Cross Division "Rival"

Badgerfan said:
Any change that would screw up the UW-Minnesota rivalry would turn me into a NU hater for life.
Click to expand...
LOL....you should be so proud that you are rivals with Minnesota. Says a lot about Wisconsin as an overall program. The college football world could give a crap about UW vs Minn.

 
HuskerBCS said:
Badgerfan said:
Any change that would screw up the UW-Minnesota rivalry would turn me into a NU hater for life.
Click to expand...
LOL....you should be so proud that you are rivals with Minnesota. Says a lot about Wisconsin as an overall program. The college football world could give a crap about UW vs Minn.
Click to expand...
This comment only serves to betray your ignorance of college football history. I'll leave it at that.

 
Man it's sad when the best fan's in college football are out classed by a fan from another team on Husker site.

 
This kind of thinking is why OU didn't want to do a cross division rivalry with us when the Big 12 formed, we didn't really protest (thinking it meant an easier schedule) and uhhh...big success that league was.

 
Always hated that the OU game wasn't played every year after the Big 12 was formed. Would have gladly given up playing CU or ISU to keep it intact.

 
gin_32 said:
Badgerfan said:
SCGamecock said:
I remember looking at those matchups and wondering WTH? The SEC is pretty even, you got Vandy and UK playing MSU and Ole Miss, Bama-Tennessee(not too even recently), UF-LSU, UGA-AU, USC-Arky, and now Mizzou-TAMU. Although there have been rumors that LSU may be switching to our permanent rival but that remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
It was done to preserve rivalries which I have no problem with.

Any change that would screw up the UW-Minnesota rivalry would turn me into a NU hater for life.
Click to expand...
That's good because you can keep that Minnesota rivalry...Personally I would have liked our cross divisional game to be tOSU first and Wisconsin second. Penn St. will be licking thier wounds for awhile so I don't think they will be relavent any time soon.
Click to expand...
OSU was always going to be Michigan though. From a Nebraska perspective I would of preferred Wisconsin. Wisconsin/Nebraska being a yearly meeting could of ended up being the #2 rivalry in the B1G to OSU/UM. But considering the history in the conference it makes sense for the two new teams to get paired up.

 
Nebraska's just been put in a poor position. Of the three teams that are on its level as far as history and success two already have a great rivalry and one is too far away and now too much in the dumps to establish what fans will feel is an acceptable rivalry...but rivalries take time.

To clarify my earlier statement the NU part was kind of a joke, it wouldn't be their fault its just that the expansion would've brought about such change but any added team could've done it. I don't think they'll drop UW-U of M though I'd really like to play NU every year. It'd be a great series.

Looks like its Iowa for now...

I'm sorry.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Luck of the draw. Unfortunately, I can see Penn St. becoming one of the bottom dwellers for an extended period of time.

 
IF the Big Ten goes to a 9 game conference schedule I'd fully expect each team to pick up a 2nd permanant crossover game (even though the league has said it doesn't forsee that happening)

Iowa - Purdue and Wisconsin (reestablishes the Iowa Wisconsin Rivalry)

Michigan - Ohio State and Indiana (or Illinois depending on historical preference of conference)

Michigan State - Indiana and Penn State (reestablishes MSU-PSU "Rivalry")

Minnesota - Wisconsin and Purdue

Nebraska - Penn State and Illinois (or Indiana depending on historical preference of conference)

Northwestern - Illinois and Ohio State

Illinois - Northwestern and Nebraska

Indiana - Michigan State and Michigan

Ohio State - Michigan and Northwestern

Penn State - Nebraska and Michigan State

Purdue - Iowa and Minnesota

Wisconsin - Minnesota and Iowa

It's all about competitive balance and rivalries in this conference. A 2nd crossover adresses all the lapses the current schedule now presents as far as rivalry games and makes it more balanced (though still not completely balanced again due to those rivalries).

The one thing I'd like to see if they don't make any other changes is to after the current cycle is finished modify the schedule so that we arne't playing Ohio State, Wisconsin and Penn State in the same cycle. We'll play PSU every cycle but they really need to split the OSU/Wisconsin series into seperate 2 year stints after the initiation years.

 
I agree with the original author. On average, we are down a half game to MSU before the season even begins. We will win some and lose some to PSU, but Indiana never wins.

 
This is a new concept for Nebraska fans....playing a competitive and full schedule.

Even in the old Big 8 (of course scholarship limits have been reduced) Nebraska would play maybe 2 tough games a year......of course in many years in the Big 12 we might have 2-3 tough games in a good year. The north division was sad many years. We were down for several Callahan years so didn't matter the competition.

now we have 5, 6 sometimes 7 competitive games in the Big 10 per year.

 
Badgerfan said:
SCGamecock said:
I remember looking at those matchups and wondering WTH? The SEC is pretty even, you got Vandy and UK playing MSU and Ole Miss, Bama-Tennessee(not too even recently), UF-LSU, UGA-AU, USC-Arky, and now Mizzou-TAMU. Although there have been rumors that LSU may be switching to our permanent rival but that remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
It was done to preserve rivalries which I have no problem with.

Any change that would screw up the UW-Minnesota rivalry would turn me into a NU hater for life.
Click to expand...

BFG....

 
Badgerfan said:
Nebraska's just been put in a poor position. Of the three teams that are on its level as far as history and success two already have a great rivalry and one is too far away and now too much in the dumps to establish what fans will feel is an acceptable rivalry...but rivalries take time.

To clarify my earlier statement the NU part was kind of a joke, it wouldn't be their fault its just that the expansion would've brought about such change but any added team could've done it. I don't think they'll drop UW-U of M though I'd really like to play NU every year. It'd be a great series.

Looks like its Iowa for now...

I'm sorry.
Click to expand...
That's more like it...

 
We don't have that rival game any more. I know the B1G is trying to make the Iowa game one, but Iowa doesn't have the winning tradition of say a, OSU, Mich, PSU. I think Mich will be a key game each year for us, probably won't be a rival game, as OSU will always be their big rival. When I thought of the Big-10, I always thought of OSU and Mich, and thats it. Same as the Big-8, Neb and Okl. Out west USC and UCLA. Tex and Ark in the SWC. Ala and Aub. ND and USC was always a good one.

I think OSU will get back to being the class of the Leaders division, but Neb will have a tougher time trying to get to the top of the Legends and staying there most years, with a tougher Mich team, to have to play each year. Heck Northwestern, could be the rival if they keep throwing a monkey wrench into the plan. lol

GBR!!!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top