I miss the Big XII.

[knapplc]

Is scheduling KU as an annual OOC an outlandish proposal?

 

The Big Ten frowns on scheduling FCS schools.

[WoodyHayes1951]

Is scheduling KU as an annual OOC an outlandish proposal?

 

The Big Ten frowns on scheduling FCS schools.

 

 

 

Well played...

 

[mturn087]

What bothers me the most that people forget yea the Big 10 has history but for the most part since the 70s what has the Big 10 won in Football? They claim a 1970 national title with Ohio State that Nebraska/Texas share already. The 1980s Penn State teams weren't in the Big 10 yet. After that it was 1997 and 2002 flip that around Colorado in that time span won 1 Nebraska won 5 OU won 4 Texas has 2. Hell even since 1997 the Big 12 won 3 compared to in the same time period of 2. So to include the period with Penn State 2 Ohio State 2 (70 since they claim it) Michigan 1 overall (5) vs Big12/8 teams 12. Basketball is the League that the Big 10 has the advantage since the same time period with 6 national titles vs the 2 (Kansas) the Big 12/8 claims. Baseball belongs to the Big 12 obviously outside of Indiana this year the Big 10 has been a non factor in the CWS. Volleyball is tied 6 apeice with 3 Nebraska 3 Texas and 6 Penn State. The Big 12 overall is loved by the computers of the BCS and was considered the 2nd strongest league or best depending on the week during the seasons. With 9 teams becoming bowl eligible. Had Ohio State been eligible this year for the postseason they most likely would have won the National Title. Yet the Big 12 could honestly say outside of a fluke night down in Waco, Kansas State could very well have won a National Title. Heisman Trophy winners 11 for Big 12 whereas 8 for Big 10. Overall competitively the Big 12 is better. The rules of Texas have sorta been blown away as the Longhorn Network is a failure and Texas A&M left and did amazing in the SEC. Texas hasn't solved the riddle of Kansas State or Oklahoma at all. It's my opinion that we were better athletically in the Big 12. Academics belong to the B1G. So its take your pick of that. Money-wise yea the Big 10 wins in that debate. So it's a take your pick of Money/Academics or Athletics for your bragging rights. I liked what one poster said earlier before Nebraska jumped ship to the BIG we all said and I do mean ALL that the Big 12 was a better conference athletically. Since the inception of the BCS the Big 12 has more appearances as well in the National Title games. I understand I'll come under fire for only including the time since 1970. Before that time hands down the Big 10 was king however they mastered being ahead of the game and marketed everything better. The Big 10 network was groundbreaking. I also understand that Texas was also in the Southwest Conference till 96. But I viewed it as fair to include them as I included Penn State's National Titles of the 80s. So with all that being said I respectfully expect to come under fire for all this! So I look forward to reading to the comments!

[knapplc]

What bothers me the most that people forget yea the Big 10 has history but for the most part since the 70s what has the Big 10 won in Football? They claim a 1970 national title with Ohio State that Nebraska/Texas share already. The 1980s Penn State teams weren't in the Big 10 yet. After that it was 1997 and 2002 flip that around Colorado in that time span won 1 Nebraska won 5 OU won 4 Texas has 2. Hell even since 1997 the Big 12 won 3 compared to in the same time period of 2. So to include the period with Penn State 2 Ohio State 2 (70 since they claim it) Michigan 1 overall (5) vs Big12/8 teams 12. Basketball is the League that the Big 10 has the advantage since the same time period with 6 national titles vs the 2 (Kansas) the Big 12/8 claims. Baseball belongs to the Big 12 obviously outside of Indiana this year the Big 10 has been a non factor in the CWS. Volleyball is tied 6 apeice with 3 Nebraska 3 Texas and 6 Penn State. The Big 12 overall is loved by the computers of the BCS and was considered the 2nd strongest league or best depending on the week during the seasons. With 9 teams becoming bowl eligible. Had Ohio State been eligible this year for the postseason they most likely would have won the National Title. Yet the Big 12 could honestly say outside of a fluke night down in Waco, Kansas State could very well have won a National Title. Heisman Trophy winners 11 for Big 12 whereas 8 for Big 10. Overall competitively the Big 12 is better. The rules of Texas have sorta been blown away as the Longhorn Network is a failure and Texas A&M left and did amazing in the SEC. Texas hasn't solved the riddle of Kansas State or Oklahoma at all. It's my opinion that we were better athletically in the Big 12. Academics belong to the B1G. So its take your pick of that. Money-wise yea the Big 10 wins in that debate. So it's a take your pick of Money/Academics or Athletics for your bragging rights. I liked what one poster said earlier before Nebraska jumped ship to the BIG we all said and I do mean ALL that the Big 12 was a better conference athletically. Since the inception of the BCS the Big 12 has more appearances as well in the National Title games. I understand I'll come under fire for only including the time since 1970. Before that time hands down the Big 10 was king however they mastered being ahead of the game and marketed everything better. The Big 10 network was groundbreaking. I also understand that Texas was also in the Southwest Conference till 96. But I viewed it as fair to include them as I included Penn State's National Titles of the 80s. So with all that being said I respectfully expect to come under fire for all this! So I look forward to reading to the comments!

