What is our second most impressive win?

[knapplc]

 

 

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.

 

The Big Ten schools voted unanimously to accept Nebraska's bid for membership.

 

You may be referring to the AAU situation.

[NUpolo8]

I have seen the pining for Kansas and Kansas State and Iowa State and Missouri and Colorado right here in this forum. Two of those schools left the Big XII for the same reasons as Nebraska, and both are better of for it, as is Nebraska. The remaining three actively stabbed Nebraska in the back to create the Big XII.

Mizzou definitely is, CU badly needs it's house in order and would no matter where they are.

 

So! Now what do we talk about?

[Junior]

 

 

 

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.

 

The Big Ten schools voted unanimously to accept Nebraska's bid for membership.

 

You may be referring to the AAU situation.

 

 

No, my understanding is that after we passed the vote on a pure majority rules basis, it was made to be unanimous so that the conference looked united. Michigan, for one, was not at all happy. They wanted Notre Dame or no one.

[knapplc]

I haven't been able to dig anything up on Michigan voting against Nebraska's Big Ten membership. Where are you seeing this?

 

 

We have some Michigan fans who frequent the board from time to time. Maybe one of them will read this and knows more about it.

[carlfense]

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

[Junior]

I haven't been able to dig anything up on Michigan voting against Nebraska's Big Ten membership. Where are you seeing this?

 

 

We have some Michigan fans who frequent the board from time to time. Maybe one of them will read this and knows more about it.

 

 

I mean, it's been years, so finding info by google search gets difficult with overwhelming irrelevant hits. So I'm working on memory here and could clearly be wrong. I lived in Michigan and worked at the U of M at the time, not to suggest that I was privy to any information, because I wasn't... but it was pretty clear that there were a handful of schools that opposed us and Michigan was one.

[knapplc]

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

 

The Dirk Defense League took umbrage to a minor slight and much explanation was demanded.

 

 

To the rest of your post... agreed 100%. We have no clue what this team is. We could lose every one of our remaining games or win them all, and both results would be equally unsurprising. It's maddening.

[carlfense]

I lived in Michigan and worked at the U of M at the time, not to suggest that I was privy to any information, because I wasn't... but it was pretty clear that there were a handful of schools that opposed us and Michigan was one.

U of M really, really, needs to get over themselves. If the academic community respected them as much as they claim to deserve no one would be talking about the Ivy League.

[NUpolo8]

I don't know what the f@$! happened in this thread . . . but circling back around . . . it's pretty crazy that we have only 3 games left in the regular season and we really have no idea what sort of team we have. None. We could lose every one of the next three or we could win them all. Neither would be that surprising, would it? We have a single loss on the season and an objective viewer could watch every snap of our games and wonder if we should actually be ranked in the top 25. That's crazy.

 

Is that purely a product of our schedule? Or is it at least partially due to the maddeningly consistent inconsistency of Nebraska teams over the past years?

 

This schedule is really that tame. It really is.

[Junior]

 

I lived in Michigan and worked at the U of M at the time, not to suggest that I was privy to any information, because I wasn't... but it was pretty clear that there were a handful of schools that opposed us and Michigan was one.

U of M really, really, needs to get over themselves. If the academic community respected them as much as they claim to deserve no one would be talking about the Ivy League.

 

 

No disagreement there. That said, I'd take a faculty position there in a heartbeat.

[NUpolo8]

 

 

I lived in Michigan and worked at the U of M at the time, not to suggest that I was privy to any information, because I wasn't... but it was pretty clear that there were a handful of schools that opposed us and Michigan was one.

 

U of M really, really, needs to get over themselves. If the academic community respected them as much as they claim to deserve no one would be talking about the Ivy League.

No disagreement there. That said, I'd take a faculty position there in a heartbeat.

I for one am sick of all the Ivy League talk around my office.

[carlfense]

 

 

I lived in Michigan and worked at the U of M at the time, not to suggest that I was privy to any information, because I wasn't... but it was pretty clear that there were a handful of schools that opposed us and Michigan was one.

U of M really, really, needs to get over themselves. If the academic community respected them as much as they claim to deserve no one would be talking about the Ivy League.

 

 

No disagreement there. That said, I'd take a faculty position there in a heartbeat.

 

Oh, no doubt. They're a damn fine school . . . but I'm not at all convinced that they're as good as they tell everyone.

[Redux]

Hey ya know whats funny? All this talk of how great the Big 12 is currently led by Baylor, K-State and TCU (south cellar dweller, north middle pack and a Mtn West).

 

So when we are playing Michigan and Ohio State plus Wisconsin and Iowa will anynof this matter? Probably not seeing as unless the Big 12 expands its probably going to get raided again by the SEC Pac12 and Big Ten, maybe even the ACC.

[Redux]

 

 

 

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?

[carlfense]

I for one am sick of all the Ivy League talk around my office.