Nebraska is the best team in the North

[dizzturbedNUfan]

As a long time lurker on all Husker Boards, it does seem a number of us read too man press clippings about being the greatest fans. I find a high number to be fairly ornery and a little stand off-ish(if you will forgive my Tuff Tiger-ish word).

Brother, after that "joke" you posted in the Missouri joke thread, you really don't want to be calling people out for being ornery.

 

Tim has some valid points.

If you could kindly point out Tim's "valid points" that would be great. Seems the consensus is that he hasn't had any yet. Any help you could provide...

 

 

Well, I tend to agree with him that "just because it's always been that way" really doesn't apply. Just because we won 24 years in a row doesn't mean we will again. As much as I dislike them, Mizzou is making some nice improvements to their program, both facility wise and player wise.

 

They are like the Iranians. There's gonna be a fight whether we want it or not...it's more a matter of "on who's terms". We can pooh pooh their progress all we want OR we can improve(as we are) and crush them BEFORE they get any more momentum.

 

You liked the Lincoln Log joke HuH? One of my favorites.

 

 

Also, it seems his primary point is that each individual game has it's own synergy. Just because they didn't match up well with another team has no effect on their matchups with us.

 

Anybody that thinks the last 3 games have any bearing on the upcoming one is a little naive.

 

Admittedly, teams CAN get on a roll like Mizz did in '97 the 2 weeks before they played us, but I don't think either team has built that kind of momentum at this point in the season.

If those games have no insight as to what might happen in our match up, I wonder why the coaches waste all of that time watching useless video.

[cscott2win]

NOW more facts for Tiger Tim and hsi believers. WE OWN MIZZOU!

 

A record of scores from 1978 to 2003.... bookend wins for the nations leading football team

 

1978- NU 31/ MU 35 note, a Misery win

1979- NU 23/ MU 20

1980- NU 38/ MU 16

1981- NU 6/ MU 0

1982-NU 23/ MU 19

1983- NU 34/ MU 13

1985- NU 28/ MU 20

1986- NU 48/ MU 17

1987- NU 42/ MU 7

1988- NU 26/ MU 18

1989- NU 50/ MU 7

it gets worse

1990- NU 69/ MU 21

1991- NU 63/ MU 6

1992- NU 34/ MU 24

1993- NU 49/ MU 7

1994- NU 42/ MU 7

1995- NU 57/ MU 0

1996- NU 51/ MU 7

1997- NU 45/ MU 38...... (there is a God)

1998- NU 20/ MU 13

1999- NU 40/ MU 10

2000- NU 42/ MU 24

2001- NU 36/ MU 3

2002- NU 24/ MU 13

2003- NU 24/ MU 41....... note. no Missouri wins since 1978

 

That should cover the "We own you part"

[BlackShirt1340]

As a long time lurker on all Husker Boards, it does seem a number of us read too man press clippings about being the greatest fans. I find a high number to be fairly ornery and a little stand off-ish(if you will forgive my Tuff Tiger-ish word).

Brother, after that "joke" you posted in the Missouri joke thread, you really don't want to be calling people out for being ornery.

 

Tim has some valid points.

If you could kindly point out Tim's "valid points" that would be great. Seems the consensus is that he hasn't had any yet. Any help you could provide...

 

 

Well, I tend to agree with him that "just because it's always been that way" really doesn't apply. Just because we won 24 years in a row doesn't mean we will again. As much as I dislike them, Mizzou is making some nice improvements to their program, both facility wise and player wise.

 

They are like the Iranians. There's gonna be a fight whether we want it or not...it's more a matter of "on who's terms". We can pooh pooh their progress all we want OR we can improve(as we are) and crush them BEFORE they get any more momentum.

 

You liked the Lincoln Log joke HuH? One of my favorites.

 

 

Also, it seems his primary point is that each individual game has it's own synergy. Just because they didn't match up well with another team has no effect on their matchups with us.

 

Anybody that thinks the last 3 games have any bearing on the upcoming one is a little naive.

