Jump to content


What is our second most impressive win?

carlfense

By carlfense,
in Husker Football

Recommended Posts

BigRedBuster Legend

BigRedBuster

Posted
Posted

 

 

I mean, I think that's kind of the point from a football perspective. The Big 10 we joined didn't have Rutgers and Maryland. We had yearly games against Penn State, Michigan State, and Michigan (no matter how down they are, that's still a big name), as well as frequent OSU games. Now we go 5 years between playing Michigan. Next year there's a game against MSU and that's it. 2016 is OSU and that's it. Everyone knows there was more to the move than football, from Nebraska's perspective. And it was still the right move. That doesn't mean that we don't have some buyer's remorse from a football standpoint, especially after the addition of Maryland and Rutgers. If we're going to be playing a crap ass conference schedule, at least we could be playing teams we have 90 years of history with.

I agree with just about all of this, except the last line. Those teams we had 90 years of history with didn't want to play us anymore. The loyalty this sentiment displays is admirable, but Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State wanted nothing more to do with Nebraska.

 

We left a conference that didn't want us to join a conference that did. Long-term the move is a no-brainer win for Nebraska. Short-term, the schedule is meh and many of the games aren't compelling.

 

 

Jim Delaney wanted us. The rest of the conference? That's debatable. Michigan and Wisconsin actively lobbied against us.

 

Interesting. Barry Alvarez was one of the main reasons why the discussions even started in the first place. He supported it fully.

  • Fire 2
Link to comment

NUpolo8 All-American

NUpolo8

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

Quite frankly the Big 12 is just as much crap right now as it was when we left it. TCU and West Virgina came from the Mountain West and shambled Big East. They are now both right at the top of the league while OU sits behind them, Texas nudges elbows with ISU and Kansas for rights at the bottom, and Okie Lite is doing god knows what. Baylor......BAYLOR is a conference front runner year in and out now. The Big 12 should be the laughing stock, not the Big Ten. Hopefully that sorts itself out next year.

I mean, every single team you mentioned has been in a BCS bowl more recently than Nebraska.

All those teams got better when Nebraska Missouri Colorado and A&M left and were replaced with a MtnWst team and a dying Big East team. Now magically the Big 12 is better off with less quality AND quantity. Nevermind its two star teams are middle of the pack or worse in conference standings.

I'll take it as a compliment that we had to leave to make all those other teams better.

This cannot possibly be a serious statement.

Maybe Nebraskas leaving didnt specifically make them better. But the drop off in competition overall seemed to help the former also rans. What exactly did I say that wasnt true?

Everything down to the punctuation.

Link to comment
Junior Backup

Junior

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

I mean, I think that's kind of the point from a football perspective. The Big 10 we joined didn't have Rutgers and Maryland. We had yearly games against Penn State, Michigan State, and Michigan (no matter how down they are, that's still a big name), as well as frequent OSU games. Now we go 5 years between playing Michigan. Next year there's a game against MSU and that's it. 2016 is OSU and that's it. Everyone knows there was more to the move than football, from Nebraska's perspective. And it was still the right move. That doesn't mean that we don't have some buyer's remorse from a football standpoint, especially after the addition of Maryland and Rutgers. If we're going to be playing a crap ass conference schedule, at least we could be playing teams we have 90 years of history with.

I agree with just about all of this, except the last line. Those teams we had 90 years of history with didn't want to play us anymore. The loyalty this sentiment displays is admirable, but Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State wanted nothing more to do with Nebraska.

 

We left a conference that didn't want us to join a conference that did. Long-term the move is a no-brainer win for Nebraska. Short-term, the schedule is meh and many of the games aren't compelling.

 

 

Jim Delaney wanted us. The rest of the conference? That's debatable. Michigan and Wisconsin actively lobbied against us.

 

Interesting. Barry Alvarez was one of the main reasons why the discussions even started in the first place. He supported it fully.

 

 

I could be wrong about Wisconsin, I don't think I am about Michigan. Regardless, Athletic Directors are not university presidents. They do not have the same goals.

Link to comment

Vargas Recruit

Vargas

Posted
Posted

This is sort of a trap question in that all of the toughest games have yet to be played, with one obvious exception. We could ask ourselves same question if were in 7-1 in the B12 with TCU, KState and Oklahoma left to play. We haven't had any great victories yet, and yes, we lost to Mich St. But with 3 tough games on schedule ahead of us we time left for some quality wins.

Link to comment
knapplc Legend

knapplc

Posted
Posted

I could be wrong about Wisconsin, I don't think I am about Michigan. Regardless, Athletic Directors are not university presidents. They do not have the same goals.

Even if the Michigan thing ends up with no evidence, I think everyone would agree with you that the entire Big Ten would have voted Notre Dame in over Nebraska. Likely they would have preferred both, but forced to make a choice, they would have chosen Notre Dame.

Link to comment

Minnesota_husker All-American

Minnesota_husker

Posted
Posted

There aren't two impressive wins. That's the problem. We've played such a weak schedule that we don't even have two good wins so far. 8-1 is an illusion, a facade covering a weak team with a grossly embarrassing list of opponents.

 

We'd have been better off staying in the Big XII, away from this crap-ass conference, playing teams with chops, teams in the top ten, teams that are nationally relevant instead of this... mess.

 

Nebraska is no better off today than we were in November, 2007. We just have a better record.

 

It's a total sham.

Just went full depression on us there.

 

We can only do our best with what is in front of us. we have won 8 of 9 games....

 

You are right.. none of those opponents were what many would deem as "Tough" but we cant control that. We have beat who is in front of us...

 

And if we can continue to do just that, maybe we have an opportunity to play a tough team and really show where we are at.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...