The big thing Nebraska lost from the VIII to XII transition was the annual Oklahoma game. If Nebraska joined today's XII, they'd have the annual Oklahoma game back (likely on Black Friday again) plus two games in Texas. If another league could take WVU, XII's the perfect fit.

(09-24-2020 07:27 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  I would like to think many of the realignment moves over the past 30-40 years (or greater) have made logical sense culturally and institutionally. It sounded like TAMU was close to embracing the SEC before the Big XII started. If they're all in with it now around campus, embracing the membership, it was a good pairing. Maybe a shame it didn't happen sooner.

Well, some have, some have not. TAMU to the SEC is maybe the best example of "fits like a glove", as their fan base had been itching for years to get away from Texas, and culturally they are closer to the Bayou country than the southwest. TCU to the Big 12 feels the same way.

Others, though, have been much more awkward. None of the B1G adds - UNL, Rutgers, or Maryland, feels like a natural fit. The schools joined for money and the B1G added them for money, so it's a transactional not emotional commitment. Missouri to the SEC has been "blah", they aren't a bad fit but aren't a good fit either, they would rather be in the B1G and the SEC just needed a warm body to go along with TAMU. Utah to the PAC has been a surprisingly good fit while Colorado to the PAC has been more awkward than I think both sides figured it would be. I guess Colorado is just too far away from the "pacific".

I would say most of the adds haven't had a great feel to them. But many have.

(09-24-2020 07:27 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-23-2020 01:19 PM)johnintx Wrote:  What you saw at Penn State is what I've found in visiting Texas A&M. We took our son on a campus tour there. The first thing we saw when we went into the admissions tour center was a case with all 14 SEC helmets. We ate lunch at a regionally known BBQ chain, and there were 14 SEC flags hanging from the ceiling. Even today, nine years after the move, it's still not unusual to see SEC logos displayed in places on and off campus other than athletic facilities. The school's entire identity is now wrapped up in being part of the SEC. Not even the charter members are more proud of the SEC than A&M. That is a function of their move away from especially UT but also the other Texas B12 schools.

Nebraska, on the other hand, lost their conference when the Big 8 went away. So, it was primarily a business transaction to move from the B12 to the B1G. The fans lost their rivals in the latter move, but the conference identity went away with the move from the Big 8 to the B12. So, for Nebraska, it's not a big deal to go rogue and fight alone to play football when some of the others would rather not. The B1G is purely a business arrangement for them.

I would like to think many of the realignment moves over the past 30-40 years (or greater) have made logical sense culturally and institutionally. It sounded like TAMU was close to embracing the SEC before the Big XII started. If they're all in with it now around campus, embracing the membership, it was a good pairing. Maybe a shame it didn't happen sooner.

It was the same with Colorado. IIRC, didn't Colorado's board approve the PAC move back in the 90's before the Big XII formed, and that it was a late decision to not move because they wanted to see the grouping out a bit? They embraced the west coast before joining the PAC.

With Nebraska, I think they lost everything about themselves when the Big 8 became the Big XII. Without having a Texas school, they could still dip into the state via Oklahoma and boast football tradition. They could look east Iowa State and Missouri, and get into the Rust Belt geographically. Colorado allowed them to look west. The non-conference schedule in the 90's...a smaller conference schedule allowed them to spread out nationally (though it looked like they favored playing western schools). It all changed. Their ability to rely on partials...put to a stop.

They leave a place that then provides more autonomy to its individual members to go to a place where its more restrictive? And to hear that both Perlman and Osborne didn't necessarily research other options except the Big Ten when it slipped out about Missouri, and Colorado clocking out? Just a hasty mess.

But, maybe the bigger question: where would Nebraska go that would allow them to have most of what they want? Part of me thinks the PAC would be the best spot, because they tended to look westward in their non-conference back in the day, and location could still help them to look toward Texas and to the Midwest. But, yikes, if the Big Ten suspending football didn't go over, how would they handle the left coast?

Well said regarding Nebraska, Colorado, and A&M. Colorado had been looking west for years, and A&M never wanted to be in the B12 to begin with.

