PSU Rivalry

[ECisGod]

I see Iowa as a school that is perfectly happy having a B or B+ football team and they are OK if every few years they are a C level team.  Nebraska & Penn State want to be A+ teams every year, so they are more natural to be rivals from a competitive standpoint, but the B1G decided that Iowa should be Nebraska's rival because of geography.

 

Honestly, I think the only sport Iowa wants to be great at is wrestling.  Everything else they are OK with being average or slightly better.

[bigtenfootballfan]

2 hours ago, ECisGod said:

I see Iowa as a school that is perfectly happy having a B or B+ football team and they are OK if every few years they are a C level team.  Nebraska & Penn State want to be A+ teams every year, so they are more natural to be rivals from a competitive standpoint, but the B1G decided that Iowa should be Nebraska's rival because of geography.

 

Honestly, I think the only sport Iowa wants to be great at is wrestling.  Everything else they are OK with being average or slightly better.

I agree.  Now that divisions are gone, Nebraska/Penn State has more of a "championship" feel to it.  Both schools want to be at the top of college football, not mediocre.

[Savage Husker]

6 hours ago, Fru said:

When Neb joined the B1G I remember thinking that Penn St would’ve been a great team to develop a rivalry with. Traded blows in the early 80’s (If Penn Staters want to talk 94, we’d be happy to talk about the calls in the 82 game) then again in the early 2000’s. It really had all of the ingredients for a series that could develop a rivalry organically, rather than feeling forced. In fact I’d say most of the Neb-PSU matchups since 2011 have been excellent games. 
 

But to be completely honest, whenever I see anything related to Penn State, I can’t help but think of the Sandusky scandal and subsequent student rioting and it makes me sick to my stomach. You seem to be posting here in good faith, and I don’t bring up those things to throw stones or talk sh!t. It’s just the truth. Obviously you had nothing to do with it and obviously bad things happen at all schools. At least once a year I hear a Lawrence Phillips crack from an opposing teams fan. It always amazes me how Neb fans often get the “delusional” label from other B1G fans, albeit for a fraction of what other B1G fanbases are guilty of.
 

Penn St has rebounded and recovered incredibly well after one of the most horrific sports scandals of all time. In fact I’m rather amazed by it. Would it be a great annual late November college football matchup? Yes. I’m sure it’d deliver many classics. But what went down in 2011 with that school is too indelible for me to get over. I want nothing to do with Penn St. 

Unless there’s evidence JoePa witnessed Sandusky abuse children - which has never been reported - then sure, go after him. However, their BoR and others are used him as a scapegoat and penalized the program for absolutely no connection nor on/off field advantage. Go after the authorities, investigators, administrators, etc., but who goes after someone who reported a second hand account to his superiors? Even after the disgusting revelation, who has come out with any accusation of JoePa knowledge of the incidents. PSU BoR used the Sandusky scandal to justify firing JoePa after years of failed attempts to move on from him.

[Lorewarn]

1 hour ago, Savage Husker said:

Unless there’s evidence JoePa witnessed Sandusky abuse children - which has never been reported - then sure, go after him. However, their BoR and others are used him as a scapegoat and penalized the program for absolutely no connection nor on/off field advantage. Go after the authorities, investigators, administrators, etc., but who goes after someone who reported a second hand account to his superiors? Even after the disgusting revelation, who has come out with any accusation of JoePa knowledge of the incidents. PSU BoR used the Sandusky scandal to justify firing JoePa after years of failed attempts to move on from him.

 

 

Regardless of what the BoR's internal motivations were, which we don't know, while Paterno wasn't criminally liable and hit a legal threshold of accountability, he absolutely and completely failed in his moral obligations as the leader of PSU football. He knew that what he reported to his superior never made it to the police, and chose to do nothing. Not only that, but in the aftermath the former FBI director's investigation found that Paterno (along with others) had knowledge of Sandusky's evil and concealed it to protect the football program. The school also honored all of the terms of his surprise early retirement negotiations that he started in secret before the scandal broke but after he was informed of the police investigation. 

[CheeseHusker]

My feelings on rivalries are the same.... they need to develop organically. I think those things are slowly happening, but Nebraska has been a lousy program for 20 years and at this point I'm just hoping for a competitive team.

That said.... I've despised PSU since I was five years old.

 

[Fru]

16 hours ago, ECisGod said:

I see Iowa as a school that is perfectly happy having a B or B+ football team and they are OK if every few years they are a C level team.  Nebraska & Penn State want to be A+ teams every year, so they are more natural to be rivals from a competitive standpoint, but the B1G decided that Iowa should be Nebraska's rival because of geography.

