Huskers and Adidas?

[kchusker_chris]

Wisconsin for sure, even TCU as far as I am concerned.

Oregon was lucky at California to.

They truly played no one. They beat Washington at their house, with Locker out, by less than we did. They are the media darlings replacing SC as far as I am concerned. I do not think anyone in the Pac10 this year is that great. I doubt Oregon or Stanford would have the records they have if they played in any other major conference.

There offensive gimmick is basiclly cheating as far as I am concerned. But I know it is legal. It is like a street fight where one guy gets hit before he expects anything. Legal, just not fair. My guess is they will look at it, but doubt it changes. Oklahoma uses it some to.

I think it will be a Auburn runaway. This will be the largest spread in awhile in the NC game.

They are too small to play with a very fast SEC defense or talented offense. I do not think the Auburn kids will run out of juice.

In honesty I hope I am totally wrong. Listening to the SEC/Finebuam idiots rant about 5 years is more than I can bear.

Wow - don't really know what to say here. Most of what you say could be taken as a dig to Bo and the Huskers. Isn't their offensive gimmick (which you say is cheating) - the offense we are trying to adopt? So we're going to be cheaters?

And lucky to beat Cal? Their QB was 10/28 for 69 yards. They had 120 yards of rushing. When you hold a team to 193 total yards of offense and win...that's not luck, that's called good defense...something Nebraska has relied on for 2 seasons now. Just because our offense can't score are all our wins now considered luck?

And you realize that Oregon's schedule is ranked #19 while Wisconsin's ranked #71, TCU's #80, Ohio State's #68 right? The entire basis for your argument is that they played no one...yet the very teams you think should replace them REALLY played no one. Since you're probably the same type of guy that says Boise State doesn't deserve to ever play in a title game I'll put it into persepective for you - Boise's schedule is ranked #70. Should they be in the title game instead?

Not sure how Sagarin's formula spit out that Oregon had the 19th strongest schedule, they played one team that won more than 8 games, and only one team in the Sagarin top 25.

Nebraska played #6, #9, #12 and #13 in the Sagarin ratings and is considered as the 28th toughest schedule? Sagarin's formula loves the Pac 10 for some reason, he ranks Oregon State as having the toughest schedule at #1, Washington as #2, Washington State as #3, UCLA as #4, Cal as #5, Arizona State as #6, USC as #7, Stanford as #10, Arizona as #12 and Oregon as 19th

Jeff Sagarin's formula has the Pac 10 as the best conference in the country which is an absolute joke. Basically it rewards a conference for having 2 top teams, 7 mediocre teams and 1 really bad team.

I don't think he forumlates his rankings based on his own rankings though. It's probably based on AP Rank, wins/losses, homefield advantage, etc. Oregon State definately had one of the hardest schedules in college football this year. They played the current #2, #3, #10, & #5 teams. Oregon played at Tennessee, at Arizona State, at USC, at Cal, at Oregon State, Standford home. He does heavily favor the pac 10 this year for some reason. Regarless, it's still kind of the industry standard everyone references. Big12 had it's fair share of really bad teams this year so I wouldn't expect our SoS to be that high.

Ohio State only played 1 team in current top 25 and lost. The rest included Marshal, Miami, Ohio, Eastern Mich, Illinios, INdiana, Purdue, Minnesota, Penn State, @Iowa, Michigan. Iowa is probably the most respectable of the bunch with 7 wins.

Wisconsin was similar, playing at Michigan State and losing, beating Ohio State. Otherwise UNLV, San Jose State, Arizona State, Austin Peay, Minnesota, @Iowa, Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, Nortwestern. The Big10 teams this year only had to play MAYBE 1-2 solid oponents, otherwise they walked through their schedule (just like Boise State does). We'll find out a little more during the bowls I guess.

 

[nhuskers5]

All i know is that Boise States Pro Combat jerseys are freaking legit

 

[CornHOLIO]

What is so attractive about NIKE?? I'm glad were with ADIDAS, NIKE is all hype and flash. Their shoes and clothes are over priced crap.

Our '80's Nike unis were our best imho.

roger craig

 

[74Hunter]

Nike would be nice, and you know Tom would say the only alternate jerseys we would wear would be throwbacks... which are awesome when done by Nike.

Also, of the past 13 BCS national championship games, only ONE team has won that has not been sponsored by Nike (Tennessee in 1998) and they were the ONLY team not sponsored by Nike to even APPEAR in the game until this year with Auburn (Under Armor). Statistically, Nike wins championships.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't NU play in the BCS game in 2001, and we wore Adidas?

 

[husker_hurdler]

:backtotopic

 

[skersfan]

Wisconsin for sure, even TCU as far as I am concerned.

Oregon was lucky at California to.

