Charter flight to Bowl Game Cancelled.

[Mavric]

http://journalstar.c...db3abea1bf.html

 

This is the first time it's happened in over 25 years. The best traveling fan base appears to have a little more people disenfranchised with the current state affairs then a loud, vocal minority it appears.

 

I wonder if even 2000 tickets will be sold through the University.

I think it's less about "current state of affairs" and more about who we're playing. Nice jab with your agenda though.

Read the article and you'll see the owner of the companies opinion

And he's certainly entitled to his opinion. Doesn't mean it the biggest reason. Perhaps going to Florida for the third straight year after a disappointing season could have something to do with it.

[Husker66]

I understand people are less than thrilled to play the same team again and the same bowl and yes if we took care of business we would be in a better bowl. I look at it this way. If attendance slides too low for too long we will start getting passed over by the better bowls and have to start settling for sh**ty bowls. As long as most of the bowls are based on what team will travel best we will always get the benefit of the doubt even when we do have a less than optimal season.

 

we start playing well, we will be right back in the big games and the college world would eat that up...we keep being a top 35 program, we will get passed up and wil deserve it...

[JJ Husker]

I might be a f'n fairweather fan but I have little desire to go see my Huskers get beat.

'87-'93 were tough years

 

Yes they were, but not for nearly the same reasons. There was a belief that we "could" or "might" prevail and we were still in the mix of things, not outside the top 25. I have to believe there is a big impact on fan outlook for travelling to games when there is hope of a reasonable performance.

[alwayshusking]

I might be a f'n fairweather fan but I have little desire to go see my Huskers get beat.

'87-'93 were tough years

 

 

Sure would be nice to see Bo bring those "tough" times back. We won the conference 4 times in those years and played elite teams in those bowl games. The 1993 team almost won the NC. Not even comparable to what we have now.

[skersfan]

Yes they were, but we were playing for something, generally a top ten finish in the National hunt. Not matched up in the good coach/bad coach game of the year. That is about all this game means to anyone else in the country. Those tuned in will be looking for the melt down and really nothing else. It has no affect on the landscape of college football.

 

But somehow we did luck out and get a ranked opponent, which we did not deserve. Our records speaks to that. It does give the kids more practice, a chance for our staff to learn, and they need the practice more than the kids do.

 

But the most important thing about it is the possibility of getting a win in the SEC hot bed. That makes the game worth it. I hate it that no one will go, but I do not think it is just the repeat game, the opponent. It is most feel we will get curb stomped and can find better ways of spending the money this time of year, than watching an ill prepared staff try and luck out a win.

[TheSker]

I might be a f'n fairweather fan but I have little desire to go see my Huskers get beat.

'87-'93 were tough years

 

Yes they were, but not for nearly the same reasons. There was a belief that we "could" or "might" prevail and we were still in the mix of things, not outside the top 25. I have to believe there is a big impact on fan outlook for travelling to games when there is hope of a reasonable performance.

There was a lot of criticism of Osborne, especially from '90-'92. A lot.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Oh, you wanted Husker fans to show up for the bowl game, Bowl Committee?

 

Yeah, scheduling a rematch probably wasn't the swellest of ideas, then.

 

One theory sure.

 

Then the article quotes the CEO of the company, and he's attributing most of it to "Bo Pelini drama"

 

Former player too. That's pretty damn telling.

 

Yes, because that is absolutely 100% correct. Does a former player and current CEO really have anymore of an insight on the current state of the fans any more than you or I or knapp or NUance or tschu or huskeraddict or PaulCrewe or ADS or KJ or GSG or sd'sker or GM_Tood or Mr. A or zoogies or True or JJ or husker_99 or anyone here on the board?

 

He's using his position to try to project something that may not even be true. If he would've come out with some solid numbers that people aren't going to the bowl game because they aren't satisfied with Bo Pelini, then I'd believe him.

 

Until then, he's just another speculator.

 

It's absolutely absurd to point to one thing, and say "THAT MUST BE IT!!!! IT'S THE ONLY CAUSE!!!!".

[Hunter94]

I'm not going because of cost 600 air fare 250 hotel plus food and what not. Cost of travel is killing most of us, wages remain low and house whole costs increase it's life. To me it is not the place or who we are playing.

 

especially if you buy in the ACA!

