T1B

King Crimson wrote:

SunCoastSooner wrote:

Believe the Heupel wrote: He has 'Bode on Jimmie Harris?

Jimmie Harris was 31-0 as a starter, won two national titles, and won an Orange Bowl.

That's pretty fuckin' good.

Edit: If I recall correctly, Jimmie Harris also played for a Midwest City Bombers football team that didn't lose a game while he was in high school. With the one year break because freshmen couldn't play back then, Jimmie Harris started for seven years without losing a game.

You're correct... on the OU Legends DVD they joke about Jimmy never losing a game.. everrrrrrrr.

that's actually Jay O'Neal on the Legends DVD. Though, Harris' record as a starter is mindboggling, no doubt about it.

I know who is on the video CK... I have it also ;)

They spend about 3 minutes talking about Jimmy Harris and how he never lost a game.

Cornhusker wrote:And nayer a word was spoken when CU won 62-36. It's a college football smack forum son.

I'll wait.

Well thanks for clearing that up, I thought we were here to just have nice cordial conversations. My only point was this: it is awfully nice to finally see a husker fan posting here again. You haven’t had shit to be proud of all year and now you beat your quasi-rival and love to rant about their horrible fans. I am sure cornhusker nation produces the finest example of sportsmanship.

But really, on the rivalry note, you say Oklahoma is your rival???????????????
As of late, you wont even play them every other year, how pathetic. For a real rivalry look at ND vs USC, OSU vs MICH, AUB vs ALA, etc. Do you see a trend there?

And how about this article:
Husker-OU Rivalry

After Saturday, Oklahoma and Nebraska won't meet again until 2008.

2008? Now that is a heated rivalry.

Sky wrote: Well thanks for clearing that up, I thought we were here to just have nice cordial conversations. My only point was this: it is awfully nice to finally see a husker fan posting here again.

Didn't know I left. (Find all posts by Cornhusker) Quick check looks like someting over 100 posts through this season. Hell, I ain't got that much to add anyway. Do the best I can, ya know?

http://www.theoneboard.com/board/profil ... file&u=206

You haven’t had shit to be proud of all year and now you beat your quasi-rival and love to rant about their horrible fans. I am sure cornhusker nation produces the finest example of sportsmanship.

Rant or made mention?
And yes we do have great fans, as has been documented numerous times by opposing teams and coaches as the opponent in victory or defeat, recieves a standing ovation from the fans in the N.W. corner of Memorial stadium when leaving the field.

But really, on the rivalry note, you say Oklahoma is your rival???????????????
As of late, you wont even play them every other year, how pathetic. For a real rivalry look at ND vs USC, OSU vs MICH, AUB vs ALA, etc. Do you see a trend there?

And how about this article:
Husker-OU Rivalry

After Saturday, Oklahoma and Nebraska won't meet again until 2008.

I don't know how long you've been a college football fan, but I will say I was 17 when NU and OU played in the '71 game.
I remember games in the 60's played on the Friday after Thanksgiving all the way through the end of the Big 8.
A tradition was built before my time and up until the Big 12 fucked it up.
It doesn't just wash away because we don't play every year...at least not to the traditionalists.
You can check with OU fan, but I think the'd embrace NU back on the schedule annually.
Hell, things change...it could happen again someday.

Obviously the Big 12 sees your rivalry as very important to their conference. Glad to see they kept it going...but really lets just keep referencing games from the 70's because they are important.

What the Big 12 should have done was give each team a rival in the other division that it plays on an annual basis. The SEC did that, and there's talk that the Big Ten will do that if it ever goes to 12 teams (the ACC is not really a valid point of comparison in this regard, as it seems to have split its divisions by putting each team in the opposite division of its principal rival, except for BC and Va Tech, who kind of got lumped together by default).

Yeah, it would've been done strictly for the purpose of matching up Nebraska and Oklahoma every year, and the other interdivisional "rivalries" would have had to have been more or less manufactured. But it would have continued one of the most storied rivalries in college football.

Some of my most vivid memories of Keith Jackson come from him calling the Nebraska-Oklahoma games of the 70's and 80's -- his drawn-out pronunciation of "Oklahoma" and the fawning over his namesake who played TE for Oklahoma in the mid-to-late 80's.

Yeah but who do you really consider your rival? It is unrealistic to have more than one real rival (unless they are in your division/conference) and your's is probably not Nebraska. For the Big 10/Pac 10 it isn't as big an issue as they play almost everyone every year but with your divisions, you lack the necessary emphasis if this is a rivalry.

But point taken, so explain to my why the Big12 hasn't paired you two up more often. I don't know how the schedule breaks down between N and S but if you play each S team once (5) and 3 OOC games that leaves 3 more spots so why not assign one of those to your 'rival' Nebraska and rotate the others?

On a side note, wouldn't it be more fun if Nebraska were good so it acutally seemed like the rivalry of old?

Believe the Heupel wrote:My thought was that each team should get two protected games a year and an otherwise-rotating schedule. Unfortunately, it was pointed out that the NCAA would not allow this in a 12 team conference.

