• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Chuck Neinas, great read, Nebraska and Missouri made mistake

Status
Not open for further replies.




Husker In Oklahoma said:
Most all. Volleyball and baseball is it mostly. Football feeds it all though, and that’s what matters.
Click to expand...

Baseball did not benefit by moving to the Big Ten. It's easier to recruit in the Big 12, and better competition provides more opportunity to be a better team. There aren't many Big Ten opponents that excite the baseball fan base. I enjoy watching Nebraska play Big Ten competition in every sport but baseball.

Athletically, we've faltered in more sports than not since joining the Big Ten. Now, lots of factors go into that -- not just because we're in the Big Ten. You still need quality coaches and players.

I tend to think the biggest benefit from joining the Big Ten is academics. It's not instantaneous, but I expect Nebraska to become a better school for students, research, etc. Athletically, a lot of it is our own doings. We've had some rotten ADs (Moos, Eichorst, and Pederson before that in the Big 12) that haven't helped matters; heck, that may be the #1 issue.
 
Last edited:
I agree that the "as-it-was" Big XII was a better fit for Nebraska. The Big 8 was even better. But this article acts like Nebraska had a choice between the 1998 Big XII and the Big Ten.

Wrong.

We had a choice between the Big Ten and a floundering conference with a commissioner asleep at the wheel. 2010 Big XII was NOTHING like 1997 Big XII. By the time we left alongside Colorado, it had been strongly rumored that Mizzou was out and the Pac-12 was exploring a Pac-16 that featured some combination of Big XII South schools.

In the face of that topsy-turvy environment, you make the smart move. You join the conference that's got a ton of academic prestige, has been around for 100 years, offers you insane money, and is anchored by 3 traditional blue bloods and another 3-4 historically solid teams who seem content to never leave that conference.

If we'd stayed? The SEC would still have come calling for A&M, plus OU and UT (eventually). Maybe we'd have been better just playing Iowa State, KU, KSU and whomever we could dredge up out of C-USA to join that sinking ship.

Is Nebraska a perfect fit in the Big Ten? No. But we're a much better fit here than in the old, crumbling Texas XII.
 
Last edited:
HuskerWeatherman said:
Baseball did not benefit by moving to the Big Ten. It's easier to recruit in the Big 12, and better competition provides more opportunity to be a better team. There aren't many Big Ten opponents that excite the baseball fan base. I enjoy watching Nebraska play Big Ten competition in every sport but baseball.

Athletically, we've faltered in more sports than not since joining the Big Ten. Now, lots of factors go into that -- not just because we're in the Big Ten. You still need quality coaches and players.

I tend to think the biggest benefit from joining the Big Ten is academics. It's not instantaneous, but I expect Nebraska to become a better school for students, research, etc. Athletically, a lot of it is our own doings. We've had some rotten ADs (Moos, Eichorst, and Pederson before that in the Big 12) that haven't helped matters; heck, that may be the #1 issue.
Click to expand...
Of course. All those things play into it. I didn’t mean baseball benefited, just that they’ve done ok. Bo overcame all those obstacles you mentioned to keep NU competitive. Hiring Riley was laughable. Hiring Frost was a grand slam, on paper. No one knew he’d bomb like he has. Moos was head and shoulders better than Pederson and Oapy. Looks like Trev is the real deal, but only one year in. Nebraska will never be a great academic school. It’s a very good school, as it was in the Big 12. Recognition comes from sports, unless you’re an ivy league school, mostly. Oklahoma State’s enrollment is up because of athletics, not it’s academics. Same for OU. Neither will ever be a great academic school. I guess it depends on what’s important. Sports are a huge part of society, right or wrong. Regardless of the money NU has received since joining, it has not fit in well athletically. It’s been just wallering in abyss. And yes, some of that can be attributed to the people in charge, and the hires. Not arguing with you, but it gave up its DNA for money. I’m not sure that can be argued. Now, it has to create a whole other DNA, to hopefully find some footing. The first 11 years have shown the DNA Is out of whack. We shall see what happens moving forward. It just feels like an odd fit, has since day 1.
 




DuckTownHusker said:
I agree that the "as-it-was" Big XII was a better fit for Nebraska. The Big 8 was even better. But this article acts like Nebraska had a choice between the 1998 Big XII and the Big Ten.

Wrong.

We had a choice between the Big Ten and a floundering conference with a commissioner asleep at the wheel. 2010 Big XII was NOTHING like 1997 Big XII. By the time we left alongside Colorado, it had been strongly rumored that Mizzou was out and the Pac-12 was exploring a Pac-16 that featured some combination of Big XII South schools.

