Bowl games, even lower level ones, are the norm at Iowa.
In Lincoln, since Solich left, Detroit and NYC are the ceiling, and not taken for granted.
Ask your grandpa what it was like when Nebraska was a respectable program.
Big 12 Sues Texas Tech, Sorsby Gone
- Thread starter RikeMiley
- Start date
In Lincoln, since Solich left, Detroit and NYC are the ceiling, and not taken for granted.
Ask your grandpa what it was like when Nebraska was a respectable program.
Honestly, I still don't buy that they are both true. If you actually have competent people making sound hiring decisions, the conference affiliation becomes a non-issue. Nebraska could have won at a relatively high level in the Big Ten. The problem is we spent two decades sabotaging ourselves from the top down.
Look at the timeline. This didn't start with the Big Ten move. The crap started in the Big 12. Steve Pedersen butchered the Frank Solich situation and made a mess of the coaching search after that. This is proof that bad leadership can sink this program in any conference.
Then look at the actual transition from Big 12 to Big 10. Bo Pelini won 9 or 10 games practically every year, regardless of whether we were playing in the Big 12 or the Big Ten. The conference change didn't stop him from winning. What actually broke the program was poor hiring decisions. Bringing in Shawn Eichorst and allowing him to create a toxic environment in the athletic department directly led to Pelini leaving. That fractured relationship started a total administrative snowball effect, and we've been paying for it since.
At the end of the day, a conference change is just a backdrop. Bad hires were the cause of the downfall in my opinion.
Hilarious! Nearly every person on this board personally witnessed championships. Iowa … you won the orange bowl that one time.
so can we start punishing every player for doing things they're not legally old enough to do now?
If I find out Trae Taylor has ever consumed alcohol, frankly I want him behind bars
If I find out Trae Taylor has ever consumed alcohol, frankly I want him behind bars
Callahan, Pelini, Cotton, Riley, Frost, Joseph, Ruhle...that's just the list since 2016!
Impressive collection of dogcrap.
Impressive collection of dogcrap.
Wasn't Pelini 3-1 vs Iowa? I don't know, check my numbers.
Nebraska would probably be the biggest brand in the new Big 12 if we still carry enough weight but 3rd or 4th in money by my guess. Texas Tech would not be there in this scenario I suppose but them and the Mormons are above us for sure, Utah might also be higher with their Mormons and private equity.
Last edited:
OK, let's try an easier path.
1) Do you think we'd end up better (let's say 10-15 years down the road) going back to the B12 if TT were kicked out?
2) How do you think losing $50M per year would affect the AD?
Nobody is acting like that.
People do realize though that the Big 2 are going to be completely and utterly in power for the next couple decades at least (barring some crazy collapse or new formation)
Exactly. Nebraska's decline and joining the B1G are not causal. Just happened at the same time.
Nobody has said it was causal. Very odd that you two invented an imaginary argument to be pissy over.
The idea of the B1G and SEC being an exclusive league of its own is a fairly popular sentiment if you take your head out of the sand.
What hat am I hanging other than pointing out something that didn't fit with the rest of your post? Pelini was a psycho, but he won games at about the same clip as Ferentz. The rest of those clowns shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Bo. See, I'm not a dickhead Anon troll who is only interested in beating my meat over my loser football program. I'm more reality based.Yeah, hang your hat on that!
Loser!
There is a very clear case being made that moving to the B1G has resulted in us not winning in football.
There is the idea of the B1G and SEC forming a super league, but it doesn't involve 30 teams lol
It would involve something like 64 teams.
No there wasn't. The case was "the extra money from the B1G hasn't resulted in a happier fandom".
The annual shitkicking we receive from the conference titans (even mediocre Minnesota/Iowa) doesn't feel nearly as good as beating Colorado did in 2024.
Do you disagree?
Oh, so it is being said?
There are currently 34 teams between the two conferences.
a couple decades is a very long time relative to how quickly things are changing in college sports.
only a fool would consider today's reality a semi-permanent status quo.
I don't know why we would compare the worst losses to some of the best wins, what an odd way to make a comparison.