The B1G hasn't been a good fit for Nebraska. Football, even now, is the identity of Nebraska. They had to fight the Big Ten to play a delayed partial schedule. The Pac would be an even worse cultural fit for the same reasons. Plus, if you're in the Central time zone, you don't willingly put yourself in the Pacific time zone unless there are significant benefits. The time change makes the travel harder and puts you at risk of late night TV games.

In hindsight, the best of Nebraska's bad options would have been to stay in the B12 as long as possible. They could have worked with Texas. If the B12 imploded, they would have still had value for another big-time conference.

(09-24-2020 10:42 AM)johnintx Wrote:  In hindsight, the best of Nebraska's bad options would have been to stay in the B12 as long as possible. They could have worked with Texas. If the B12 imploded, they would have still had value for another big-time conference.

Nebraska is just in a hard place for a blue-blood. Yes, everyone wants them, but they just don't fit in anywhere. They are the lone great plains traditional power, and there is no great plains conference anymore.

(09-24-2020 10:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Nebraska is just in a hard place for a blue-blood. Yes, everyone wants them, but they just don't fit in anywhere. They are the lone great plains traditional power, and there is no great plains conference anymore.

Yep, the Great Plains lost their conference when the Big 8 went away.

Ironically, for their identity and priorities, the SEC is the best fit for them. Problem is, there is nothing Southern about Nebraska.

No one is in a power 5 conference under duress. Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers are in the Big 10 to make money.

(09-24-2020 11:37 AM)johnintx Wrote:  

(09-24-2020 10:58 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Nebraska is just in a hard place for a blue-blood. Yes, everyone wants them, but they just don't fit in anywhere. They are the lone great plains traditional power, and there is no great plains conference anymore.

Yep, the Great Plains lost their conference when the Big 8 went away.

Ironically, for their identity and priorities, the SEC is the best fit for them. Problem is, there is nothing Southern about Nebraska.

If the SEC went crazy and grew to 18 by adding Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, there would be excellent rivalries and regional games to be had...

(09-24-2020 11:53 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  No one is in a power 5 conference under duress. Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers are in the Big 10 to make money.

I don’t disagree, but I do believe there’s more to Rutgers and the Big Ten than Maryland and Nebraska. The latter two made this about cash grabs. Rutgers...this is an institution truly attempting to pivot from something Patriot League-esque as a state school to apsirant/peer land grant state flagship schools. Rutgers has been validated in its pursuit to be more like Big Ten schools by now becoming one itself.

Even if they give off an ACC-like vibe, it’s too big a school. Operating now more like Penn State than Princeton or Lehigh.

Time for a 3-way trade

Neb --> Big 12
WV ---> SEC
Mizzou ---> Big Ten

(09-23-2020 01:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-23-2020 04:15 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 09:29 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Lot of Ohio State fans are Nebraska fans after all they did to get seasom going.

Not all Ohio State fans. I have seen a lot of them banging the drum to have Nebraska booted from the Big 10. Those fans also do not think anybody should be playing in the fall until we get this pandemic under control. As it is, the far right and young people are still gathering in large crowds not wearing a mask. That is why we are having this problems, and players getting quarantined right now.

What Ohio St fans are you speaking of? I for one am a huge supporter of the Huskers for taking on the conference brass and getting everyone back on the field. Ohio St has a national championship contender team and had Nebraska not been the spearhead we wouldn’t have had a title shot.

Ohio State fans on Twitter. There seems to be no love for the newcomers that joined the Big 10. The fans at both schools don't fit cultually with each other. Nebraska coming off snobbish and whiney at times turning them off.

The problem is that players who get this virus could be long-haulers. That is side effects from the virus that could hamper the players for months like fatigue and hard of breath. The Big 10 did the right thing to postpone. They did wrong by reversing the course.

(09-24-2020 09:28 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Utah to the PAC has been a surprisingly good fit while Colorado to the PAC has been more awkward than I think both sides figured it would be. I guess Colorado is just too far away from the "pacific".

I think of the biggest mistakes the Big XII made when forming, not going west for another member, especially if that was Utah, may be profoundly more damaging than others. Because, I think Utah would have been good in either Big XII or PAC. No way they’re leaving PAC. And who the Big XII could call upon west of its footprint now? Significant steps down, mostly.

