New Trophy Game vs. Wisconsin

[GSG]

UAB and Memphis might have one of my favorite trophies:

"Battle for the Bones"

 

[sd'sker]

UAB and Memphis might have one of my favorite trophies:

"Battle for the Bones"

they should play for this in the "battle for the bones":

 

[knapplc]

I am sure the first 5 years those were introduced people didnt care.. takes time for these things to become meaningful... if the trophy is something unique ala the axe) eventually people might care.

The Governor's Cup rivalry has roots to the 1800s, so those fans were invested in it from the beginning. Paul Bunyan's Axe dates to the 1940s, replacing the old "slab of bacon" (not kidding) trophy, so there's another the fans have been invested in since the inception.

Basically what I'm saying is, don't say, "Here's a rivalry and here's the trophy you're going to play for, so start caring.... NOW!" Let it grow, let the trophy have some kind of meaning, let the rivalry actually matter before starting up these trophy games. It makes more sense and feels more natural.

Within the 3 yrs since being in the B1G, we have played Wisky 3X and two of those games resulted in an introductory slap in the face to the B1G and prolonging our drought of conference championships. For me, I am looking for a little payback this year, and with the Nebraska vs Wisky game coming at the end of the year, both being in this three-horse race for the West, this game can have division title implications.

Looking beyond this year, Nebraska and Wisky looked primed to be the top two teams in the B1G West each year. We will see them every year now, and that game will most likely have defacto B1G West Champion implications for nearly every year. Rivals are built in this pressure cooker situations.

I like that the game now has a trophy. It will only fuel the rivalry during the off-season when teams seem it, or don't.

Trophies don't fuel rivalries. History fuels rivalries. Trophies follow (should follow) history.

We could make Purdue a trophy game, but odds are that we're going to truck Purdue the next dozen times we play them. Having a trophy attached to that game won't make it any more "meh."

Again, we played Missouri for a trophy for decades. Most nobody in Nebraska knew anything about it because we beat their butts 24 straight years and 28 of the last 32 times we played them. That game was meaningless, and the trophy didn't add a thing to it. What added to it was 2003 when they beat us for the first time since the Carter Administration, but by that time nobody had the faintest idea there was a trophy at stake.

Quick test for anyone who thinks simply adding a trophy to a game makes it a rivalry - without google, what was the name of the Nebraska/Missouri rivalry?

 

[papersun87]

^Back in 2011 there was a joke circulating the internet that they were naming the trophy "the Brass Sandbag," which actually seemed perfect.

 

[MR Red]

UAB and Memphis might have one of my favorite trophies:

"Battle for the Bones"

This is the greatest trophy ever!

 

[NUpolo8]

I am sure the first 5 years those were introduced people didnt care.. takes time for these things to become meaningful... if the trophy is something unique ala the axe) eventually people might care.

The Governor's Cup rivalry has roots to the 1800s, so those fans were invested in it from the beginning. Paul Bunyan's Axe dates to the 1940s, replacing the old "slab of bacon" (not kidding) trophy, so there's another the fans have been invested in since the inception.

Basically what I'm saying is, don't say, "Here's a rivalry and here's the trophy you're going to play for, so start caring.... NOW!" Let it grow, let the trophy have some kind of meaning, let the rivalry actually matter before starting up these trophy games. It makes more sense and feels more natural.

Within the 3 yrs since being in the B1G, we have played Wisky 3X and two of those games resulted in an introductory slap in the face to the B1G and prolonging our drought of conference championships. For me, I am looking for a little payback this year, and with the Nebraska vs Wisky game coming at the end of the year, both being in this three-horse race for the West, this game can have division title implications.
Looking beyond this year, Nebraska and Wisky looked primed to be the top two teams in the B1G West each year. We will see them every year now, and that game will most likely have defacto B1G West Champion implications for nearly every year. Rivals are built in this pressure cooker situations.

I like that the game now has a trophy. It will only fuel the rivalry during the off-season when teams seem it, or don't.

Trophies don't fuel rivalries. History fuels rivalries. Trophies follow (should follow) history.

We could make Purdue a trophy game, but odds are that we're going to truck Purdue the next dozen times we play them. Having a trophy attached to that game won't make it any more "meh."

Again, we played Missouri for a trophy for decades. Most nobody in Nebraska knew anything about it because we beat their butts 24 straight years and 28 of the last 32 times we played them. That game was meaningless, and the trophy didn't add a thing to it. What added to it was 2003 when they beat us for the first time since the Carter Administration, but by that time nobody had the faintest idea there was a trophy at stake.

Quick test for anyone who thinks simply adding a trophy to a game makes it a rivalry - without google, what was the name of the Nebraska/Missouri rivalry?

Victory Bell.

And honestly I didn't know it existed until I was walking to class from my Fraternity house in January 1999 and a bunch of Mizzou people were in town for some random thing and they had written in chalk all over the sidewalks on the old union entrance about the Bell. Come to find out it was sitting in the Wick directly across the street from me the whole time.

But I digress....

Rivalries are organic and cyclical, in the 70's the Dodgers and Reds had a blood feud going because they were playing for the NL pennant on a yearly basis. Obviously that's quelled now, but regardless of either teams success, the years of playing the Giants have turned that into one of the biggest rivalries in sports.

