Nebraska-TSUN comparison

[k2onprimetime]

Nebraska>TSUN
Yes, they both have been in the elite of college football, But i just see TSUN having many many loosing season after this season. DickRod is gonna get fired after this season, and hes put the next coach in a real deep hole.

 

[BayBuck]

You and Muck are the ones who keep claiming that TSUN is the odds on favorite to be the 1B power in the Big Ten for the foreseeable future.

I'd be interested to see you quote me getting anywhere near that point. As you have said, "please find a quote where I have done that, I'll sit back and wait."

 

[daddyphatsacs]

In the short term I think Nebraska will be much better than Michigan. In the long term, I think those two programs will wash. I love the fact that Nebraska is joining the Big Ten, I think it's a perfect fit.

I think Bo P. has them(the Huskers) really heading in the right direction. In fact, I feel that the Huskers will be a BCS team this year. As for Michigan, well you get the story.

At some point the Michigan faithful will finally get their wish and Dickrod will be fired. If Michigan doesn't make the right hire at that point, well, I think Nebraska will be "1B" for the next decade or so. If they do, we'll have 1B and 1C, which I think is a great thing.

 

[zincfinger]

In the short term I think Nebraska will be much better than Michigan. In the long term, I think those two programs will wash. I love the fact that Nebraska is joining the Big Ten, I think it's a perfect fit.

I think Bo P. has them(the Huskers) really heading in the right direction. In fact, I feel that the Huskers will be a BCS team this year. As for Michigan, well you get the story.

At some point the Michigan faithful will finally get their wish and Dickrod will be fired. If Michigan doesn't make the right hire at that point, well, I think Nebraska will be "1B" for the next decade or so. If they do, we'll have 1B and 1C, which I think is a great thing.

You don't think Penn St has what it takes to be in that same group, or you just left them out because this thread's about UM vs UN?

 

[daddyphatsacs]

You don't think Penn St has what it takes to be in that same group, or you just left them out because this thread's about UM vs UN?

It's funny you bring this up, because this same question came in my head as I was writing that comment. I feel that Penn St. is going to fall very soon after Joe Pa. retires. They are heading downward in the next decade, IMHO. I view them at the level of an Iowa or Wisconsin at that point.

 

[westbrock]

I was hoping for a longer honeymoon period. We'll have plenty of time to hate each other in the future.

 

[Rugger]

This whole thread makes me sad. Nebraska and M*ch*gan are both in a down period at the moment. Nebraska joins the party next season, and after a few, we'll see how things shake out. I have seen on several different website these pointless fights between Nebraska and M*ch*gan (most often), but a lot of other ugly things are coming out of the woodwork after the extension of the olive branch. For one, I don't understand how Nebraska fans - allegedly the most respectable in college football - post everywhere saying that their going to dominate the conference or bring legitimacy to the conference or whatever, when they don't really have a conference title win in the last decade to stand on and just generally being overbearingly arrogant. Secondly, I don't understand why Nebraska fans are so crass when weighing in on division split issue like "I don't care if they split OSU UM. What's the big deal if they play twice a year? Earlier? So what? Look what they did to us and OU fifteen years ago..." when they clearly have no understanding of the gravity of the rivalry or the cultural aspects of it. I'm sorry, Nebraska, you may be a great new 12th member, but you guys don't know [censored] about the conference and should really just shut the [censored] up about what you consider to be proper or fair or appropriate in the coming divisions. Just twiddle your thumbs and be happy with who winds up in your division and enjoy the TV money and research collaboration. The arrogance I have observed of so many Nebraska fans on the web is just unbelievable, like they own the conference now or something. They're not entirely to blame, obviously, because it doesn't help that other Big Ten fans get caught up in these arguments and inflame things more. We're supposed to be a united conference and we're fighting over whose dick has been chewed the most since 1945. Jeez.