 

Admittedly, teams CAN get on a roll like Mizz did in '97 the 2 weeks before they played us, but I don't think either team has built that kind of momentum at this point in the season.

If those games have no insight as to what might happen in our match up, I wonder why the coaches waste all of that time watching useless video.

but he's speeeeeeciiiiiaaalllll

[TheEvilBeak]

As a long time lurker on all Husker Boards, it does seem a number of us read too man press clippings about being the greatest fans. I find a high number to be fairly ornery and a little stand off-ish(if you will forgive my Tuff Tiger-ish word).

Brother, after that "joke" you posted in the Missouri joke thread, you really don't want to be calling people out for being ornery.

 

Tim has some valid points.

If you could kindly point out Tim's "valid points" that would be great. Seems the consensus is that he hasn't had any yet. Any help you could provide...

 

 

Well, I tend to agree with him that "just because it's always been that way" really doesn't apply. Just because we won 24 years in a row doesn't mean we will again. As much as I dislike them, Mizzou is making some nice improvements to their program, both facility wise and player wise.

 

They are like the Iranians. There's gonna be a fight whether we want it or not...it's more a matter of "on who's terms". We can pooh pooh their progress all we want OR we can improve(as we are) and crush them BEFORE they get any more momentum.

 

You liked the Lincoln Log joke HuH? One of my favorites.

 

 

Also, it seems his primary point is that each individual game has it's own synergy. Just because they didn't match up well with another team has no effect on their matchups with us.

 

Anybody that thinks the last 3 games have any bearing on the upcoming one is a little naive.

 

Admittedly, teams CAN get on a roll like Mizz did in '97 the 2 weeks before they played us, but I don't think either team has built that kind of momentum at this point in the season.

If those games have no insight as to what might happen in our match up, I wonder why the coaches waste all of that time watching useless video.

but he's speeeeeeciiiiiaaalllll

 

For tendencies in situations...do you think the coaches strictly watch the last 3 games for ideas?

 

A 5'11" DB at Nevada may have an entirely different skill set than our same 5'11" guy.

 

You are aware that it took Watson 3 years to come up with the 2001 CU gameplan, aren't you? Or did he just use the prior 3 games?

 

By your logic, in '97, we should have been able to stop that stupid crossing pattern Mizz used on us all day. Hell they only ran it to prefection against Okie Light and someone else the 2 weeks before...

[dizzturbedNUfan]

As a long time lurker on all Husker Boards, it does seem a number of us read too man press clippings about being the greatest fans. I find a high number to be fairly ornery and a little stand off-ish(if you will forgive my Tuff Tiger-ish word).

Brother, after that "joke" you posted in the Missouri joke thread, you really don't want to be calling people out for being ornery.

 

Tim has some valid points.

If you could kindly point out Tim's "valid points" that would be great. Seems the consensus is that he hasn't had any yet. Any help you could provide...

 

 

Well, I tend to agree with him that "just because it's always been that way" really doesn't apply. Just because we won 24 years in a row doesn't mean we will again. As much as I dislike them, Mizzou is making some nice improvements to their program, both facility wise and player wise.

 

They are like the Iranians. There's gonna be a fight whether we want it or not...it's more a matter of "on who's terms". We can pooh pooh their progress all we want OR we can improve(as we are) and crush them BEFORE they get any more momentum.

 

You liked the Lincoln Log joke HuH? One of my favorites.

 

 

Also, it seems his primary point is that each individual game has it's own synergy. Just because they didn't match up well with another team has no effect on their matchups with us.

 

Anybody that thinks the last 3 games have any bearing on the upcoming one is a little naive.

 

Admittedly, teams CAN get on a roll like Mizz did in '97 the 2 weeks before they played us, but I don't think either team has built that kind of momentum at this point in the season.

If those games have no insight as to what might happen in our match up, I wonder why the coaches waste all of that time watching useless video.

but he's speeeeeeciiiiiaaalllll

 

For tendencies in situations...do you think the coaches strictly watch the last 3 games for ideas?