IMO, Colorado fits the PAC fine. They just aren’t great in football or basketball consistently. I think Missouri in the Big Ten could look the same in terms of performance: they fit but they can’t always hang. From that spot, I can see why Nebraska is far more attractive a catch, but, again, institutionally and culturally, Boulder’s like the other PAC schools more than Lincoln is the B1G.

I disagree that the Big Ten is a bad fit for Nebraska. I think it’s an excellent fit, the Huskers just have to get back to their winning ways. They aren’t helped by the fact that the conference brass gave them Ohio St as an annual game for this scheduling cycle (personally I dislike this policy and don’t think there should be any semi-permanent crossovers other than Indiana-Purdue.)

The Big 12 was going to lose Colorado and Texas A&M. Losing Missouri is a bit of a toss up—they might have stayed put (opening up WVU to the SEC). Personally, I think being in the Big Ten is preferable to a 10 team Big 12–although a 9 game round robin schedule that would ensure playing Texas and Oklahoma annually is pretty alluring.

Ultimately, the Big Ten was a known, stable entity. The same could not have been said of the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma could have darted at any time.

(09-22-2020 07:30 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Nebraska this season. 0-8

They deserve to lose all their games. They should be booted from the Big 1o. Nebraska's school's leadership, the AD, the players, the parents and Scott Frost is not welcome in my state to visit. There are a lot of more important things than football.

Hahahahaha
Where do you live?
Arkansas?
Colorado?
Idaho?
I know where you went to school as a friend of mine on this board went to school with you, but don’t know where your home state is.

(09-26-2020 03:28 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-22-2020 07:30 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Nebraska this season. 0-8

They deserve to lose all their games. They should be booted from the Big 1o. Nebraska's school's leadership, the AD, the players, the parents and Scott Frost is not welcome in my state to visit. There are a lot of more important things than football.

Hahahahaha
Where do you live?
Arkansas?
Colorado?
Idaho?
I know where you went to school as a friend of mine on this board went to school with you, but don’t know where your home state is.

Did he know who DavidSt was while in school? David must’ve been the real popular guy all chicks flocked to.

(09-23-2020 01:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-23-2020 12:51 PM)johnintx Wrote:  Nebraska and all of the B12 North schools gave up their culture when they moved to the B12.

See, it only *seems* like Nebraska "moved to" the Big 12. In fact, the SWC dissolved and four schools were absorbed in to the Big 8, to form the Big 12. It was Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech and Texas AM that moved to the Big 8.

But yes, because Texas quickly came to dominate the Big 12, it seemed as if the Big 8 schools were the vagabonds who lost their conference and had to join the SWC schools.

What sunk Nebraska in terms of culture and power was Oklahoma. Nebraska helped form the Big 12 with its eyes open, it knew that Texas always acted like an 800-pound gorilla. <b>But what Nebraska figured was that their conference mate, Oklahoma, would be on their side, and that a Nebraska - Oklahoma power nexus of two football blue-bloods would outweigh, or at least balance out, the influence of Texas on the new conference.</b>

But to UNL's surprise, Oklahoma quickly sidled up much more closely with Texas. In retrospect, this shouldn't have been much of a surprise, as Oklahoma has always been more a part of Southwestern culture, like Texas, than Great Plains culture, like Nebraska. And of course Texas was always Oklahoma's traditional rival. But UNL thought their Big 8 conference ties would be stronger. They were wrong, and so the Big 12 soon took on the character and culture of the SWC, even though it was the Big 8 that had absorbed the SWC.

The only real home for Nebraska is the old Big 8. But that home no longer exists. Any conference they join, they will be uncomfortable in.

I don't think this is true as before the first Big XII game was played, you could see the Longhorn/Sooner connection. Nebraska pushed for a permanent cross-over game with Oklahoma and the Sooners said no. With Oklahoma being so bad in the mid-90's when this transition took place and ten years before the two teams met in the conference title game, that rivalry fizzled. The Big 8 and SWC schools where a marriage of convenience. The four SWC schools needed a place to land and the Big 8 schools needed the large markets of Texas.