How I wished things could have worked out: Nebraska joins the conference. We are happy, because they make the conference more competitive. They're happy too. We get a long really well at first and show our increased solidarity as a conference to other conferences and fan bases. Then, when things heat up in 2011 and the results of the first conference games come in, then we develop the sweet bitterness of a competitive rivalry, which we would embrace like we do with Ohio State-M*ch*gan, Wisconsin-Minnesota, Purdue-Indiana, etc, because we are all in the same conference playing for a common goal, and we all face common enemies after conference play is over. We are the freaking Big Ten. How things are shaping up now is playing homage to the idiocy of the Big 12. What the hell.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Fans arguing on message boards is not what was wrong with the Big 12.

 

[Mike80]

This whole thread makes me sad. Nebraska and M*ch*gan are both in a down period at the moment. Nebraska joins the party next season, and after a few, we'll see how things shake out. I have seen on several different website these pointless fights between Nebraska and M*ch*gan (most often), but a lot of other ugly things are coming out of the woodwork after the extension of the olive branch. For one, I don't understand how Nebraska fans - allegedly the most respectable in college football - post everywhere saying that their going to dominate the conference or bring legitimacy to the conference or whatever, when they don't really have a conference win in the last decade to stand on and just generally being arrogant cows. Secondly, I don't understand why Nebraska fans are so crass when weighing in on division split issue like "I don't care if they split OSU UM. What's the big deal if they play twice a year? Earlier? So what? Look what they did to us and OU fifteen years ago..." when they clearly have no understanding of the gravity of the rivalry or the cultural aspects of it. I'm sorry, Nebraska, you may be a great new 12th member, but you guys don't know shit about the conference and should really just shut the fuck up about what you consider to be proper or fair or appropriate in the coming divisions. Just twiddle your thumbs and be happy with who winds up in your division and enjoy the TV money and research collaboration. The arrogance I have observed of so many Nebraska fans on the web is just unbelievable, like they own the conference now or something. Their not entirely to blame, obviously, because it doesn't help that other Big Ten fans get caught up in these arguments and inflame things more. We're supposed to be a united conference and we're fighting over whose dick has been chewed the most since 1945. Jeez.

How I wished things could have worked out: Nebraska joins the conference. We are happy, because they make the conference more competitive. They're happy too. We get a long really well at first and show our increased solidarity as a conference to other conferences and fan bases. Then, when things heat up in 2011 and the results of the first conference games come in, then we develop the sweet bitterness of a competitive rivalry, which we would embrace like we do with Ohio State-M*ch*gan, Wisconsin-Minnesota, Purdue-Indiana, etc, because we are all in the same conference playing for a common goal, and we all face common enemies after conference play is over. We are the freaking Big Ten. How things are shaping up now is playing homage to the idiocy of the Big 12. What the hell.

I can't say I disagree with much of this post, except to say that Nebraska isn't down right now.

Nebraska had two years below .500 (2004 at 5-6 and 2007 at 5-7), but both of these were Callahan years (after the inexplicable firing of Frank Solich)....

Michigan, OTOH, hasn't exactly set the world on fire and is in line to have its third losing season in a row, something Nebraska has never been seriously in danger of.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

Do you seriously think one can't get a pretty good idea of what the future conference hierarchy will be by looking at past results? Indiana's as likely as OSU to be at the top of the conference in ten years? Historical trends aren't fool proof, but they're usually pretty reliable. And the historical trends strongly suggest that over the long term, OSU, UM, PSU, and UN will be roughly comparable to one another at the top of the conference.

If, by roughly comparable, you mean that Ohio State and UNL will be roughly comparable with UM a notch below and PSU a notch below that (with Iowa and Wiscy a couple of notches below that), then I agree with you. Whether UNL (or anyone else) will remain comparable in the future remains to be seen. Who know what effect the change will have on them and by extension on the rest of us.

 

[Diego-Bucks]

This thread's overall argument devolved into two mutually exclusive arguments. Unfortunately, it didn't take long. What I see is a few people saying mostly vague arguments and not taking much of a stand that scUM may be better in the future (and thus the Big Ten's #2 team) because they've recovered well in the past. They also say that Nebrasksa shouldn't speak about getting to be the #2 team until they have won things in the Big Ten, which basically just ruins the meaning of the ol' internets.