 

A 5'11" DB at Nevada may have an entirely different skill set than our same 5'11" guy.

 

You are aware that it took Watson 3 years to come up with the 2001 CU gameplan, aren't you? Or did he just use the prior 3 games?

 

By your logic, in '97, we should have been able to stop that stupid crossing pattern Mizz used on us all day. Hell they only ran it to prefection against Okie Light and someone else the 2 weeks before...

So then by your logic, they didn't use them at all? I'm guessing by the fact that Misery is minus about 4 star players this year and can't stop the run to save their life, the coaches looked at these last 4 games very close. As much as you would like to think I'm an idiot, I fully understand that they look at more film then just the last 4, I'm just saying that they are pretty important in attacking the weakness this year.

[knapplc]

For tendencies in situations...do you think the coaches strictly watch the last 3 games for ideas?

 

A 5'11" DB at Nevada may have an entirely different skill set than our same 5'11" guy.

 

You are aware that it took Watson 3 years to come up with the 2001 CU gameplan, aren't you? Or did he just use the prior 3 games?

 

By your logic, in '97, we should have been able to stop that stupid crossing pattern Mizz used on us all day. Hell they only ran it to prefection against Okie Light and someone else the 2 weeks before...

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but... are you new to football?

[TheEvilBeak]

For tendencies in situations...do you think the coaches strictly watch the last 3 games for ideas?

 

A 5'11" DB at Nevada may have an entirely different skill set than our same 5'11" guy.

 

You are aware that it took Watson 3 years to come up with the 2001 CU gameplan, aren't you? Or did he just use the prior 3 games?

 

By your logic, in '97, we should have been able to stop that stupid crossing pattern Mizz used on us all day. Hell they only ran it to prefection against Okie Light and someone else the 2 weeks before...

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but... are you new to football?

 

 

nope, are you?

[knapplc]

For tendencies in situations...do you think the coaches strictly watch the last 3 games for ideas?

 

A 5'11" DB at Nevada may have an entirely different skill set than our same 5'11" guy.

 

You are aware that it took Watson 3 years to come up with the 2001 CU gameplan, aren't you? Or did he just use the prior 3 games?

 

By your logic, in '97, we should have been able to stop that stupid crossing pattern Mizz used on us all day. Hell they only ran it to prefection against Okie Light and someone else the 2 weeks before...

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but... are you new to football?

 

 

nope, are you?

I ask because you're showing a pretty critical misunderstanding of how the game works here. Watching film is pretty much a daily necessity to coaching football. The players these days watch as much film as coaches did 20 years ago. Dismissing it as unnecessary or not beneficial is baffling. Care to help us understand where you're coming from?

[BlackShirt1340]

For tendencies in situations...do you think the coaches strictly watch the last 3 games for ideas?

 

A 5'11" DB at Nevada may have an entirely different skill set than our same 5'11" guy.

 

You are aware that it took Watson 3 years to come up with the 2001 CU gameplan, aren't you? Or did he just use the prior 3 games?

 

By your logic, in '97, we should have been able to stop that stupid crossing pattern Mizz used on us all day. Hell they only ran it to prefection against Okie Light and someone else the 2 weeks before...

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but... are you new to football?

 

 

nope, are you?

I ask because you're showing a pretty critical misunderstanding of how the game works here. Watching film is pretty much a daily necessity to coaching football. The players these days watch as much film as coaches did 20 years ago. Dismissing it as unnecessary or not beneficial is baffling. Care to help us understand where you're coming from?

You tell him Knapp.... not to mention he put his post inside my post when he quoted my "special" comment, making it look like I said that...

