowl, others were included but they never had access to any of this before," Delany said. "You have to understand who brought what to the table. Who's continuing to give and who's continuing to get." "The only thing I would say, if you think you (the non-automatic qualifying leagues) can continue to pressure the system and we'll just naturally provide more and more and more," Delany said. "I don't think that's an assumption that our presidents, athletic directors, football coaches and commissioners necessarily agree with. Those contracts, though, may not be renewed if the non-automatic qualifying leagues keep asking for more. And from Delany's tone: this isn't a threat, but a promise. http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/12/09/jim-delany-warns-non-aq-leagues-dont-expect-more-than-youre/?a_dgi=aolshare_facebook When all is said and done - Delaney is PISSED about what the BCS has done to the Rose Bowl tradition. The Rose Bowl was the last to join (leading to the Nebraska/Penn State and Nebraska/Michigan games not being able to be played) and has also demanded concessions whenever something happened that caused them to lose out on the Pac-10 Big-10 game (in 2002 when the Orange Bowl picked Iowa first and kept the Rose from getting us to replace Ohio State the rules were changed so that the conference tie ins were maintained if there was another eligible school). The Rose Bowl was also the driving force behind stopping the rotation of the title game being played in the actual bowl and instead being played the following week at the same site so that they wouldn't lose their game every 4 years. The Rose Bowl did give in to the once in 4 years having to take a non-AQ school due to political pressure but I wouldn't be surprised to see that go away in the next round as well. I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't the last year that you don't see a traditional Rose Bowl match-up for the forseeable future.

That is why I spent the day over here yesterday talking about the new logo and division announcements. Couldn't stand what was going on over on the Hawk boards. Glad to see another Hawk fan over here so that we outnumber the NW fans 2-1!!!

OK - now THAT is funny!

This was one of those damned if you do/damned if you don't situations. Several old member schools only got 2 trophy mentions. As far as comments about the people picked not being deserving - they list the accomplishments and reasons for the choices. Granted some of them are kind of weak - but at lesat they didn't just pick people at random. Randel El was derided earlier in the thread but as it mentions he was the first ever to both rush and pass for 40 TDs. As far as Suh and Henry - the most recent players graduated in 2002 so they wouldn't have been eligible yet anyway it seems. I would guess that these trophy names might chnage over time since nobody will ever remember their names anyway.

Yeah - would be kind of nice if we were playing each other for a spot in the Big 10 title game most years and relegate Michigan to irrelevance! (I can dream can't I!!!)

Over 100 years of history and tradition and they come up with that crap? ugh.

Posted in the other thread about this - but it looks like the carnage is limited to 2 RBs at this time according to the official press release. Press conference scheduled for tomorrow morning. There might be other players that have limited playing time but Hampton (off the team) and ARob (suspended until January) are the only 2 given in the press release that won't be attending the bowl game.

Looks like the carnage ends at 2 players. One transferring from the team and one not making the bowl trip due to violation of team rules and suspended until January from the team (no practicing). Too bad they were our number 1 and 2 RBs heading in to next year. The IRBHG (Iowa Running Back Hating God) has struck again. We started the season with 6 RBs and now we are down to 1. 1 transfer before season started. 1 left due to personal issues (Weghner). 1 injured and now leaving team (Hampton). 1 suspended (ARob). 1 moved to FB position (will probably play some RB in the bowl) and Coker. Anyone else find it ironic that the only RB we have left for the bowl game is named Coker given what has happened?

Sportsbook has pulled the line for the Iowa bowl game. That isn't a good sign.

Been hanging out over here all day to avoid this topic! 23 seems a bit high. I would guess it will be somewhere in the 5-7 range including a decimation at our RB position.

Awesome. Thanks!

unless my count is off aren't there only 9 states? Nebraska - Cornhuskers Minnesota - Golden Gophers Wisconsin - Badgers Iowa - Hawkeyes Illinois - Illini, Wildcats Indiana - Hoosiers, Boilermakers Michigan - Wolverines, Spartans Ohio - Buckeyes Pennsylvania - Nittany Lions Yes, only 9 state.It was 7 states before until Nebraska and Penn St came into the picture.10 teams represented the Big 10, not the 10 states. Just my thoughts. He was getting ahead of himself. When we add Notre Dame and Missouri it will be 10 states!

The description that I saw was that the B10 logo allowed just the first word to be used and still be able to be read as Big Ten in places where the full logo would not fit. Had nothing to do with a homage to the original 10 members.

Part of the Rose Bowl thing stems from the fact that for DECADES the Big 10 didn't allow their teams to play in any bowl except the Rose Bowl. It was literally Rose Bowl or bust. Over the years there had been several 1 and 2 loss teams ranked in the top 10 at the end of the year sitting at home for the holidays. 1975 was the first year that multiple teams from the conference were allowed to attend bowl games. Yes that was over 30 years ago now - but Rose Bowl or bust was around for long enough that it remains ingrained as the primary goal to start the season. That doesn't mean that teams don't want to play for the MNC - but when even an undefeated season might not mean a chance to play for it all, the Rose Bowl is the only goal that is guaranteed at the start of the season.

Any chance you can put who was hired at each of the places and where from as the positions get filled? I know I can find it elsewhere if I look - but as long as there is already a thread I can at least try to be lazy