Husker_x
New member
LINK
Woelk: Don't worry, Buffs know NU game is important
By Neill Woelk (Contact)
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Certain portions of Colorado football fans are apparently a tad upset with CU coach Dan Hawkins' philosophy of treating the Nebraska game, in the words of D-lineman George Hypolite, in a "business as usual" manner.
One former Buff player (who shall remain unnamed) even went as far as to drop an e-mail to the Camera suggesting, "You may think Nebraska is like any other game, but if you lose to Nebraska and finish at 50/50 or less, then we will have a new coach at Colorado that understands the importance of beating Nebraska."
My how time has fogged this former player's memory. If he and his teammates had been held to the same standard, they would have gotten a couple of coaches fired.
Hawk already has one more win over NU than this player experienced in his four years at Colorado -- and several years before and after.
Remember, Colorado once lost 18 in a row to the Huskers. After Eddie Crowder defeated Nebraska in 1967, CU didn't win a game in the series again until 1986, when Bill McCartney ended the losing streak in his fifth year in Boulder.
That's a span that included the last six years of Eddie Crowder's stay, all five years of the Bill Mallory era, three years of Chuck Fairbanks and the first four years of McCartney's regime.
All of those coaches may have understood the importance of beating Nebraska -- but it certainly didn't translate into too many victories.
Speaking of McCartney, it's also worth remembering that McCartney didn't actually declare NU as Colorado's "rival" when he arrived in Boulder.Rather, McCartney said Nebraska was the program Colorado should aspire to emulate. Mac wanted a standard by which to measure the Buffs, and he chose what was then one of the best programs in the nation.
Subsequently, he set the bar as high as possible and challenged the Buffs to reach it. That's where the "rivalry" began.
But circumstances are different today.
Let's be honest: If you were going to pick a program in the Big 12 to emulate, a program to use as a measuring stick, the Huskers would be pretty far down that list.
You'd start with Texas and Oklahoma. You'd continue with Missouri. Even after that, there are other programs that might be a better model of success than Nebraska over the last five years.
Nebraska has actually been the picture of mediocrity over that span. Since the beginning of 2004, NU has a 34-26 record, including a 19-20 mark in the Big 12.
Heck, even Kansas actually has a better overall record in that span (35-25) -- and not many folks in black and gold are clamoring to make Kansas CU's new rival.
Believe me, nobody in the Dal Ward Center today is underestimating the importance of the Nebraska game. Nobody is suggesting that playing Nebraska is the same as playing Eastern Washington. The players and coaches know who Nebraska is, and very much want to win.
But in all honesty, beating Nebraska these days doesn't carry the same status that it did even six or seven years ago. It is in no way, shape or form a measuring stick of playing against the best.
Rather, the last few years it's become a way for Colorado to salvage a season -- and that's not what CU should be pursuing as an "end all."
The Huskers may indeed be an upper-tier team again someday. This year, though, they have just one victory -- against Kansas -- that would be considered a "quality" win. Otherwise, they're a team also trying to catch the big boys in the Big 12.
Fans may want Dan Hawkins to circle this game in red. But truth is, the Buffs shouldn't be satisfied with this being their biggest game of the year. McCartney set his sights on the best team in the conference -- today's Buffs should do the same.
Simply, lending a manufactured air of "do or die" to a slightly better-than-average Big 12 team is a sense of desperation that isn't necessary.
Save that attitude for the true red-letter affairs.
Woelk: Don't worry, Buffs know NU game is important
By Neill Woelk (Contact)
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Certain portions of Colorado football fans are apparently a tad upset with CU coach Dan Hawkins' philosophy of treating the Nebraska game, in the words of D-lineman George Hypolite, in a "business as usual" manner.
One former Buff player (who shall remain unnamed) even went as far as to drop an e-mail to the Camera suggesting, "You may think Nebraska is like any other game, but if you lose to Nebraska and finish at 50/50 or less, then we will have a new coach at Colorado that understands the importance of beating Nebraska."
My how time has fogged this former player's memory. If he and his teammates had been held to the same standard, they would have gotten a couple of coaches fired.
Hawk already has one more win over NU than this player experienced in his four years at Colorado -- and several years before and after.
Remember, Colorado once lost 18 in a row to the Huskers. After Eddie Crowder defeated Nebraska in 1967, CU didn't win a game in the series again until 1986, when Bill McCartney ended the losing streak in his fifth year in Boulder.
That's a span that included the last six years of Eddie Crowder's stay, all five years of the Bill Mallory era, three years of Chuck Fairbanks and the first four years of McCartney's regime.
All of those coaches may have understood the importance of beating Nebraska -- but it certainly didn't translate into too many victories.
Speaking of McCartney, it's also worth remembering that McCartney didn't actually declare NU as Colorado's "rival" when he arrived in Boulder.Rather, McCartney said Nebraska was the program Colorado should aspire to emulate. Mac wanted a standard by which to measure the Buffs, and he chose what was then one of the best programs in the nation.
Subsequently, he set the bar as high as possible and challenged the Buffs to reach it. That's where the "rivalry" began.
But circumstances are different today.
Let's be honest: If you were going to pick a program in the Big 12 to emulate, a program to use as a measuring stick, the Huskers would be pretty far down that list.
You'd start with Texas and Oklahoma. You'd continue with Missouri. Even after that, there are other programs that might be a better model of success than Nebraska over the last five years.
Nebraska has actually been the picture of mediocrity over that span. Since the beginning of 2004, NU has a 34-26 record, including a 19-20 mark in the Big 12.
Heck, even Kansas actually has a better overall record in that span (35-25) -- and not many folks in black and gold are clamoring to make Kansas CU's new rival.
Believe me, nobody in the Dal Ward Center today is underestimating the importance of the Nebraska game. Nobody is suggesting that playing Nebraska is the same as playing Eastern Washington. The players and coaches know who Nebraska is, and very much want to win.
But in all honesty, beating Nebraska these days doesn't carry the same status that it did even six or seven years ago. It is in no way, shape or form a measuring stick of playing against the best.
Rather, the last few years it's become a way for Colorado to salvage a season -- and that's not what CU should be pursuing as an "end all."
The Huskers may indeed be an upper-tier team again someday. This year, though, they have just one victory -- against Kansas -- that would be considered a "quality" win. Otherwise, they're a team also trying to catch the big boys in the Big 12.
Fans may want Dan Hawkins to circle this game in red. But truth is, the Buffs shouldn't be satisfied with this being their biggest game of the year. McCartney set his sights on the best team in the conference -- today's Buffs should do the same.
Simply, lending a manufactured air of "do or die" to a slightly better-than-average Big 12 team is a sense of desperation that isn't necessary.
Save that attitude for the true red-letter affairs.