(Related: f#*k the Giants and their fans in their miserable ears)

So now, Wisconsin has pulled a train on us two out of the three times we've played, and I would hope Nebraska is pretty salty over that. Wisconsin, well they probably are copping the same attitude that we copped with Colorado. Which I would hope would add to the sodium level as well. Beating them in Madison, trophy or not, will help this along, just like it helped when Nebraska won 30-3 in 05 after CU had some fun for a few years.

 

[Thanks_Tom RR]

I am sure the first 5 years those were introduced people didnt care.. takes time for these things to become meaningful... if the trophy is something unique ala the axe) eventually people might care.

The Governor's Cup rivalry has roots to the 1800s, so those fans were invested in it from the beginning. Paul Bunyan's Axe dates to the 1940s, replacing the old "slab of bacon" (not kidding) trophy, so there's another the fans have been invested in since the inception.
Basically what I'm saying is, don't say, "Here's a rivalry and here's the trophy you're going to play for, so start caring.... NOW!" Let it grow, let the trophy have some kind of meaning, let the rivalry actually matter before starting up these trophy games. It makes more sense and feels more natural.

Within the 3 yrs since being in the B1G, we have played Wisky 3X and two of those games resulted in an introductory slap in the face to the B1G and prolonging our drought of conference championships. For me, I am looking for a little payback this year, and with the Nebraska vs Wisky game coming at the end of the year, both being in this three-horse race for the West, this game can have division title implications.
Looking beyond this year, Nebraska and Wisky looked primed to be the top two teams in the B1G West each year. We will see them every year now, and that game will most likely have defacto B1G West Champion implications for nearly every year. Rivals are built in this pressure cooker situations.

I like that the game now has a trophy. It will only fuel the rivalry during the off-season when teams seem it, or don't.

Trophies don't fuel rivalries. History fuels rivalries. Trophies follow (should follow) history.

We could make Purdue a trophy game, but odds are that we're going to truck Purdue the next dozen times we play them. Having a trophy attached to that game won't make it any more "meh."

Again, we played Missouri for a trophy for decades. Most nobody in Nebraska knew anything about it because we beat their butts 24 straight years and 28 of the last 32 times we played them. That game was meaningless, and the trophy didn't add a thing to it. What added to it was 2003 when they beat us for the first time since the Carter Administration, but by that time nobody had the faintest idea there was a trophy at stake.

Quick test for anyone who thinks simply adding a trophy to a game makes it a rivalry - without google, what was the name of the Nebraska/Missouri rivalry?

Trophies do not equal Rivals. I completely agree with you there. What I am saying is a rivalry is already brewing (the NU-UW game is the game that fires me up most this year) and is all-but-inevitable with the new division break up and Nebraska and Wisconsin being the two best teams in the B1G West. Thus, from my perspective, the B1G merely jumped the gun a little and included a trophy to this game, but I have no complaints. Now, if you have no bad-blood with Wisconsin currently and/or don't think a rivalry will be solidified in the next couple of years, then I see why you would view this trophy as a complete waste of time.
I say...let The Quick & The Red series continue!

 

[knapplc]

I agree with you that the rivalry with Wiscy is brewing. We owe them something fierce. Let's let that brew for a few years and see where we are, that's the best option in my opinion.

 

[Redux]

Is Wisconsin v Nebraska a rivalry? No. Does adding a trophy make it a rivalry? No.

Now that thats settled. I wonder what exactly they intend to do with this series? The Heroes Game concept was trying way too hard to fake importance. They had to beat us before it even mattered a smidge.

 

[Abdullah the Butcher]

When is CNN giving us a trophy of Ted Turner for the Illinois game?

 

[hskrfan4life]

I really liked the idea of PSU becoming our main rival. Geograohy hurt the series alot but you cant tell me a channel surfing football fan wont stop to watch NU vs PSU. And, in three years PSU was the only other team besides NW to play us close every time, minus beating us.

i agree with that. we had history, we were on opposite sides of the conference geographically (which means something, i think), and we were both outsiders in the big 10 (again, figuratively as well as literally). i thought that could have been a good one.

I am going to miss playing Penn State every year.

 

[HUSKER FREAK]

I can't get the image of a little Barry Alvarez trophy out of my mind

The similarity is remarkable.

_____

Holy sh#t that's funny!!!!!!!

 

[JJ Husker]

Simply throwing a trophy into the mix doesn't make it rivalry. As others have said, these things come about organically and any efforts to force the issue seem silly, desperate, and contrived. But, on the positive side, if NU-UW does grow into a rivalry (which I think a lot of people would like to see), twenty years down the road this trophy may have some relevance and we then may appreciate having more years of history to claim. I guess it's not hurting anything at this point in time but I sure don't expect it to mean much to anyone for quite some time, if ever.

 

[walksalone]

Great, another trophy game, quit trying to force rivalries B1G! Just let them happen over time and develop over time!

x 10000

 

[Hooked on Huskers]

Another project in Junior High shop. Already completed Heroes Trophy.

:facepalm:

:facepalm: . Plastic football toy covered in silver spray paint.