That conversation led to DallasHusker saying that most stats indicate that Nebraska is/has been better than Michigan and will definitely vie for being the #2 team in the Big Ten if not the #1 team.

Well, congratulations because you are both right. Michigan is a formerly great program that is capable (just like any former power is) of reclaiming its amazingness. And Nebraska is a great program that may go right on being great.

It definitely led to lots of (paraphrasing here): "I didn't say Nebraska sucks, I'm just saying they aren't going to be better than Michigan possibly, but we don't know" and of course "You can't find a quote that states that I said Nebraska would come in and blow people out of the water!"

It became quite funny to read. No worries guys, you aren't exactly arguing about the same thing.

My 2-cents though, 1st 5 years of Big Ten (expanded) will be a dogfight between Ohio State and Nebraska with the usual suspects making a run or two at the conference title (a la Penn St., Iowa and yes, scUM). For me though, Nebraska has much better footing than scUM currently (and it also seems historically).

I just want to point out one thing here on BP arguments, if you are going to argue/debate about something try to ACTUALLY say something and make a stand. Some of the posters hide behind being so vague that when you re-read it, they really haven't said much other than "your argument may be wrong because we can't know the future", which is always going to be correct. We are in a discussion forum, and this thread was specifically titled "Nebraska-TSUN comparison" though I know it was split off, so lets actually discuss something!

 

[Huskerrat]

Fans arguing on message boards is not what was wrong with the Big 12.

C'mon, you don't mean that do you? If not the #1 reason, than the #2 reason. Wait, what am I arguing here?

 

[muffler dragon]

C'mon, you don't mean that do you? If not the #1 reason, than the #2 reason. Wait, what am I arguing here?

You were discussing the ineptitude that IS the Big XII. :tongue2:

 

[zincfinger]

If, by roughly comparable, you mean that Ohio State and UNL will be roughly comparable with UM a notch below and PSU a notch below that (with Iowa and Wiscy a couple of notches below that), then I agree with you. Whether UNL (or anyone else) will remain comparable in the future remains to be seen. Who know what effect the change will have on them and by extension on the rest of us.

What I mean is that, in my opinion, the intrinsic potential of those 4 programs is so similar as to be virtually identical, and that the hierarchy between them, whether today, in 5 years, or any number of years, is determined predominantly by who the coaches are. So I can see ranking OSU and UNL as the top two as they appear to have the best coaches today and are most likely to have their current coaches at future time x. In five years, Rodriguez is obviously long gone, or else he's somehow managed to make whatever it is he's doing up there work, at least reasonably well (and if forced to bet, I'd put my money on the former). It seems unlikely that Paterno's still coaching in five years. Someone suggested above that when Paterno retires, PSU will go on a steep decline. That's certainly possible if they get the wrong coach, but if they get the right coach, I think it's entirely possible they go on an upward trend and compete strongly for the top of the hierarchy. Same thing at UM. So to me, the four programs are so comparable in terms of potential for success as to be virtually indistinguishable, and whatever time frame you're looking at, the hierarchy is mainly determined by which of them have the right coaches in place.

 

[Woody1968]

Do you seriously think one can't get a pretty good idea of what the future conference hierarchy will be by looking at past results? Indiana's as likely as OSU to be at the top of the conference in ten years? Historical trends aren't fool proof, but they're usually pretty reliable. And the historical trends strongly suggest that over the long term, OSU, UM, PSU, and UN will be roughly comparable to one another at the top of the conference.

I'm not talking about Indiana. Many people thought that when Penn State joined the conference, they would become a power. They have done OK, but over the course of their membership, they are closer to Wisconsin than Ohio State. When PSU joined in the early 1990s, did anyone think Wisconsin would have the level of success that they have enjoyed over the past 2 decades, or that Penn State would have only won 3 titles at this point?