I think Osborne does not have an ego as you mentioned. That said he was more concerned that his legacy team was slipping away in the B12, so he changed leagues. It did not help. They are still third or fourth in BIG in terms of noteriety.
***OFFICIAL BIG 12 EXPANSION THREAD 2.0***
- Thread starter Boxerdaddy
- Start date
- Status
What's their long term plan in football?
-Tradition sells less and less each year as the 90s fade further away.
-Lincoln is a less appealing school and city in many ways, further from Big Ten's biggest markets than any other team.
-They can't sell that they regularly play in Texas anymore.
-Easiest thing to fix, but their coach is incredibly unlikeable.
-Their schedule just got a lot more boring playing Mich, OSU and Penn State less often and mixing in occasional games with Rutgers and Maryland.
I'm shocked they haven't fallen off further or faster, I basically view them as at a substantial disadvantage to Wisconsin, a slight disadvantage to Iowa (not yet but long term) and can't even bring up OSU, Mich, PSU. I don't think they'd be lighting the world on fire if they were playing the current 10 teams in the Big 12, but I think their football program would be stronger in the long run for it.
The reason that Nebraska was leaving was NOT because they would never be on an equal or greater footing than Texas. You keep repeating that. That is NOT the reason.
The reason for leaving had NOTHING to do with the amount of money that Texas was getting. And that is why people are telling you that you are wrong.
What do you think it was than? I stated that they left to get a bigger piece by sharing in the B1G than unequal revenue in the Big 12. You don't think during the formative years of the Big 12 that Nebraska thought it would be the big dog? You underestimate their ego. I used to live near Lincoln, if they thought Texas would end up in the position they did they would never have supported the movement toward it, their ego blinded them all along.
Coming to the realization that Texas was always going to be at a significant advantage over Nebraska, under the rules Nebraska had supported, most definitely played into both the instability of the conference and Neb jumping.
It had NOTHING to do with what Texas was getting. It had EVERYTHING to do with what Nebraska was getting. Nebraska felt they would get more money in the Big Ten versus the money they would get in the Big 12. So they moved when they were offered.
It had NOTHING to do with what Texas, Oklahoma, or anyone else's revenue. Nebraska simply felt that they would increase THEIR revenue. And they felt that Texas or Oklahoma would do the same if given the opportunity and leave them high and dry. So they left.
It's been four years since Nebraska left for t[FONT="]h[/FONT]e Bi[FONT="]g[/FONT] Ten. Can we move on? T[FONT="]h[/FONT]e obsession wit[FONT="]h[/FONT] w[FONT="]h[/FONT]y t[FONT="]h[/FONT]ey left and takin[FONT="]g[/FONT] endless s[FONT="]hots at t[/FONT][FONT="]hem [/FONT]just s[FONT="][/FONT]creams jilted ex syndrome. [FONT="]g[/FONT]et over it
As far as Nebraska and their ego. Yes. I think that Nebraska considered themselves to be the Top Dog in the Big 12. Or at least one of the Top Dogs. And I think that Nebraska considers themselves to be the Top Dog or one of the Top Dogs in the Big Ten. That is fading fast however. Nebraska is clearly not the Top Dog or one of the Elite teams in the Big Ten. They are a notch below at this point.
I am not obsessed. Really care less about Nebraska. Talking about why they left has little to do with what you are claiming. IMO, they are turning into a very average team in a very average conference that is becoming weaker with the adding of additional weak programs.
.....and I'm OK with that. From the beginning it seemed obvious that a move to the Big 10 would hurt the football program. Every year and every new alternate uniform later shows the slide into middle of the pack status for the Bugeaters
It may not be the major reason, but it was true they were sinking in the B12. You have to have your head buried in the sand not to hear the Nebraska faithful groan about another b12 loss.
We do not move on like we keep watching Tiger Woods. We watch the Huskers flounder in a couple games each year. They are not the Huskers of the nineties.
Like I said we agree, combine your last two posts and it's what I was saying in both my posts.
There's no guarantee they'd be better off in the B12 either. What would you pick in the long run? A 10-35% bump in TV revenue or a conference schedule that makes it easier to recruit the south? Probably a small net negative for football, probably a positive for everything else. In the end they made the right choice because of the uncertainty of the Big 12 composition...an uncertainty they had a very big hand in creating as we've talked about in the last dozen posts.
Fair enough. It just sounded like you were saying the Huskers moved to the Big 10 because they were not getting as much money as Texas. The amount of money Texas got had NOTHING to do with the Huskers moving to the Big 10.
There is no guarantee they would be better off in the Big 12. In fact, they may be better off in the Big 10 in the long run. Their problem in the Big 10 is that they really have no tradition left now or long term rivalries now. The only thing they have now is the present........which is not all that great. And will hasten their descent to mediocrity.
Nebraska is about football. Any net negative to their football program is fine with me. Nebraska decided to join a TV network and not stay and strengthen the conference. It was their decision and now I hope they enjoy playing their traditional rivals of Rutgers and Maryland.
Nebraska soiled their tradition after letting a 10 win Frank Solich walk off campus. The world from the NU athletic department must look different than what rational people see. Since it's not my school and ISU appears to have landed on better ground I wish NU luck as the football program sinks to Northwestern prestige
What's even better is they'll probably run Bo Peep out of town if he can't win more than 8-9 games. They can't seem to realize averaging 9+ wins a year is actually pretty good in college football today. If they fire Bo and make a bad hire...I can't wait.
I'm now wondering, what if the B1G would have picked up Mizzou over Nebraska? While Nebraska offers the "blue blood" pedigree, Mizzou looks to be the better fit in the B1G's philosophy of picking up markets for their network with both St. Louis and Kansas City.
Had Mizzou left for the B1G, would Colorado have done the same for the Pac-10? If not, does Texas A&M still go to the SEC? Would the SEC even expand to 14 without Mizzou as a partner for TAMU? But if A&M stayed, would they have made the package more attractive for the then Pac-12 to go to Pac-16 along with UT, OU, and OSU to give UT the concessions they needed to jump?
Things could look a lot different if that first domino went a different direction.
It could've been different but CU has always been a Pac wannabe and aTm has always wanted to stick it to UT. I guess I was most surprised by MUs move.
- Status