They truly played no one. They beat Washington at their house, with Locker out, by less than we did. They are the media darlings replacing SC as far as I am concerned. I do not think anyone in the Pac10 this year is that great. I doubt Oregon or Stanford would have the records they have if they played in any other major conference.

There offensive gimmick is basiclly cheating as far as I am concerned. But I know it is legal. It is like a street fight where one guy gets hit before he expects anything. Legal, just not fair. My guess is they will look at it, but doubt it changes. Oklahoma uses it some to.

I think it will be a Auburn runaway. This will be the largest spread in awhile in the NC game.

They are too small to play with a very fast SEC defense or talented offense. I do not think the Auburn kids will run out of juice.

In honesty I hope I am totally wrong. Listening to the SEC/Finebuam idiots rant about 5 years is more than I can bear.

Wow - don't really know what to say here. Most of what you say could be taken as a dig to Bo and the Huskers. Isn't their offensive gimmick (which you say is cheating) - the offense we are trying to adopt? So we're going to be cheaters?

And lucky to beat Cal? Their QB was 10/28 for 69 yards. They had 120 yards of rushing. When you hold a team to 193 total yards of offense and win...that's not luck, that's called good defense...something Nebraska has relied on for 2 seasons now. Just because our offense can't score are all our wins now considered luck?

And you realize that Oregon's schedule is ranked #19 while Wisconsin's ranked #71, TCU's #80, Ohio State's #68 right? The entire basis for your argument is that they played no one...yet the very teams you think should replace them REALLY played no one. Since you're probably the same type of guy that says Boise State doesn't deserve to ever play in a title game I'll put it into persepective for you - Boise's schedule is ranked #70. Should they be in the title game instead?

I am talking about the hurry up where the defense is not allowed to adjust. Keeping the defense in the wrong package so to speak. I know it is legal, but it is taking advantage of the system I think. My personal oppinion.

Cal missing the field goal is what I was talking about. I think, could be wrong, that when Cal missed the field goal, his first of the year I think, the team lost its composure. Had they made it, they might have stopped Oregon from driving down and scoring.

They played one team with a good record, that would be Stanford who played the exact same group of teams. How they got the rating they got is beyond belief as far as I am concerned. I would bet if Nebraska played the exact same schedule we would not be ranked like that. I do not understand the rankings. I am not questioning you on that as I have heard those lofty rankings before.

Arizona, USC, Stanford were the only winning teams other than break even teams. Some were the worst in college football.

Not an attack on Nebraska, I just think the Ducks are way over rated, just like last year, and we know what Ohio State did to them. My guess is this will be one of the worst beatdowns in BCS history.

I think Boise or TCU are good enough to play with anyone in the country, but I do not think they earn the right to play a Auburn, Oklahoma or several others with their schedules. One game knock out punch so to speak.

I have no problems with the offense Bo runs or wants to. You have never heard me say a negative word about it or Watson's running of it. I know it takes certain athletes to do certain things. I am not qualified to know if we have those players or not. I leave those things to the coaching staff.

But I do watch more than Nebraska, every weekend of the year. I follow many different schools.

 

[CornKing]

I've been watching this thread but unable to post from work.

Nebraska left Nike because Adidas offered more money. There are 2 ways to look at this

1. (Once again my opinion) Adidas may offer more $ but the fan bases loses out on more availability of fan gear. The team also loses out on the technology Nike uses in everything from the socks to the helmets to improve performance.

2. If they go with Nike they may get less money coming in to the team.(not sure on figures...I don't know them) Nike does like to put their stamp on everything so they may want to alter things. But, you have to remember Nebraska was the team we know and love when they had Nike Sponsor them before.

I would vote Nike in a heartbeat as long as we don't change too much. But, I doubt Dr. Tom would let them change much.

 

[huskerSoldier321]

What is so attractive about NIKE?? I'm glad were with ADIDAS, NIKE is all hype and flash. Their shoes and clothes are over priced crap.

Our '80's Nike unis were our best imho.

roger craig

What happen to tradition? I guess they didn't care back then when they switch to adidas. I'm all for us getting a NIKE deal. Adidas fan aparral sucks.

 

[Landlord]

What is so attractive about NIKE?? I'm glad were with ADIDAS, NIKE is all hype and flash. Their shoes and clothes are over priced crap.

Our '80's Nike unis were our best imho.

roger craig

What happen to tradition? I guess they didn't care back then when they switch to adidas. I'm all for us getting a NIKE deal. Adidas fan aparral sucks.

Adidas isn't the tradition, traditional, practical uniform designs are. Most people seem to be under the impression that Nike and that tradition are antonyms of one another.

 

[HuskerNMO]

What is so attractive about NIKE?? I'm glad were with ADIDAS, NIKE is all hype and flash. Their shoes and clothes are over priced crap.

