not farmaggedon

[Seattle Red]

How about Nebraska versus Iowa and let the rivalry develop on its own. Now we are forcing a rivalry like Colorado in the 90s.

i think this is a much more natural rival, and will be mutually accepted.

 

now for some emoticons:

:hellloooo :ahhhhhhhh :ahhhhhhhh :hellloooo

 

Here is the truth, a rivalry cannot be manufactured and it cannot be started in the first year of annual competition. Let it get going for a while. Do you think that the OU/UT game was called the Red River Shootout the first year they played? It takes years, besides I think that cute names are for second tier football programs (besides this obvious exclusion). Even though I give them a lot of sh!t I think Iowa is above that. I know I am.

 

There is no cute name for Ohio State/Michigan that I recall, nor for Notre Dame/USC. Sorry, but I think a simple Iowa/Nebraska is a better way to describe it. It is more dignified. BTW, it has a better ring to it with Iowa first I feel. Can't believe I just said that.

i appreciate your truth, but i do not know what you mean by manufacture. i get that people can try to force rivalries, like colorado did with NU, but the reason that it was never a rivalry is because we never cared about it. people will care about this game, that is what makes it a rivalry. we will want to win this game more than most (even though we want to win all games equally, if we had to lose to michigan st. or iowa, i think we would rather lost to MSU). what makes a rivalry is the higher stakes (i.e. bragging rights). i think we all know a lot of iowans, maybe even related to a few. this game will be important to both fanbases and held on a higher level then any of the other games, and that is why it will be an instant rivalry. not all rivalries have to be forged like the OU/NU rivalry, and the reason that on fell apart so easily is because it was forged by both teams being in the top 2 and when one school became less relevant, the game was no longer relevant. UT/OU will always be relevant because of geography, just like this game will always be relevant. even if a team is down, this will be an important game to win. plus, rivalries make the sport more enjoyable, so it makes sense people would push for them. it may take some years for this rivalry to become intense and gain more gravity, but i think it will be an instant rivalry.

 

i don't know why you are down on cute names, but with american consumerism, it is all about branding. just like teams have 'cute' names and mascots, rivalries can be branded, i don't see how it affects the dignity or integrity of the teams, it just makes a rivalry more unique and the nickname highlights what makes the teams rivals. for instance OU/UT share the red river, hence the red river rivalry.

 

Well said sd'sker. I agree. It's a natural geographic rivalry just like OU-UT is. The game will claim bragging rights between the two states, just like OU-UT. It will be given a cute name, just like OU-UT. Some won't like the cute name for the rivalry (depending on what it ends up being called), but you can never make everyone happy.

 

BTW, I tried to find out when they started calling the OU-UT game "The Red River Shootout" (now corporately hijacked and called "The AT&T Red River Rivalry"), but my web searches have so far been unsuccessful. Anybody know?

[huKSer]

The Corn War? Cornfield Showdown? Battle for the Bluffs? (winning losing state stakes claim to council bluffs for the ensuing year)

Fixed for ya

[mmmtodd]

the 'toothless gambler cup.' if iowa wins, we give them teeth. If we win, they give us our gambling money back.

[sd'sker]

How about Nebraska versus Iowa and let the rivalry develop on its own. Now we are forcing a rivalry like Colorado in the 90s.

i think this is a much more natural rival, and will be mutually accepted.

 

now for some emoticons:

:hellloooo :ahhhhhhhh :ahhhhhhhh :hellloooo

 

Here is the truth, a rivalry cannot be manufactured and it cannot be started in the first year of annual competition. Let it get going for a while. Do you think that the OU/UT game was called the Red River Shootout the first year they played? It takes years, besides I think that cute names are for second tier football programs (besides this obvious exclusion). Even though I give them a lot of sh!t I think Iowa is above that. I know I am.

 

There is no cute name for Ohio State/Michigan that I recall, nor for Notre Dame/USC. Sorry, but I think a simple Iowa/Nebraska is a better way to describe it. It is more dignified. BTW, it has a better ring to it with Iowa first I feel. Can't believe I just said that.

i appreciate your truth, but i do not know what you mean by manufacture. i get that people can try to force rivalries, like colorado did with NU, but the reason that it was never a rivalry is because we never cared about it. people will care about this game, that is what makes it a rivalry. we will want to win this game more than most (even though we want to win all games equally, if we had to lose to michigan st. or iowa, i think we would rather lost to MSU). what makes a rivalry is the higher stakes (i.e. bragging rights). i think we all know a lot of iowans, maybe even related to a few. this game will be important to both fanbases and held on a higher level then any of the other games, and that is why it will be an instant rivalry. not all rivalries have to be forged like the OU/NU rivalry, and the reason that on fell apart so easily is because it was forged by both teams being in the top 2 and when one school became less relevant, the game was no longer relevant. UT/OU will always be relevant because of geography, just like this game will always be relevant. even if a team is down, this will be an important game to win. plus, rivalries make the sport more enjoyable, so it makes sense people would push for them. it may take some years for this rivalry to become intense and gain more gravity, but i think it will be an instant rivalry.

 

i don't know why you are down on cute names, but with american consumerism, it is all about branding. just like teams have 'cute' names and mascots, rivalries can be branded, i don't see how it affects the dignity or integrity of the teams, it just makes a rivalry more unique and the nickname highlights what makes the teams rivals. for instance OU/UT share the red river, hence the red river rivalry.

 

Well said sd'sker. I agree. It's a natural geographic rivalry just like OU-UT is. The game will claim bragging rights between the two states, just like OU-UT. It will be given a cute name, just like OU-UT. Some won't like the cute name for the rivalry (depending on what it ends up being called), but you can never make everyone happy.

 

BTW, I tried to find out when they started calling the OU-UT game "The Red River Shootout" (now corporately hijacked and called "The AT&T Red River Rivalry"), but my web searches have so far been unsuccessful. Anybody know?

wikipedia has a page dedicated to it. also, the corporate hijacking is weak.

[Manhattan]

The "Where The Red Team sh#ts On The Yellow Team Classic"

[sd'sker]

that's funny, i was thinking, is it a coincidence that Iowa uses the exact same color as charlie brown's shirt? i mean, are they the charlie brown of the big 10?