The Big 8 was Nebraska's home. Nebraska was looking for a home when the Big XII appeared to be falling apart. The Big Ten west is as close to the Big 8 as Nebraska will find going forward. If the same money can be had in a few years between the SEC/Big Ten (I have my doubts about this), I could see Missouri/Kansas coming to to Big Ten and the Big Ten West would be just about perfect for the Huskers.

Good guy or bad guy, Nebraska is here to stay. Penn State struggled for acceptance for a long time. They still have fans that would prefer an Eastern conference/independence over the Big Ten. Over time, schools and fan base assimilate. People now think of Sparty as a Big Ten team, but 40 years ago, there were people that still though of them as outsiders.

The Nebraska administrators love the Big Ten. They love being associated with the conference. The fans are just annoyed that the football team sucks and look for outlets to vent their frustration. The Big Ten hasn't helped the Huskers with the schedules they have been given over the years, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. The TV money is what it is because the networks want the attractive matchups. That means Nebraska gets to play the big dogs (see Ohio State) more often which translates into more losses.

Winning solves a lot of problems. Even with the Buckeyes on the schedule most years a good team doesn't consistently finish with only 4-6 wins. They just don't have a good football team right now. For some fans, they think that being in the Big XII will lead to winning more games. Pretty sure that they would still be a bad team in the Big XII right now, too. Being a bottom feeder in the Big Ten > being a bottom feeder in the Big XII.

(09-27-2020 09:33 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(09-23-2020 01:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-23-2020 12:51 PM)johnintx Wrote:  Nebraska and all of the B12 North schools gave up their culture when they moved to the B12.

See, it only *seems* like Nebraska "moved to" the Big 12. In fact, the SWC dissolved and four schools were absorbed in to the Big 8, to form the Big 12. It was Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech and Texas AM that moved to the Big 8.

But yes, because Texas quickly came to dominate the Big 12, it seemed as if the Big 8 schools were the vagabonds who lost their conference and had to join the SWC schools.

What sunk Nebraska in terms of culture and power was Oklahoma. Nebraska helped form the Big 12 with its eyes open, it knew that Texas always acted like an 800-pound gorilla. <b>But what Nebraska figured was that their conference mate, Oklahoma, would be on their side, and that a Nebraska - Oklahoma power nexus of two football blue-bloods would outweigh, or at least balance out, the influence of Texas on the new conference.</b>

But to UNL's surprise, Oklahoma quickly sidled up much more closely with Texas. In retrospect, this shouldn't have been much of a surprise, as Oklahoma has always been more a part of Southwestern culture, like Texas, than Great Plains culture, like Nebraska. And of course Texas was always Oklahoma's traditional rival. But UNL thought their Big 8 conference ties would be stronger. They were wrong, and so the Big 12 soon took on the character and culture of the SWC, even though it was the Big 8 that had absorbed the SWC.

The only real home for Nebraska is the old Big 8. But that home no longer exists. Any conference they join, they will be uncomfortable in.

I don't think this is true as before the first Big XII game was played, you could see the Longhorn/Sooner connection. Nebraska pushed for a permanent cross-over game with Oklahoma and the Sooners said no. With Oklahoma being so bad in the mid-90's when this transition took place and ten years before the two teams met in the conference title game, that rivalry fizzled. The Big 8 and SWC schools where a marriage of convenience. The four SWC schools needed a place to land and the Big 8 schools needed the large markets of Texas.

The Big 8 was Nebraska's home. Nebraska was looking for a home when the Big XII appeared to be falling apart. The Big Ten west is as close to the Big 8 as Nebraska will find going forward. If the same money can be had in a few years between the SEC/Big Ten (I have my doubts about this), I could see Missouri/Kansas coming to to Big Ten and the Big Ten West would be just about perfect for the Huskers.

Good guy or bad guy, Nebraska is here to stay. Penn State struggled for acceptance for a long time. They still have fans that would prefer an Eastern conference/independence over the Big Ten. Over time, schools and fan base assimilate. People now think of Sparty as a Big Ten team, but 40 years ago, there were people that still though of them as outsiders.

