Debate: What advantages does the Nebraska job have over the Oklahoma job

[kchusker_chris]

What matters is who we have rosteredWe have more Texans rostered now, than we did back then when we played in the Texas Conference;

http://www.huskers.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=100&SPID=22&SPSID=4

http://www.huskers.c...8;Q_SEASON=2004

Firstly, your vitriol isn't very becoming. I find it odd that people who disagree keep insulting my team, when my point is not relevant to them in any way nor is my position couched in any sort of mean way, so...

Back to an attempt at discussion.

I would remind you that rosters lag years after recruiting. You were either in another conference when a lot if your current Texas kids came or still had good ties briefly thereafter. When we are tracking recruiting, I think the recruits you get are the measure. I am sorry You don't like my conclusion, but the Landlord has the same data I do and I think it is a clear trend. Again, not saying that is the end all to have more Texas kids, but it is one thing to note brought on for a logical reason.

So let me get this straight:

We joined the Big 12 in 1996

8 years later we have 9 kids from Texas on the roster

11 years later we have 11 kids from Texas on the roster

We leave the Big 12 and join the B1G in 2010

We now have 15 Kids from Texas on the Roster

What matters is who we roster- how many stick with the program

Also what is ALL THE FUSS about when it comes to Texas players?

We won ALL THOSE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS with very few kids from Texas on the team

In fact we did better when we had fewer Texans, not more

Our winning % was much higher in the years leading up to the Big12- than in the Big 12 and getting all those great Texas numbers

Texas kids- great

Being obcessed with them- nahh

Look how many NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS the University of Texas has won since 1971 having the pick of the litter of kids in Texas- ONE TITLE, how embarrassing for them

Meanwhile lil ol Nebraska with a lot less $$ and just a tiny handfull of Texans on it's rosters won 5 National Titles and played for a bunch of others in that very same time period

 

[Redmusky]

Main reason OU has it better in the recruiting battles is ,OU has a better Lexus dealership.

 

[jmfb]

Interesting deal:

Texas, Texas A&M, Baylor, TCU, Houston, Texas Tech and Rice have combined to win ONE National Championship in the last 50+ years of college football

They havent even been close most years

Even with all the cheating, grand facilities, $$$ and all those great Texas players etc

 

[Landlord]

Interesting deal:

Texas, Texas A&M, Baylor, TCU, Houston, Texas Tech and Rice have combined to win ONE National Championship in the last 50+ years of college football

They havent even been close most years

Even with all the cheating, grand facilities, $$$ and all those great Texas players etc

Hope you realize you're the only person here making a big deal out of this.

 

[okaive]

What matters is who we have rostered

No, what matters is how many kids from Texas we are recruiting now vs. before. Quit the strawman and try to keep up, would you? Read what he posted (and you attacked) again:

I just observed, factually, you are getting less recruits from there now, which should not be a surprise.

He said we are getting less recruits from Texas than we were before. This is true. I have proven this to be true with statistics. He never said we have less kids from Texas on the roster than we did before. Do you see how that is a separate statement with a different meaning?

What's funny is that he still doesn't get it.