 

Honestly, I think the only sport Iowa wants to be great at is wrestling.  Everything else they are OK with being average or slightly better.

I think this applies to 90% of the B1G and is one of the “cultural” differences that remains between Neb and the old guard B1G. Neb came from the Big 8/12 where the mindset of the down schools was “How can we beat the top dogs?” CU, KSU, Ok St scratched, clawed and fought their way to relevancy because of aspiring to be/beat NU or OU. The mindset of down teams in the B1G is “Celebrate 7 wins, bowl eligibility, and act as if it means you’ve arrived as a program.”

 

Most of the B1G schools have been largely irrelevant in the major football landscape for decades. To me, that’s why they love their trophy games so much, because frankly there was nothing else to play for. They can call it “tradition” or whatever they want. But…Ever wonder why Mich and OSU don’t play for an axe, pig or jug? Same reason NU and OU didn’t play for one. 

 

For right or wrong, Neb has at least aspired and tried to achieve something greater than what they’ve been the last 20 years. It obviously has produced the results we’d all want, but I find it admirable to aspire for more. 

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Fru said:

I think this applies to 90% of the B1G and is one of the “cultural” differences that remains between Neb and the old guard B1G. Neb came from the Big 8/12 where the mindset of the down schools was “How can we beat the top dogs?” CU, KSU, Ok St scratched, clawed and fought their way to relevancy because of aspiring to be/beat NU or OU. The mindset of down teams in the B1G is “Celebrate 7 wins, bowl eligibility, and act as if it means you’ve arrived as a program.”

 

Most of the B1G schools have been largely irrelevant in the major football landscape for decades. To me, that’s why they love their trophy games so much, because frankly there was nothing else to play for. They can call it “tradition” or whatever they want. But…Ever wonder why Mich and OSU don’t play for an axe, pig or jug? Same reason NU and OU didn’t play for one. 

 

For right or wrong, Neb has at least aspired and tried to achieve something greater than what they’ve been the last 20 years. It obviously has produced the results we’d all want, but I find it admirable to aspire for more. 

What you described the B1G as is exactly what the Big 8 was.  ISU, OKC, KSU, KU...etc. drempt of beating OU and NU.....and would celebrate 7+ win seasons.

 

In the B1G, Iowa, Northwestern, Purdue, Minnesota...etc. dream of beating OSU and Michigan....while celebrating 7+ win seasons.

 

There really isn't much different.  Problem is, our view from Nebraska has been in the wrong direction.  We should be the ones they are celebrating beating.

[Fru]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

What you described the B1G as is exactly what the Big 8 was.  ISU, OKC, KSU, KU...etc. drempt of beating OU and NU.....and would celebrate 7+ win seasons.

 

In the B1G, Iowa, Northwestern, Purdue, Minnesota...etc. dream of beating OSU and Michigan....while celebrating 7+ win seasons.

 

There really isn't much different.  Problem is, our view from Nebraska has been in the wrong direction.  We should be the ones they are celebrating beating.

When CU was bad, did they create a trophy game with Kansas? Or did they fight their way to being as relevant as they could be with Neb? 

KSU, CU, Ok St, Baylor all raised their profiles because of aspiring to be better and not settling in and accepting 7 wins and celebrating a rivalry game with zero stakes. 

[BigRedBuster]

7 minutes ago, Fru said:

When CU was bad, did they create a trophy game with Kansas? Or did they fight their way to being as relevant as they could be with Neb? 

KSU, CU, Ok St, Baylor all raised their profiles because of aspiring to be better and not settling in and accepting 7 wins and celebrating a rivalry game with zero stakes. 

And, Minnesota, Purdue and Illinois are raising their profiles.

Just because the B1G has trophy games doesn't mean they aren't still trying to beat the big dogs.  KU and KSU love kicking each other's asses even though it doesn't mean anything.  Is it really that different just because they don't have a trophy?  Not within the conference, but ISU loves beating Iowa.  Does it really matter that they don't have a trophy?

 

You're trying really hard to wax nostalgically about our old conferences when there were very similar issues with competitiveness within them.

[BigRedBuster]

You really think the conference would be better if Iowa only cared about beating OSU and Michigan instead of actually caring about games like Minnesota, Purdue and Wisconsin?

 

I disagree.

[Fru]

13 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

And, Minnesota, Purdue and Illinois are raising their profiles.

Just because the B1G has trophy games doesn't mean they aren't still trying to beat the big dogs.  KU and KSU love kicking each other's asses even though it doesn't mean anything.  Is it really that different just because they don't have a trophy?  Not within the conference, but ISU loves beating Iowa.  Does it really matter that they don't have a trophy?

 

You're trying really hard to wax nostalgically about our old conferences when there were very similar issues with competitiveness within them.

