LandOf10: Iowa-Nebraska series sizzling toward rivalry status

[HuskerNBigD]

People need to get their heads out of the sand if they still consider Iowa the little brother / an inferior opponent. The elitist attitude is bullsh#t, especially since our last conference championship was 18 years ago.

 

[HuskerNBigD]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

Yeah, cause those wins pre-WWII hold a lot of clout/merit these days. If we're going off historical figures such as this, we need to still consider Minnesota a powerhouse.

And you can't say it isn't about little brother comments when half the responses on the board are typed in that manner. Most people scoff at Iowa being a rival, yet our series is even with them since joining the BIG.

 

[Redux]

I'm betting after 20 years of B1G membership, our overall series with Iowa looks pretty one sided.

 

[GBRFAN]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

 

[JJ Husker]

Ha, I like it. The little hard luck brother that didn't inherit any of the athletic genes (or smarts either). You know, the one that wears a bucket on his head and drools on himself while running into walls. Iowa.

 

[Mavric]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

Says it's about series wins.

Notes that the series has been pretty even over the lifetime of the people who can actually do something about it on the field.

Got it.

Also, I will be dreaming of the day when we can be considered as good of a football program as Minnesota. Since they've owned the overall series against us, that obviously makes them the better team.

And it's a good thing we don't have to play Pitt very often. They're obviously an incredibly better football program than we are.

 

[HuskerNBigD]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

Says it's about series wins.

Notes that the series has been pretty even over the lifetime of the people who can actually do something about it on the field.

Got it.

Also, I will be dreaming of the day when we can be considered as good of a football program as Minnesota. Since they've owned the overall series against us, that obviously makes them the better team.

And it's a good thing we don't have to play Pitt very often. They're obviously an incredibly better football program than we are.

Bingo!

 

[BigRedBuster]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

Really??? So, if Nebraska and Iowa were more even in wins in the series, then it would be a rivalry?

Nebraska leads Iowa in wins 29-15-3 .617

Since joining the Big 10 3-3 .500

Michigan leads MSU in wins 69-35-5 .633

Alabama leads Auburn in wins 45-35-1 .555

Not much difference.

 

[StPaulHusker]

The answer is somewhere in the middle.

Iowa is a "rival" in the sense that they're in our division, there's dislike between the fan bases and the games have an impact on divisional standings. Geography helps, to a degree.

However, in my opinion, it's an insignificant rivalry that's been heavily influenced by a corporate/conference desires to have a rivalry. It's inorganic. It's like calling American cheese... "cheese." Husker and Hawkeye fans have been treating each other like crap for decades, long before we had yearly games. That dislike doesn't make them rivals, in my opinion. Rivals need to be built on the field, not in the neighborhood bar.

I tend to agree with a lot of what you say but I disagree here. Aside from the corporate sponsorship. Which I hate but at least it's for a good cause.
The rivalry has been built organically (in a bar) for decades. And now we get to put our money where our mouths are and prove it on the field, court, diamond. THAT is a rivalry in every sense of the word.

Well that's why everyone gets to have their own opinion. You don't seem to like it when people disagree with yours. I agree with Enhanced and knapp on this one. I do not view Iowa as any kind of rival. Sure, lately we've struggled with them on the field and I hate losing to them but the same can be said for many other teams. Animosity towards a fanbase doesn't make it a rivalry. IMO there have to be some games of significance involved before any serious rivalry talk should ensue. That just hasn't been the case in this series.

If you want to consider Iowa as our rival, good for you, enjoy it. Don't demand that everyone else needs to feel the same way.

Yeah. no one is forcing anyone to do anything with regards to their feelings towards another team. So i think you can relax.

But animosity towards a fanbase definitely factors into a rivalry

 

[Nebfanatic]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

Really??? So, if Nebraska and Iowa were more even in wins in the series, then it would be a rivalry?
Nebraska leads Iowa in wins 29-15-3 .617

Since joining the Big 10 3-3 .500

Michigan leads MSU in wins 69-35-5 .633

Alabama leads Auburn in wins 45-35-1 .555

Not much difference.

stop comparing Nebraska-Iowa to the Iron Bowl please. It is not the same at all.

 

[StPaulHusker]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

Really??? So, if Nebraska and Iowa were more even in wins in the series, then it would be a rivalry?

Nebraska leads Iowa in wins 29-15-3 .617

Since joining the Big 10 3-3 .500

Michigan leads MSU in wins 69-35-5 .633

Alabama leads Auburn in wins 45-35-1 .555

Not much difference.

Nebraska leads Colorado 49-18-2 for that "rivalry"

 

[BigRedBuster]

It's not about being elitist. It's not about 'little brother' comments etc.

It's about overall series wins. If it were more even, there might be a rivalry. Until then, this is all that needs to be posted: http://www.winsipedia.com/nebraska/vs/iowa

^^^^ This right here is correct. The only reason it isn't more lopsided is that Iowa didn't face NU much between 1984 - 2010.

We lead the series 8-4 over the past 40 years and 5-3 over the past 20 years. Again it would be much worse if we would have played them multiple times between 1985 and 2010 ( there would have been a couple years in the early 2000's that they would have had a chance however even then it would have been a coin flip).

Really??? So, if Nebraska and Iowa were more even in wins in the series, then it would be a rivalry?
Nebraska leads Iowa in wins 29-15-3 .617

Since joining the Big 10 3-3 .500

Michigan leads MSU in wins 69-35-5 .633

Alabama leads Auburn in wins 45-35-1 .555

Not much difference.

stop comparing Nebraska-Iowa to the Iron Bowl please. It is not the same at all.

Sure, it's not as big of rivalry. Nobody is claiming that it is.

But, the excuses that come up as to why Iowa vs. Nebraska isn't a rivalry....don't really hold water when you compare those excuses to the other major rivalries around the sports world.

 

[Nebfanatic]

Well my excuse why it's not a rivalry is those other games. Sure our game could become that but right now it's not even close to any of the games ours have been put up against to try and decide if it's a "real rivalry". In my opinion, a real rivalry has no debate not just from the fan bases of the 2 schools but from fans of the game around the country. Does America consider this a rivalry?

 

[BigRedBuster]

Well my excuse why it's not a rivalry is those other games. Sure our game could become that but right now it's not even close to any of the games ours have been put up against to try and decide if it's a "real rivalry". In my opinion, a real rivalry has no debate not just from the fan bases of the 2 schools but from fans of the game around the country. Does America consider this a rivalry?

Is there a definite line in the sand to where America declares a game a "rivalry game"? When those games were early rivalries, I would bet money that their fan bases didn't give a flying rip if someone in California or New York or Nebraska cared about the game.

 

[Nebfanatic]

Well my excuse why it's not a rivalry is those other games. Sure our game could become that but right now it's not even close to any of the games ours have been put up against to try and decide if it's a "real rivalry". In my opinion, a real rivalry has no debate not just from the fan bases of the 2 schools but from fans of the game around the country. Does America consider this a rivalry?

Is there a definite line in the sand to where America declares a game a "rivalry game"? When those games were early rivalries, I would bet money that their fan bases didn't give a flying rip if someone in California or New York or Nebraska cared about the game.

maybe so but the point is I don't think it's a rivalry along with quite a few other people on this board alone, so I'm not sure how it can be called such when we can't even agree if it is one. Again, there is no such debate about games like Georgia and Florida.