[DocNice]

A fact that may disturb some of those MU, CU, and KU fans that have enjoyed their brief moments of winning against the Huskers is the fact that the North is a little sister to the south. Why is this? I'm excluding K State for now as they are probably............ K state again. CU had it's moment in the sun in this early decade but the Huskers still played for the national title that year. Don't forget the Huskers beat the Sooners earlier that year while CU had 2 losses. KU has never been to the title game and MU has had their butts handed to them the last 2 years with their "greatest team in school history" and whether they like it or not tied the Huskers for 1st in the north last year. The fact is the north has been a doormat to the south because of one thing. The demise of Nebraska under Callahan. But still Callahan got NU into one title game and they looked better than MU has the past 2 years or CU against Texas a few years back. History has showed us that the Oklahoma's, Texas's and Nebraska's of football have their low periods from time to time but they seem to rebound from struggling seasons faster than say the aforementioned programs and remain more consistant from year to year. The basic truth is Nebraska is head and shoulders above any football team in the north as far as fan base, support, potential, history, stadium and practice facilities, $$$, educational support and on and on. Nebraska invented the weight room. Call it history or call it the future but while teams like MU, Cu, and KU strive to not regress Nebraska is getting better in leaps and bounds. The Huskers are trying to catch teams like Oklahoma, Texas, USC, and Florida. I doubt they are setting their goals as being as good as Missouri!!! And that is the cold hard truth whether you like it or not. Regardless of the outcome this year or of the past few years. Nebraska still owns you and will again. Enjoy your time in the sun.

 

Is this attitude why you're the best fans in college football? Must be it. You act like Mizzou doesn't know that Nebraska is good. Listen, we know you're Nebraska. Colorado, Kansas State, Kansas and Mizzou will rise and fall by their coaches, their fortunes, etc. Nebraska will rise and fall too, but when they fall, they're still pretty good. Heck you "tied" for the North title last year, with only a...okay I won't go there. These "ties" crack me up. When did Nebraska fall so far to claim such a thing? Anyway, I digress. My point is that you'll always be good, while other programs will rise and fall. But the very nature of their programs, Mizzou and Colorado are poised to challenge you more consistently in the long run, especially Mizzou, but we know there will be bad years.

 

Now let me give you some hard truths as the rest of the college football world, and particularly the Big 12 North sees it. Nebraska thinks it's chasing USC, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma. Sorry, you're chasing Mizzou right now. You think you're chasing those other programs, but they're on another level. And don't point to VT as being a top team. It was either Pat Forde or Stewart Mandel that wrote this week that the Hokies would get absolutely smoked by one of the real contenders. NU has a lot of good things going for it, but you've got way too far to make up in recruiting to get up with that company.

 

Can you get back there at all? Anything's possible, but I don't see it happening. The best thing you've got going for you is that perception is reality in college football, and you've got a big name that gets the benefit of the doubt in the polls. You'll have championship games, top 10 rankings, maybe even number 1 rankings like Mizzou a couple years ago. But the 90s are never coming back without returning to your roots that allowed you to compete as much on system as athletes.

 

In the meantime, focusing on that lofty goal is actually hurting you. You ran a perfectly good coach out of town because you didn't want to surrender the Big 12 to OU and UT, and instead surrendered the North to Mizzou and even KU. You're clawing to get it back, and maybe you will. Now, I'm not an expert on your team, but based on what I saw on the field the last few years with the little I've watched you play this year, I'd put you on par, talent wise, with KU. Your talent is in different places, and good coaching can possibly get a North division out of it, but it's a long haul to USC and Florida.

 

If I'm wrong, we'll see it on the field on the 8th. You're welcome to try and convince me otherwise, but I might need some good evidence, since I've seen too many posts over the last few years about how you were more talented than Mizzou then, when obviously it was not the case.

[walksalone]

Is this attitude why you're the best fans in college football? Must be it. You act like Mizzou doesn't know that Nebraska is good. Listen, we know you're Nebraska. Colorado, Kansas State, Kansas and Mizzou will rise and fall by their coaches, their fortunes, etc. Nebraska will rise and fall too, but when they fall, they're still pretty good. Heck you "tied" for the North title last year, with only a...okay I won't go there. These "ties" crack me up. When did Nebraska fall so far to claim such a thing? Anyway, I digress. My point is that you'll always be good, while other programs will rise and fall. But the very nature of their programs, Mizzou and Colorado are poised to challenge you more consistently in the long run, especially Mizzou, but we know there will be bad years.