We have sucked, thus our experience has been worse. But it has nothing to do with being in the B1G...and yes you are making that conclusion, otherwise you wouldn't be claiming that moving back would be better LOL
"Comparing things is an odd way to make a comparison"
Be serious, we're adults here
Still didn't say it did, you're arguing with yourself.
Signing up for a marathon doesn't make you fat or skinny.
Suggesting to a fat person that they'd have better luck at a 5k doesn't indicate they were made fat by signing up for a marathon.
I listed seven, count em seven, HCs/Interim that have led the Huskers since the AD fired the best coach the Huskers have had since TO.
And yet you mentioned the one guy of those that was remotely successful.
That's definitely "hanging your hat".
I get it, Husker fans are STARVING for relevance.
Too bad that the AD will have another HC search in 1-2 years.
Go back to the Big12. Texas and Oklahoma are gone.
It's safe.
BTW: I'd love to continue this conversation, but you fellas seem to have run out of ammo.
Last edited:
Pelini had a better winning percentage at Nebraska than Ferentz has at Iowa (head to head AND vs the field). If Pelini (.713) was only "remotely successful".... what's that say about your guy (.625)?
What position am I arguing here (hint: none)? I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your posts based on actual facts.
Hard to say. I can say that the football team hasn't won jack **** in the Big 10. To say hey look at us, we've got more revenue than Iowa State and Kansas State is silly. Or when posters come on here and brag about the Big 10 doing better than the SEC in the draft and with recent national titles. Who gives a ****? We ain't contributing anything to that.
It's neat that you think that. But who knows what the future of college football looks like in 20 years (at least)?
You seem all in on being a bottom half dwelling team at the big boy table for the last 15 and hopefully the next 20 years. That doesn't do much for me, personally. But you do you, my friend.
Edit: Never mind. I just read the other responses and other posters have summed it all up for you. I can't say it any better.
Last edited:
I support this.
Since leaving the Big 12, we’ve seen a major drop-off in recruiting across Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and St. Louis, and we have yet to gain any real traction in states like Ohio and Michigan.
Only an idiot would think it’s not a massive advantage to tell recruits they'll be playing close to home once or twice a year. While we might still land a few kids from those regions, we aren't pulling them in like we used to.
But...but...but...we have a seat at the big boy table. We are so much better than Utah (oops), TCU, Texas Tech, etc. We're like Rutgers and Maryland. That's worth celebrating. Because...uh...uh...uh...have you seen our B1G media check? It may not have meant anything in the last 15 years, but I bet it means something in the next 20 plus.
At
the time we moved conferences the selling point is all the games would be televised so family and friends can see them every Saturday, which was not the norm in those days.
This is a chicken or egg. We don’t do a lot of things like we used to because we have been a bad football program. Bad football is bad football regardless of conference. Maybe I’ve the last 8 years we win a game or two more but I wouldn’t have counted on it. Just last year we barely scraped by a middle of the pack Big12 team and got Curb stomped by the 3rd best team in the conference.
We all want to blame the move to the Big10 but given the current climate would it be better to suck in the Big12 or Suck in the Big10? Because those are the options. There is no world where we are competing for playoffs if we were in the Big12 all these years.
It would be worse with less revenue
I've already answered that and to reiterate, unequivocally give me sucking in the Bg 12 over sucking in the B1G. For the retained rivalries, better road games and socially like-minded opponents alone. Never mind the potential for actually having a little more success.
I have zero doubt that I would have had more fun as a fan the last 15 years in the Big 12 than I have in the B1G, all other things being equal. And I think anyone who says otherwise is a liar.
Worse how? Please elaborate. Because that's saying the Big 12 is better than the B1G which might backfire on you. So, better be careful here.
Scott Frost returned to the Big 12 and immediately replicated his best Nebraska record, with considerably less talent.
If only we'd had someone with the 20 plus year foresight of someone like @sklarbodds at that time. I'm sure he would have told us all that would be completely meaningless because they'd all be televised in the next couple years and urged us to stay in the Big 12. Oh wait...that doesn't really pencil out does it?
Ask anyone working in the athletic department on those bloated salaries and they would agree with you. There are people over their making six figures who haven't put in an honest days work in months. If ever.