The Nebraska administrators love the Big Ten. They love being associated with the conference. The fans are just annoyed that the football team sucks and look for outlets to vent their frustration. The Big Ten hasn't helped the Huskers with the schedules they have been given over the years, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. The TV money is what it is because the networks want the attractive matchups. That means Nebraska gets to play the big dogs (see Ohio State) more often which translates into more losses.

Winning solves a lot of problems. Even with the Buckeyes on the schedule most years a good team doesn't consistently finish with only 4-6 wins. They just don't have a good football team right now. For some fans, they think that being in the Big XII will lead to winning more games. Pretty sure that they would still be a bad team in the Big XII right now, too. Being a bottom feeder in the Big Ten > being a bottom feeder in the Big XII.

FWIW, to me Penn State still doesn't feel fully at home in the B1G, and an eastern conference would be their natural home.

I agree that when you are racking up 11-win seasons, the fans don't care much who you are. But nobody does that forever (though for 30 years or so it seems like Nebraska did), so it's the normal times that bring out the bugs. We'll never see a team go 33 straight years winning 9 or more games like UNL did from 1969-2001.

I agree Nebraska is not moving from the B1G. The B1G just pays a lot more than the B12. So if neither is a great fit, might as well be in the one that pays more.

Yes, these are blue-blood P5 problems. I wish USF had them, LOL, but they are real.

It certainly helped Penn State that they played well when they first joined the Big Ten (would have won the national championship if it weren't for ... Nebraska!) Back in the 90's, Penn State came in and played well in the Big Ten and Florida State came in and dominated the ACC. In the 2010's, newcomers haven't had been anywhere near as successful in P5 conferences. Utah did make the P12 championship game last season and Missouri did win two SEC East titles but the others have been mediocre at best in football.

(09-27-2020 10:57 AM)schmolik Wrote:  It certainly helped Penn State that they played well when they first joined the Big Ten (would have won the national championship if it weren't for ... Nebraska!) Back in the 90's, Penn State came in and played well in the Big Ten and Florida State came in and dominated the ACC. In the 2010's, newcomers haven't had been anywhere near as successful in P5 conferences. Utah did make the P12 championship game last season and Missouri did win two SEC East titles but the others have been mediocre at best in football.

Yes, but both Penn State and FSU arrived in their conferences at peak-level in terms of performance. They were dominating as independents as well at the time they joined those conferences.

That was true of none of the teams that came aboard new conferences in the 2010-2012 shakeup.

That said, I doubt PSU will ever feel like an integral B1G member. Thirty years hasn't done it, even adding Rutgers and Maryland hasn't.

In a weird way, PSU is like Nebraska on the other wing. Nebraska will never feel at home unless they are in the Big 8, a conference that doesn't exist anymore and isn't coming back. PSU would only feel at home in an eastern conference comprising schools like Pitt, WV, Maryland, Rutgers, Temple, Syracuse, Army, Navy and BC.

That isn't happening either.

As a Penn State fan/alum I feel well at home in the Big Ten. Of course I'm bad to ask since I am also an Illinois fan/alum and I'm used to the Big Ten. Once I got to PSU for grad school I was used to playing Ohio State, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The last two years I was at Illinois they played Penn State in football. I remember a big game at Penn State the year Michigan shared the national championship. PSU and Michigan were both unbeaten in November. Before that game we were thinking national championship.

When you win you "become" a member of the conference. The other advantage Penn State has over Nebraska is they are geographically closer to Ohio State and Michigan, the "core" of the B1G (Pennsylvania literally borders Ohio). I've said before I don't believe in "East" vs. "Midwest" and Ohio and Michigan share more in common with Pennsylvania than they do with Nebraska in that they are populous states with populous cities as opposed to being a less populous state. Yes Penn State has almost a 20 year head start on Nebraska when it comes to the Big Ten. But to me they'll always be more of a Big Ten member. Ask OSU and UM who they are more of a rival with, us or Nebraska?

(09-27-2020 11:17 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  In a weird way, PSU is like Nebraska on the other wing.