 

As with any good team, program, etc, there has to be an element of "swagger", "attitude", or what ever you want to call it. Without it, you're program is going to be mediocre. The prior to last year the past 4 years had been brutal to be a Husker fan. We had streaks broken that the Mizzou fan base, can barely comprehend.

 

Now let me give you some hard truths as the rest of the college football world, and particularly the Big 12 North sees it. Nebraska thinks it's chasing USC, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma. Sorry, you're chasing Mizzou right now. You think you're chasing those other programs, but they're on another level. And don't point to VT as being a top team. It was either Pat Forde or Stewart Mandel that wrote this week that the Hokies would get absolutely smoked by one of the real contenders. NU has a lot of good things going for it, but you've got way too far to make up in recruiting to get up with that company.

 

We're chasing Mizzou? Hold on a second...

 

*gag, cough*

 

Ok, if we're "chasing" you, because of the past few years of moderate success you've had, then wow, we might be more hosed than originally thought.

 

If anything, the North division is chasing the south.

 

Can you get back there at all? Anything's possible, but I don't see it happening. The best thing you've got going for you is that perception is reality in college football, and you've got a big name that gets the benefit of the doubt in the polls. You'll have championship games, top 10 rankings, maybe even number 1 rankings like Mizzou a couple years ago. But the 90s are never coming back without returning to your roots that allowed you to compete as much on system as athletes.

 

Benefit of doubt in the polls? Wow, the more I read this, the more delusional you look. We have to win games, North Titles, Big XII titles, and so on. That's one way to improve recruiting. But you should know this as well, we're in one of the toughest conferences in the FBS. Nebraska, much like Mizzou, has to battle KSU, KU, UT, OU, and etc for recruits. And the fact that you're touting the #1 ranking that you had a couple years ago? Who was president last time you were ranked #1???

 

In the meantime, focusing on that lofty goal is actually hurting you. You ran a perfectly good coach out of town because you didn't want to surrender the Big 12 to OU and UT, and instead surrendered the North to Mizzou and even KU. You're clawing to get it back, and maybe you will. Now, I'm not an expert on your team, but based on what I saw on the field the last few years with the little I've watched you play this year, I'd put you on par, talent wise, with KU. Your talent is in different places, and good coaching can possibly get a North division out of it, but it's a long haul to USC and Florida.

 

Perfectly good coach? I hope you don't mean Clownahan? If you do, this whole long winded post of you adds up to dinky doo.

 

Surrendering the North? I'm pretty sure outside of the "dark ages" for Husker football, the goal was to win as many conference games as possible to get to the Big XII title game, and go from there.

 

So we're KU, only with a Defense? Any other gems copernicus?

 

If I'm wrong, we'll see it on the field on the 8th. You're welcome to try and convince me otherwise, but I might need some good evidence, since I've seen too many posts over the last few years about how you were more talented than Mizzou then, when obviously it was not the case.

 

I'm going to wait to the 8th, then we'll see, just what is what.

[DocNice]

Is this attitude why you're the best fans in college football? Must be it. You act like Mizzou doesn't know that Nebraska is good. Listen, we know you're Nebraska. Colorado, Kansas State, Kansas and Mizzou will rise and fall by their coaches, their fortunes, etc. Nebraska will rise and fall too, but when they fall, they're still pretty good. Heck you "tied" for the North title last year, with only a...okay I won't go there. These "ties" crack me up. When did Nebraska fall so far to claim such a thing? Anyway, I digress. My point is that you'll always be good, while other programs will rise and fall. But the very nature of their programs, Mizzou and Colorado are poised to challenge you more consistently in the long run, especially Mizzou, but we know there will be bad years.