Like I said, the SEC was able to give each team an annual rival from the other division. I'm surprised the Big 12 couldn't do that.

USC has a great rivalry with Notre Dame-one that isn't played every year even.

That one has been continuous since 1946. And unless you know something I don't, it's projected to be continuous through the foreseeable future.

You might have been thinking of the Michigan-ND rivalry, which hasn't been every year.

Pitt/Penn State is a good rivalry game.

Unfortunately, that one was a casualty of the move toward superconferences. Those teams stopped playing each other when Penn State joined the Big Ten and the Big East started playing football (to protect itself from poaching from other conferences).

Army and Navy aren't in the same conference as each other OR Air Force.

Army and Navy are both independents now, although Army played in C-USA for awhile before reverting back to independent status, yet never dropped Navy or Air Force.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Some of my most vivid memories of Keith Jackson come from him calling the Nebraska-Oklahoma games of the 70's and 80's -- his drawn-out pronunciation of "Oklahoma" and the fawning over his namesake who played TE for Oklahoma in the mid-to-late 80's.

in terms of the TE Jackson's performance in O-ka-la-ho-ma-Nebraska games in 85 and 86....the fawning was well-deserved.

in the early years of the Big XII Oklahoma was probably the only team in the United States that wanted to play Nebraska every year.

I've heard Stoops say this year (around the time of the NU game) that he wouldn't be in favor of it in terms of creating a competitive disadvantage with regard to other teams OOC schedules. i think fans feel differently.....but the "bottom line" has replaced the fan enthusiasm for trad. rivalry as any valid criteria in the AD at OU.

Believe the Heupel wrote:No kidding? I thought that there was a couple-year break in the USC/ND game a few years back. My bad.

The point remains that they're not in the same conference, though.

Yes, Army and Navy are both independents, but when Army was a CUSA doormat Army/Navy was still heated.

I stand by the rest.

Hell, Georgia and Florida both have each other as rivals AND have schools outside their conference as a rival.

You could even add to your list FSU-Miami. Yes, they're in the same conference now, but this was a rivalry before Miami joined the ACC. Hell, it was a rivalry before FSU joined the ACC.

And I'm sure JON will be in here before long to pimp Iowa-Iowa State, as well.

Let me clarify, what I mean was that it is unrealistic to have more than one 'rival' unless the others are in your conference or division. Thus Minnesota doesn't face a huge problem as they play 8 of 10 Big 10 opponents (I am not sure who all they consider opponents). USC/ND, Army/Navy, Auburn/Alabama, etc. always play eachother but they don't have other rivals outside of their conference or division.

If your respective administrators really feel this is a rivalry, why didn't they complain or push for a change? I find it hard to believe 2 top tier programs can't influence the Big12 scheduling.

But really, who is your RIVAL, not who do you have a rivalry with, but who is your #1 rival? Those are the important games that must happen each year.

No, I agree with that. A rivalry should be protected with solid scheduling. Great rivals should play every year, not off and on.

I don't understand your first three lines, I feel like you are agreeing with what I said. The only exception would be that OU and UN should play each and every year. Thus you get two other random north opponents.

OK, we just keep going round and round, how about this:

The Big12 administrators are idiots not to allow OU and UN to play each year. As they don't I think the rivalry will diminish and your fight with UT will grow in importance.

Sky wrote:USC/ND, Army/Navy, Auburn/Alabama, etc. always play eachother but they don't have other rivals outside of their conference or division.

ND doesn't play in a conference, so by definition, all of our games are OOC.

And we have eight more or less permanent opponents on our schedule who are all rivals to one extent or another (but don't tell ND Nation I said that, as they refuse to consider BC a "rival" in any sense of the word). Of course, none is a rival in the same way that USC is, but during the 1980's, the case could be made that Miami supplanted USC as our principal rival. Not saying that something like that will happen again, but it could, you never know.

Believe the Heupel wrote:I find it refreshing that we have a "hate" rivalry that has all the venom of Alabama/Auburn and a "respect" rivalry that I don't know is mirrored anywhere else in college football.

I'd say that ND has a "respect" rivalry with both USC and Michigan. You want to win both games badly, but there's always an underlying feeling of respect. Both programs are classy and chock-full of tradition, like ND's.

We had a "hate" rivalry once -- Miami. Unfortunately, the old hate-meter in that one went so far off the charts that we had to stop the series.

Well good point, and as discussed, Army and Navy as well.

I just think, in the OU/UN case, they should get to/have to play each other every year. The Big12 is hurting themselves by disallowing this.

Sky wrote:Well good point, and as discussed, Army and Navy as well.

I just think, in the OU/UN case, they should get to/have to play each other every year. The Big12 is hurting themselves by disallowing this.

I'll take the United Nations and lay the points, that is of course if AD re-injuries that ankle. Otherwise...

Sky, exactly how we feel...it's BS and when it was originally announced it was a black day in Corn Country.

It truly was/is a marque game.