¶

[Count 'Bility]

What bothers me the most that people forget yea the Big 10 has history but for the most part since the 70s what has the Big 10 won in Football? They claim a 1970 national title with Ohio State that Nebraska/Texas share already. The 1980s Penn State teams weren't in the Big 10 yet. After that it was 1997 and 2002 flip that around Colorado in that time span won 1 Nebraska won 5 OU won 4 Texas has 2. Hell even since 1997 the Big 12 won 3 compared to in the same time period of 2. So to include the period with Penn State 2 Ohio State 2 (70 since they claim it) Michigan 1 overall (5) vs Big12/8 teams 12. Basketball is the League that the Big 10 has the advantage since the same time period with 6 national titles vs the 2 (Kansas) the Big 12/8 claims. Baseball belongs to the Big 12 obviously outside of Indiana this year the Big 10 has been a non factor in the CWS. Volleyball is tied 6 apeice with 3 Nebraska 3 Texas and 6 Penn State. The Big 12 overall is loved by the computers of the BCS and was considered the 2nd strongest league or best depending on the week during the seasons. With 9 teams becoming bowl eligible. Had Ohio State been eligible this year for the postseason they most likely would have won the National Title. Yet the Big 12 could honestly say outside of a fluke night down in Waco, Kansas State could very well have won a National Title. Heisman Trophy winners 11 for Big 12 whereas 8 for Big 10. Overall competitively the Big 12 is better. The rules of Texas have sorta been blown away as the Longhorn Network is a failure and Texas A&M left and did amazing in the SEC. Texas hasn't solved the riddle of Kansas State or Oklahoma at all. It's my opinion that we were better athletically in the Big 12. Academics belong to the B1G. So its take your pick of that. Money-wise yea the Big 10 wins in that debate. So it's a take your pick of Money/Academics or Athletics for your bragging rights. I liked what one poster said earlier before Nebraska jumped ship to the BIG we all said and I do mean ALL that the Big 12 was a better conference athletically. Since the inception of the BCS the Big 12 has more appearances as well in the National Title games. I understand I'll come under fire for only including the time since 1970. Before that time hands down the Big 10 was king however they mastered being ahead of the game and marketed everything better. The Big 10 network was groundbreaking. I also understand that Texas was also in the Southwest Conference till 96. But I viewed it as fair to include them as I included Penn State's National Titles of the 80s. So with all that being said I respectfully expect to come under fire for all this! So I look forward to reading to the comments!

You have?

[admo]

I am not cherry picking a random 4 game stretch.

Any 4-game stretch you pick will be cherry-picking. Look at the schedule as a whole or don't bother looking at all.

Look at your face, or don't look at anything at all.

 

I tried taking the high road after my comments. You pushed. Tough guy.

I stand by my stance with the schedule within the Big 12 and it's favoritism. I friggin live in Texas, I know what I am talking about.

 

Back to the topic - as stated, I really like the B1G. It's a better conference for us. IMHO.

[Count 'Bility]

Obviously, if we look at this from a football only and the impacts on the future of our football program exclusively, yes, the move to the Big 10 can be seen as questionable at best. But we have to realize this was a university move, and for the school and entire AD was undoubtedly the best move-not just possible, but period. We're set. FOREVER. Obviously with football being top dog in our state, it's seems kind of ho hum right now. But the other sports like volleyball and basketball are now competing in a, if not the, premier conference in the country. And baseball has already shown improvements in the Big 10. We have to continue to view move with the proper perspective until the football matters become hunky dory again.

[HuskerTrucker]

I don't miss Texas, or any of the other Texas schools for that matter. The Big 12 was nothing more than a conference built to cater to them. I miss the old Big 8, even if it did have Colorado.

[Moiraine]

Obviously, if we look at this from a football only and the impacts on the future of our football program exclusively, yes, the move to the Big 10 can be seen as questionable at best.

 

That's a load of B.S. Maybe if you had said "the move to the Big 10 can be seen as questionable," it would be alright. But teams were leaving the Big 12 when we left regardless of whether we left. In order for the move to be "questionable at best," the Big 12 needs to be this vastly better juggernaut right now and how the hell is that the case? It can easily argued that they've been better the past couple years, but not better enough that your statement is even close to being true.

[HuskerTrucker]

Is scheduling KU as an annual OOC an outlandish proposal?

KU? Really? 95% of the time they do nothing but hurt your chances at a National Championship, not because they are that good, but because they are that bad.

[GM_Tood]

At first I was 'meh' about the move but I think it has (and will) be best for the University.

 

Been to the big away games for us and with the exception of one experience, not too bad.

[husker_99]

We need to reschedule Colorado so we can continue the Thanksgiving traditions of beating their ass!

[GSG]

We need to reschedule Colorado so we can continue the Thanksgiving traditions of beating their ass!

 

[knapplc]

Missing the Big XII is like an abused spouse missing their ex. It was a bad relationship, they're better off away and free, but it was what they were used to so there's this lingering nostalgia.

[Count 'Bility]

Obviously, if we look at this from a football only and the impacts on the future of our football program exclusively, yes, the move to the Big 10 can be seen as questionable at best.

 

That's a load of B.S. Maybe if you had said "the move to the Big 10 can be seen as questionable," it would be alright. But teams were leaving the Big 12 when we left regardless of whether we left. In order for the move to be "questionable at best," the Big 12 needs to be this vastly better juggernaut right now and how the hell is that the case? It can easily argued that they've been better the past couple years, but not better enough that your statement is even close to being true.

Oh Moiraine, you make me chuckle. You know what I mean. There just seems to be these second thought about it because of the current status of our football program and Big 10 football as a whole. Maybe I did word it sh**ty, but still, I think youre pickin it apart too much. As cool as it was at the time to give Texas the middle finger, now 2 years in, I'm sensing a lot of reluctance on this move, and I think it's mainly from a football only standpoint. I know it was the best move-probably the only move-as well as many others do.