 

As with any good team, program, etc, there has to be an element of "swagger", "attitude", or what ever you want to call it. Without it, you're program is going to be mediocre. The prior to last year the past 4 years had been brutal to be a Husker fan. We had streaks broken that the Mizzou fan base, can barely comprehend.

 

Now let me give you some hard truths as the rest of the college football world, and particularly the Big 12 North sees it. Nebraska thinks it's chasing USC, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma. Sorry, you're chasing Mizzou right now. You think you're chasing those other programs, but they're on another level. And don't point to VT as being a top team. It was either Pat Forde or Stewart Mandel that wrote this week that the Hokies would get absolutely smoked by one of the real contenders. NU has a lot of good things going for it, but you've got way too far to make up in recruiting to get up with that company.

 

We're chasing Mizzou? Hold on a second...

 

*gag, cough*

 

Ok, if we're "chasing" you, because of the past few years of moderate success you've had, then wow, we might be more hosed than originally thought.

 

If anything, the North division is chasing the south.

 

Can you get back there at all? Anything's possible, but I don't see it happening. The best thing you've got going for you is that perception is reality in college football, and you've got a big name that gets the benefit of the doubt in the polls. You'll have championship games, top 10 rankings, maybe even number 1 rankings like Mizzou a couple years ago. But the 90s are never coming back without returning to your roots that allowed you to compete as much on system as athletes.

 

Benefit of doubt in the polls? Wow, the more I read this, the more delusional you look. We have to win games, North Titles, Big XII titles, and so on. That's one way to improve recruiting. But you should know this as well, we're in one of the toughest conferences in the FBS. Nebraska, much like Mizzou, has to battle KSU, KU, UT, OU, and etc for recruits. And the fact that you're touting the #1 ranking that you had a couple years ago? Who was president last time you were ranked #1???

 

In the meantime, focusing on that lofty goal is actually hurting you. You ran a perfectly good coach out of town because you didn't want to surrender the Big 12 to OU and UT, and instead surrendered the North to Mizzou and even KU. You're clawing to get it back, and maybe you will. Now, I'm not an expert on your team, but based on what I saw on the field the last few years with the little I've watched you play this year, I'd put you on par, talent wise, with KU. Your talent is in different places, and good coaching can possibly get a North division out of it, but it's a long haul to USC and Florida.

 

Perfectly good coach? I hope you don't mean Clownahan? If you do, this whole long winded post of you adds up to dinky doo.

 

Surrendering the North? I'm pretty sure outside of the "dark ages" for Husker football, the goal was to win as many conference games as possible to get to the Big XII title game, and go from there.

 

So we're KU, only with a Defense? Any other gems copernicus?

 

If I'm wrong, we'll see it on the field on the 8th. You're welcome to try and convince me otherwise, but I might need some good evidence, since I've seen too many posts over the last few years about how you were more talented than Mizzou then, when obviously it was not the case.

 

I'm going to wait to the 8th, then we'll see, just what is what.

 

We can comprehend more than you know. You will never know what it's like to be on the short end of a 28 year losing streak.

 

I know it's hard for NU fans to realize they're chasing Mizzou. I've said for a while now that almost as hard as seeing Nebraska lose control of the North was surrendering it to Mizzou of all teams. But IMHO, even if you win this year, you're still in an uphill battle to catch up as a program, but maybe that's just a homer opinion. If you lose this year, I think it's quite clearly not a homer opinion.

 

Comparing you to KU is not as much an insult as you think. They've got some playmakers, and they've had very good LB's and linemen in recent years. But in general, they've been less talented than Mizzou and the top teams in the south. My humble opinion is that Nebraska is in the same boat. They've got good coaching which puts them in a position to win, but in the end, they're just not as fast as the top teams. I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think the part you probably have a problem with is that I think Mizzou has that top team athleticism, and you don't, mainly because our jersey's say Missouri. To be sure, the top teams have more solid line play which is where Mizzou needs to catch up most, and in some positions we're a little smaller. But we've got the horses to run with the big boys in most positions. To that point...