Our '80's Nike unis were our best imho.

roger craig

That's a Russel jersey, the shoes were Nike.

Devaney started getting Husker jerseys from Russell back in the mid 60's, we wore them for almost 30 years until we signed a contract with Apex in 1994 that began in 1995. The 1995 Orange Bowl actually had an interesting jersey history, both Russell and Apex sent us jerseys for the game, and the players were allowed to choose which one to wear. Some wore one the first half, another the second. Nebraska wore Apex jerseys for the first week of the season in 1995, but Apex sold out to Converse in August so we turned to Adidas, the rest has been history.

Here's a video of our 95 opener at OSU when we had no jersey logo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6Rr4oL5UwQ

In this video you can see no logo on week 1 jersey again, but week 2 against Michigan State the Adidas logo is there, plus it's a killer video of the greatest college football team ever.

 

[huskerSoldier321]

What is so attractive about NIKE?? I'm glad were with ADIDAS, NIKE is all hype and flash. Their shoes and clothes are over priced crap.

Our '80's Nike unis were our best imho.

roger craig

What happen to tradition? I guess they didn't care back then when they switch to adidas. I'm all for us getting a NIKE deal. Adidas fan aparral sucks.

Adidas isn't the tradition, traditional, practical uniform designs are. Most people seem to be under the impression that Nike and that tradition are antonyms of one another.

I like to argue that change is the tradition. I think its time to make changes to the uniforms. New conference, new start, new uniforms, same husker spirit. I am bored with the same old husker uniforms. I'm sure I'll get some negative responses for this post. But change always comes with time. We look too much like Wisconsin. Cornhuskers are a brand name. Not a generic team. As long as that N stays the same on the side of the helmets. I think change is needed.

 

[mmmtodd]

thats a great post jliehr. i knew we had russell jerseys in the past because they were the ones that accidentally invented the infamous "tear-away" duds, but didnt know much about the rest of the timeline.

 

[HuskerNMO]

What is so attractive about NIKE?? I'm glad were with ADIDAS, NIKE is all hype and flash. Their shoes and clothes are over priced crap.

Our '80's Nike unis were our best imho.

roger craig

What happen to tradition? I guess they didn't care back then when they switch to adidas. I'm all for us getting a NIKE deal. Adidas fan aparral sucks.

Adidas isn't the tradition, traditional, practical uniform designs are. Most people seem to be under the impression that Nike and that tradition are antonyms of one another.

I like to argue that change is the tradition. I think its time to make changes to the uniforms. New conference, new start, new uniforms, same husker spirit. I am bored with the same old husker uniforms. I'm sure I'll get some negative responses for this post. But change always comes with time. We look too much like Wisconsin. Cornhuskers are a brand name. Not a generic team. As long as that N stays the same on the side of the helmets. I think change is needed.

Huh? Change is needed? But the helmet needs to stay the same?

 

[skersfan]

Personally I really do not care as long as our school colors are adhered to. Nike has some good looking stuff, but I do not want Nebraska to be the test bed of their wacky designers.

I am not saying the uniforms can not change, but the basics are still there. Anyone looking at the game will know it is Nebraska in a matter of seconds. I see no reason Wisconsin could not change theirs either.

Actually I think Oregon wore the same uniform minus the day glow socks and shoes their last game. They were good looking if you were a raiders fan. I liked the carbon fiber helmet look, but it did not scream Oregon to me. Oregon has some good looking uniforms when they stick with the Green and Yellow I think. Quite bright and flashy.

The N is a trademark so to speak, so are the red and white of Nebraska. GM, Ford, IBM do not change their logos on a daily basis, I do not think we should either.

That is for wannabees, and that is exactly what I classify Oregon as.

 

[HuskerNMO]

Personally I really do not care as long as our school colors are adhered to. Nike has some good looking stuff, but I do not want Nebraska to be the test bed of their wacky designers.

I am not saying the uniforms can not change, but the basics are still there. Anyone looking at the game will know it is Nebraska in a matter of seconds. I see no reason Wisconsin could not change theirs either.

Actually I think Oregon wore the same uniform minus the day glow socks and shoes their last game. They were good looking if you were a raiders fan. I liked the carbon fiber helmet look, but it did not scream Oregon to me. Oregon has some good looking uniforms when they stick with the Green and Yellow I think. Quite bright and flashy.

The N is a trademark so to speak, so are the red and white of Nebraska. GM, Ford, IBM do not change their logos on a daily basis, I do not think we should either.

That is for wannabees, and that is exactly what I classify Oregon as.

Oregon's throwback they wore vs Cal was great IMO. Switch the green with Scarlet and the yellow with creme and you have a Nike jersey that I think any Husker purist would be proud of.