[True2tRA]

Oh, you wanted Husker fans to show up for the bowl game, Bowl Committee?

 

Yeah, scheduling a rematch probably wasn't the swellest of ideas, then.

 

Edit: I should have read more posts into this thread. This has already been discussed. Carry on.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

I might be a f'n fairweather fan but I have little desire to go see my Huskers get beat.

'87-'93 were tough years

 

Yes they were, but not for nearly the same reasons. There was a belief that we "could" or "might" prevail and we were still in the mix of things, not outside the top 25. I have to believe there is a big impact on fan outlook for travelling to games when there is hope of a reasonable performance.

There was a lot of criticism of Osborne, especially from '90-'92. A lot.

 

 

everyone has selective amnesia...they forget that about 90-92. They also forget that Nebraska fumbled then just as much as we fumble now. Selective amnesia fits well.

 

Looking back on it now:

 

1990: We went 9-3, finished 3rd in the Big 8. Ranked #3 in the nation, we lost by 15 to #9 Colorado, 27-12. We then lost to unranked Oklahoma as the 10th ranked team, 45-10. We went to the Orange Bowl where we lost to #2 Georgia Tech as the #19 team, 45-21.

 

1991: As the 9th ranked team in the nation, we lost to #4 Washington by 15 points, 36-21. We tied 15th ranked Colorado and then lost to #1 Miami in the Orange Bowl, losing 22-0. We also tied for 1st in the Big 8.

 

1992: We lost as the 12th ranked team to #2 Washington by 15 points, 29-14. We then lost to unranked Iowa State as the 7th ranked team in the nation, 19-10. We won the Big 8 and then lost in the Orange Bowl to Florida State, the #3 ranked team, 27-14.

 

 

So...a couple of losses to unranked teams. And a loss to the top ranked team, two losses to the #2 ranked team, a loss to the #3 ranked team, and a loss to the #4 ranked team. That's a team not being able to win the big game. That's vastly different than Bo. But again, this is well into Osborne's career, so it's not exactly a fair comparison.

[True2tRA]

 

Looking back on it now:

 

1990: We went 9-3, finished 3rd in the Big 8. Ranked #3 in the nation, we lost by 15 to #9 Colorado, 27-12. We then lost to unranked Oklahoma as the 10th ranked team, 45-10. We went to the Orange Bowl where we lost to #2 Georgia Tech as the #19 team, 45-21.

 

1991: As the 9th ranked team in the nation, we lost to #4 Washington by 15 points, 36-21. We tied 15th ranked Colorado and then lost to #1 Miami in the Orange Bowl, losing 22-0. We also tied for 1st in the Big 8.

 

1992: We lost as the 12th ranked team to #2 Washington by 15 points, 29-14. We then lost to unranked Iowa State as the 7th ranked team in the nation, 19-10. We won the Big 8 and then lost in the Orange Bowl to Florida State, the #3 ranked team, 27-14.

 

 

So...a couple of losses to unranked teams. And a loss to the top ranked team, two losses to the #2 ranked team, a loss to the #3 ranked team, and a loss to the #4 ranked team. That's a team not being able to win the big game. That's vastly different than Bo. But again, this is well into Osborne's career, so it's not exactly a fair comparison.

 

Geez, you know, I never really thought of it like that.

 

 

FIRE OSBORNE!

[True2tRA]

I find it hard to believe that a team that runs the option 95% of the time would have some fumbles.

 

 

Oh wait, no I don't.

[Hooked on Huskers]

I heard Huskers' team charter will be cancelled.

 

Just use EA Sports PS3 gadget instead of real game. Good idea?

 

[Dagerow]

Waahhh.... I don't like the bowl game. Waahhh.... we don't win enough. Waahhh... I don't like Bo. Waahhh.... With our tradition, we should get a better coach.

 

Grow the f up. How other teams are glad with their bowl games? Not many. How many tradition rich or powerful programs are hurting? A lot (eg, Michigan, Florida, Texas, ect.). But ignore that and keep thinking NU is the only one.

[sd'sker]

There was a lot of criticism of Osborne, especially from '90-'92. A lot.

this is a joke, right?

 

are you arguing that we should not criticize bo because people criticized osborne and he eventually won multiple mnc's?

 

i do not see how they are related. especially because osborne put a top 15, if not top 10, product on the field.