 

You don't think you get the benefit of the doubt? Look at it from a preseason perspective, before a snap was played. Nebraska was worse than Mizzou last year, and lost its star QB, most of its receiving talent and your senior RB, as well as the usual role players. The players stepping in are evidently competent, and there's potential that you've recruited some talent, but you haven't made headlines like the big programs in this respect.

 

Mizzou was better than Nebraska last year, lost its star QB, most of its receiving production, and little else. We had a very highly touted QB stepping into the role as well as some highly regarded receivers. We've recruited very well in recent years, consistently in the top half of the conference and the top 30 in the country, and of course Pinkel has a reputation for finding underrated talent.

 

Now, one of these teams started the season as co-favorites in the North and ranked in the polls. One of them remains unranked despite a win over a BCS team and the other team with a loss.

 

Tell me, if I switched the names on those teams, would Nebraska still be ranked and Missouri not?

 

The answer, in case you're not sure, is no. That's name recognition. That's benefit of the doubt.

[walksalone]

We can comprehend more than you know. You will never know what it's like to be on the short end of a 28 year losing streak.

 

I know it's hard for NU fans to realize they're chasing Mizzou. I've said for a while now that almost as hard as seeing Nebraska lose control of the North was surrendering it to Mizzou of all teams. But IMHO, even if you win this year, you're still in an uphill battle to catch up as a program, but maybe that's just a homer opinion. If you lose this year, I think it's quite clearly not a homer opinion.

 

Comparing you to KU is not as much an insult as you think. They've got some playmakers, and they've had very good LB's and linemen in recent years. But in general, they've been less talented than Mizzou and the top teams in the south. My humble opinion is that Nebraska is in the same boat. They've got good coaching which puts them in a position to win, but in the end, they're just not as fast as the top teams. I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think the part you probably have a problem with is that I think Mizzou has that top team athleticism, and you don't, mainly because our jersey's say Missouri. To be sure, the top teams have more solid line play which is where Mizzou needs to catch up most, and in some positions we're a little smaller. But we've got the horses to run with the big boys in most positions. To that point...

 

You don't think you get the benefit of the doubt? Look at it from a preseason perspective, before a snap was played. Nebraska was worse than Mizzou last year, and lost its star QB, most of its receiving talent and your senior RB, as well as the usual role players. The players stepping in are evidently competent, and there's potential that you've recruited some talent, but you haven't made headlines like the big programs in this respect.

 

Mizzou was better than Nebraska last year, lost its star QB, most of its receiving production, and little else. We had a very highly touted QB stepping into the role as well as some highly regarded receivers. We've recruited very well in recent years, consistently in the top half of the conference and the top 30 in the country, and of course Pinkel has a reputation for finding underrated talent.

 

Now, one of these teams started the season as co-favorites in the North and ranked in the polls. One of them remains unranked despite a win over a BCS team and the other team with a loss.

 

Tell me, if I switched the names on those teams, would Nebraska still be ranked and Missouri not?

 

The answer, in case you're not sure, is no. That's name recognition. That's benefit of the doubt.

 

Your dissertation on Nebraska losing control of the north, the fact that we're chasing you, and comparing us to KU is essentially the same thing you said in your post that I replied to. In this latest offering, you've added a couple of points, but essentially you're saying the same thing.

 

Just so I can be reduntant as well, we don't know what it's like to suffer for 28 years of sucking, we'll never return to national prominence, and Nebraska gets the benefit of the doubt.

 

Essentially, this is what it is...

 

I'm glad Mizzou has had it's recent run of success, because it makes a Nebraska victory, that much sweeter...

[Fuzzy]

I'm glad Mizzou has had it's recent run of success, because it makes a Nebraska victory, that much sweeter...

 

Agreed.

