Bob Stoops

[husker B-rent]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

 

[mturn087]

Stoops had a good point though. Its not really fair to OU that they have to play Texas and Nebraska every year. I agree though it may have been a rivalry but the 90s and the Big 12 put an end to that. Stoops said when Texas does OU will kinda makes chuckle though cause that would happen when pigs fly.

 

[knapplc]

Just so we're clear - Texas is Oklahoma's rival, and they always have been.

But that doesn't mean that Oklahoma Fan doesn't miss our yearly game. They like us - or, maybe it's safer to say that they like to "hate" us, as respected rivals. But not THE rival.

I spoke to a LOT of Oklahoma fans last November. To a man/woman, they said how much they respect us, how great it is that we're coming back, that they miss playing us, etc. It was a love-fest. They genuinely liked the annual game, and they miss it. A perfect world for Oklahoma Fan would be to play Texas and Nebraska every year.

 

[Apathy]

I hate the hawkeyes almost more than anyone in the big 12.

Really? Why? What is there about Iowa that would grab your interest? Do you live around Iowa fans?

I work with 2 Hawkeye fans and have several Hawkeye fans on facebook and they are ALWAYS the first ones to rub a loss in my face especially the Iowa State and I still hear about that game to this date.

I live right across the Missouri River from Sioux City, IA and now that Iowa is doing good in football I've seen more Hawkeye flags in that last 8-9 months compared to the last 5 years put together. They've sold 4,000 extra season tickets now that they're winning and they're a bunch of bandwagon fans. They don't support the team when they're crap but now they'll support them now that they're doing good and talk to each other like they've won 2 national championships in the past 3 seasons.

Not all Hawkeye fans are bad because there are some good fans on my moms side of the family.

Back to the original post I'd say that we're more of a rival to Colorado and Mizzou than we are with OU because we play each other every year and its gotten more intense when we play against Mizzou and CU.

 

[Enhance]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

It's important, but doesn't beating every team in your division still give you the North championship, even if you were to lose all three games against the south?

 

[husker B-rent]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

It's important, but doesn't beating every team in your division still give you the North championship, even if you were to lose all three games against the south?

no you dont. that would mean that you would only have a 5-3 record in conference play and you would hold the tie breaker if another team had the same record but if another team is 6-2, 7-1, or 8-0 then they would win the division. the only difference is that in division games will give you a tie breaker if you win and out of division games will not. but the goal is still to win the most conference games not just division games.

 

[kansas husker]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

It's important, but doesn't beating every team in your division still give you the North championship, even if you were to lose all three games against the south?

No, not always the first catagory to determain the divisional champ is overall conferance record.

Edit: beat me to it B-rent well played. <_<

 

[I See Red People]

Iowa's claims to fame:

1 National Title

1 Heisman Winner

61 Consensus All-Americans

11 Big Ten Titles

13-10-1 in Bowl Games

580-512-39 Overall Record (.530)

2 Maxwell Awards

2 Davey O'Brien Awards

1 Doak Walker Award

1 John Mackey Award

1 Lou Groza Award

3 Outland Trophies

We've won as many bowl games as they've been in. I think that puts that prestige conversation to rest.

Good point.

 

[jsneb83]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

It's important, but doesn't beating every team in your division still give you the North championship, even if you were to lose all three games against the south?

no you dont. that would mean that you would only have a 5-3 record in conference play and you would hold the tie breaker if another team had the same record but if another team is 6-2, 7-1, or 8-0 then they would win the division. the only difference is that in division games will give you a tie breaker if you win and out of division games will not. but the goal is still to win the most conference games not just division games.

If you beat everyone in the division, then there wouldn't be any teams in the division that are 8-0 right? :LOLtartar

But yes, conference games against south teams are important, but divisional are more important just because then you would hold the tiebreaker. Or you could just win every conference game and not have to worry about it.

 

[jsneb83]

Alright not on the scout team anymore. I guess I have one thing over Gilleylen and Holt. :LOLtartar

 

[Enhance]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

It's important, but doesn't beating every team in your division still give you the North championship, even if you were to lose all three games against the south?

no you dont. that would mean that you would only have a 5-3 record in conference play and you would hold the tie breaker if another team had the same record but if another team is 6-2, 7-1, or 8-0 then they would win the division. the only difference is that in division games will give you a tie breaker if you win and out of division games will not. but the goal is still to win the most conference games not just division games.

So, if Nebraska went 7-1 in conference play with a loss to Missouri, but Missouri goes 6-2 in conference play with two losses to South teams, then Nebraska still wins the North division?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but that just seems backwards. When you look at the NFL, for example, beating every team in your division will win you the division no matter how bad you played against teams outside your division.

 

[Blackshirtsguru]

OU has never seen us as their main rivalry. It has always been Texas. It's like the Colorado fans. Come hell or high water, they think that the NU-CU is a rivalry game. To me it's like playing football against your little brother. They always think they will beat ya, but in the end they lose!

 

[kc_husker]

Anyways, back to the topic at hand....(flippin thread hijackers)

The OU-NU rivalry is non-existent. Sure, it's nice to re-hash the memories of great games, great wins, and tough losses, but it doesn't really matter anymore because unless we meet in the Big 12 title game, beating the other in regular conference play doesn't really do much for us unless we get into tiebreaker situations.

i dont believe that to be correct. losing a conference game to a south opponent is very important when it comes to division standings....

It's important, but doesn't beating every team in your division still give you the North championship, even if you were to lose all three games against the south?

no you dont. that would mean that you would only have a 5-3 record in conference play and you would hold the tie breaker if another team had the same record but if another team is 6-2, 7-1, or 8-0 then they would win the division. the only difference is that in division games will give you a tie breaker if you win and out of division games will not. but the goal is still to win the most conference games not just division games.

So, if Nebraska went 7-1 in conference play with a loss to Missouri, but Missouri goes 6-2 in conference play with two losses to South teams, then Nebraska still wins the North division?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but that just seems backwards. When you look at the NFL, for example, beating every team in your division will win you the division no matter how bad you played against teams outside your division.

How can NU go 7-1 while losing all three games to the south????????

 

[REDSTEEL]

In all fairness Stoops wasn't around when it was the Big Eight so he has no comparison to go by on a Oklahoma, Nebraska Rivalry. You can't blame a coach not wanting to play a team that was supposed to be and should be the best team in the North every year.

It's no different then a student or fan of Nebraska that just started watching Nebraska football recently who consider Missou as a rival. :facepalm: where as I can count on one hand just 5 losses in a 40 year span and can hardly think of them as such. Face it not that many fans even knew that Missou and Nebraksa even had a trophy game untill missou won a few games.

 

[irafreak]

I only knew about the trophy from NCAA 2003 for the PS2. As far as fairness with the schedule....OU plays us every year AND texas but they get to skip either Texas AM/Texas Tech each year and always get to pad their schedule with Colorado.