Purdue is really the only team that has raised their profile by winning the division. They’re basically back to square one now. Minnesota under Fleck is basically what they were under Kill. Their winning percentage is marginally better. I’m still in wait and see mode with Illinois.

 

My point is about mindset. Neb gets mocked for aspiring to be elite again. The Iowa’s of the conference have this “Just accept what you are as a 7-5 program!” mindset that I do not understand. 
 

11 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

You really think the conference would be better if Iowa only cared about beating OSU and Michigan instead of actually caring about games like Minnesota, Purdue and Wisconsin?

 

I disagree.

If Iowa nutted up and got a real OC, they could absolutely make a serious run at a conference title. They choose not to. That’s settling. 
 

[Lorewarn]

1 hour ago, Fru said:

I think this applies to 90% of the B1G and is one of the “cultural” differences that remains between Neb and the old guard B1G.

 

90%??? 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Fru said:

Neb came from the Big 8/12 where the mindset of the down schools was “How can we beat the top dogs?” CU, KSU, Ok St scratched, clawed and fought their way to relevancy because of aspiring to be/beat NU or OU. The mindset of down teams in the B1G is “Celebrate 7 wins, bowl eligibility, and act as if it means you’ve arrived as a program.”

 

Most of the B1G schools have been largely irrelevant in the major football landscape for decades.

 

 

 

The conference currently has 14 members, 3 of which are blue bloods and one is right on the threshold (3 out of 14 is 20%, 4 out of 14 is 28%). Wisconsin is very obviously trying to beat the big dogs, getting one of the best splash coaching hires of the offseason, routinely scheduling marquee OOC matchups, and being a few bad breaks away from a few more championships and playoff berths. Michigan State has won the conference, made the playoffs, and played spoiler to the big dogs a good handful of times over the last 12 years. 

 

So, respectfully, how do you get 90% when you've got three blue blood, one new blood, and at least two other programs floating around the championship level bubble since we've been in the league?

[BigRedBuster]

7 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

 

90%??? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The conference currently has 14 members, 3 of which are blue bloods and one is right on the threshold (3 out of 14 is 20%, 4 out of 14 is 28%). Wisconsin is very obviously trying to beat the big dogs, getting one of the best splash coaching hires of the offseason, routinely scheduling marquee OOC matchups, and being a few bad breaks away from a few more championships and playoff berths. Michigan State has won the conference, made the playoffs, and played spoiler to the big dogs a good handful of times over the last 12 years. 

 

So, respectfully, how do you get 90% when you've got three blue blood, one new blood, and at least two other programs floating around the championship level bubble since we've been in the league?

 

And, when you look at the conference and the money flowing to programs and what many have done with facilities and paying coaches, it's laughable to say they don't want to get better.

[Fru]

1 hour ago, Lorewarn said:

 

90%??? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The conference currently has 14 members, 3 of which are blue bloods and one is right on the threshold (3 out of 14 is 20%, 4 out of 14 is 28%). Wisconsin is very obviously trying to beat the big dogs, getting one of the best splash coaching hires of the offseason, routinely scheduling marquee OOC matchups, and being a few bad breaks away from a few more championships and playoff berths. Michigan State has won the conference, made the playoffs, and played spoiler to the big dogs a good handful of times over the last 12 years. 

 

So, respectfully, how do you get 90% when you've got three blue blood, one new blood, and at least two other programs floating around the championship level bubble since we've been in the league?

90% was a bit of an overreach. Rather, I’d say a majority of the B1G have the “just accept what you are” mindset. I don’t think it only applies to Iowa.
 

7 of the 14 teams have 6 or fewer winning seasons in the last 12 years. Minnesota has 7. Michigan, OSU, PSU, Wis, Iowa and Mich St. all have 9+ since 2011

Mich, OSU and PSU will assuredly always be formidable. 

Iowa has chosen as a program that they like where they are and won’t take steps to change anything. Even with their consistency, choosing not to elevate your program at a prime opportunity is about as defeatist as it gets. 

 

Wis is absolutely an outlier as a program that was horrific and elevated themselves to be perennial contenders. Before Barry that program was terrible. In some ways I respect them axing Paul and going after Fickell. We’ll see if it pans out. 
 

I wouldn’t put Mich St in the same category as Wisconsin. Yes 2015 was a great year for them but they seemingly squandered any opportunity to turn that into annual consistency. They haven’t sniffed that kind of success and have been on a downward trajectory ever since. 

[Archy1221]

3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

KU and KSU love kicking each other's asses even though it doesn't mean anything.  Is it really that different just because they don't have a trophy? 

They do have a trophy.  The Governors Cup