 

2008 - Loss 17 - 52

2007 - Loss 6 - 41

2006 - Won 24 - 20

2005 - Loss 24 - 41

2004 - Won 24 - 3

2003 - Loss 24 - 41

2002 - Won 24 - 13

2001 - Won 36 - 3

 

If you look at it, with the exception of the last two games, it hasnt really been that bad, 4 - 4.

 

In fact, in the past 10 years, we are 6 - 4 against Mizzou.

 

Yes, the last two meeting have been bitter defeats, and a lot of Mizzou fans have given the Huskers a piece of their mind when they took us to the woodshed, but this year, Husker fans want to swing that wooden paddle back the other way. I'm one of them. The one that hurts though, is that when we lost to Mizzou, we lost big and by a score over 40 points.

 

In anycase, i know what your saying about the rivarly between the teams, but i think you might have had a poor choice of words. As for comparing Nebraska to Kansas, is an incorrect statement. Kansas should be looked at a program that deserves credibility as with KSU in the recent years. I do remember not too long KU making a very good, and yet unexpected run for the national championship not too long ago, and yet who knocked them out of that position? Mizzou. So i give them credit. I also remember hearing not long ago and KSU beat Texas, and KU beating Oklahoma. Nebraska isn't chasing Mizzou, and vice versa, I realized awhile ago, during the Callahan years, that somewhere along the line Husker fans got cocky, and expected to win every game, with no regard that some years we aren't the best. Its great to come out every game and expect our players to be the best every year, and it's an expectation from the coaches and fans for them to play that hard every game. But when a loss happens, Husker fans can't quite swallow it and just move in, they dredge on it for awhile, and it takes them awhile to turn their heads forward to the next game. Not saying that all Husker fans are that way, but unfortunately a majority of them are, most of them are students or younger adults.

 

But for some of us older Husker fans, who have seen the rise and fall of the program, even before Solich and Callahan. An up and down trend of every school is normal, some are just more frequent than others.

[walksalone]

I'm glad Mizzou has had it's recent run of success, because it makes a Nebraska victory, that much sweeter...

 

Agreed.

 

2008 - Loss 17 - 52

2007 - Loss 6 - 41

2006 - Won 24 - 20

2005 - Loss 24 - 41

2004 - Won 24 - 3

2003 - Loss 24 - 41

2002 - Won 24 - 13

2001 - Won 36 - 3

 

If you look at it, with the exception of the last two games, it hasnt really been that bad, 4 - 4.

 

In fact, in the past 10 years, we are 6 - 4 against Mizzou.

 

Yes, the last two meeting have been bitter defeats, and a lot of Mizzou fans have given the Huskers a piece of their mind when they took us to the woodshed, but this year, Husker fans want to swing that wooden paddle back the other way. I'm one of them. The one that hurts though, is that when we lost to Mizzou, we lost big and by a score over 40 points.

 

In anycase, i know what your saying about the rivarly between the teams, but i think you might have had a poor choice of words. Nebraska isn't chasing Mizzou, and vice versa, I realized awhile ago, during the Callahan years, that somewhere along the line Husker fans got cocky, and expected to win every game, with no regard that some years we aren't the best. Its great to come out every game and expect our players to be the best every year, and it's an expectation from the coaches and fans for them to play that hard every game. But when a loss happens, Husker fans can't quite swallow it and just move in, they dredge on it for awhile, and it takes them awhile to turn their heads forward to the next game. Not saying that all Husker fans are that way, but unfortunately a majority of them are, most of them are students or younger adults.

 

But for some of us older Husker fans, who have seen the rise and fall of the program, even before Solich and Callahan. An up and down trend of every school is normal, some are just more frequent than others.

 

It's funny you mention that, if you read some of mizzou fans who've come out from under their bridges, you'd think they'd been whippin our asses for 30 years.

 

Granted our losses to Mizzou have been down right ugly, and Mizzou fans can puff out their chests for a little while, but I do believe that's coming to a close.

 

If I wanted to be completely arrogant douchebag, I could just say that the Big XII should send a thank you note to Bill Callahan for setting our program back and giving everyone else a chance to catch up...