In the face of that topsy-turvy environment, you make the smart move. You join the conference that's got a ton of academic prestige, has been around for 100 years, offers you insane money, and is anchored by 3 traditional blue bloods and another 3-4 historically solid teams who seem content to never leave that conference.

If we'd stayed? The SEC would still have come calling for A&M, plus OU and UT (eventually). Maybe we'd have been better just playing Iowa State, KU, KSU and whomever we could dredge up out of C-USA to join that sinking ship.

Is Nebraska a perfect fit in the Big Ten? No. But we're a much better fit here than in the old, crumbling Texas XII.
Click to expand...
Osborne warned, no one listened. Knowing what’s known now, I’d like to see what those schools would vote now if they could get a redo. I guarantee it wouldn’t be 11-1. In fact, I bet it would be the opposite. 10-2, with the lone holdouts Texas, and the nut sack swaying OU.
 
DuckTownHusker said:
I agree that the "as-it-was" Big XII was a better fit for Nebraska. The Big 8 was even better. But this article acts like Nebraska had a choice between the 1998 Big XII and the Big Ten.

Wrong.

We had a choice between the Big Ten and a floundering conference with a commissioner asleep at the wheel. 2010 Big XII was NOTHING like 1997 Big XII. By the time we left alongside Colorado, it had been strongly rumored that Mizzou was out and the Pac-12 was exploring a Pac-16 that featured some combination of Big XII South schools.

In the face of that topsy-turvy environment, you make the smart move. You join the conference that's got a ton of academic prestige, has been around for 100 years, offers you insane money, and is anchored by 3 traditional blue bloods and another 3-4 historically solid teams who seem content to never leave that conference.

If we'd stayed? The SEC would still have come calling for A&M, plus OU and UT (eventually). Maybe we'd have been better just playing Iowa State, KU, KSU and whomever we could dredge up out of C-USA to join that sinking ship.

Is Nebraska a perfect fit in the Big Ten? No. But we're a much better fit here than in the old, crumbling Texas XII.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

I don't understand why people keep dredging this up.

NU didn't make a mistake. They took the best option that was available. If NU had stayed, the chips would have fallen differently and they likely would be worse off than they are now.

"You can never go home again"

We are where we are. Get over it.
 
Last edited:
Red Dead Redemption said:
Exactly.

I don't understand why people keep dredging this up.

NU didn't make a mistake. They took the best option that was available. If NU had stayed, the chips would have fallen differently and they likely would be worse off than they are now.

"You can never go home again"

We are where we are. Get over it.
Click to expand...
Who’s not over it? Another article was posted on this very website, and it’s being discussed. Everyone knows there is no going back. Chuck Nienas is no dummy. What’s wrong with discussing it? Geographically, it’s not a fit. Dissing nearly a century of tradition, has been costly, and had ramifications. I think most realize there would have been ramifications had NU stayed as well. No one knows what those would be. It’s speculative. Nebraska football is an afterthought 11 years later, for a variety of reasons. Switching conferences is not easy. It’s a major shift. No one here expects them to go back, but athletically, it’s been a major disappointment, and a failure, regardless of why. Only Nebraska fans say it wasn’t a mistake.
 
Husker In Oklahoma said:
Who’s not over it? Another article was posted on this very website, and it’s being discussed. Everyone knows there is no going back. Chuck Nienas is no dummy. What’s wrong with discussing it? Geographically, it’s not a fit. Dissing nearly a century of tradition, has been costly, and had ramifications. I think most realize there would have been ramifications had NU stayed as well. No one knows what those would be. It’s speculative. Nebraska football is an afterthought 11 years later, for a variety of reasons. Switching conferences is not easy. It’s a major shift. No one here expects them to go back, but athletically, it’s been a major disappointment, and a failure, regardless of why. Only Nebraska fans say it wasn’t a mistake.
Click to expand...
sleepy-sloth.gif
 



DuckTownHusker said:
I agree that the "as-it-was" Big XII was a better fit for Nebraska. The Big 8 was even better. But this article acts like Nebraska had a choice between the 1998 Big XII and the Big Ten.

Wrong.

We had a choice between the Big Ten and a floundering conference with a commissioner asleep at the wheel. 2010 Big XII was NOTHING like 1997 Big XII. By the time we left alongside Colorado, it had been strongly rumored that Mizzou was out and the Pac-12 was exploring a Pac-16 that featured some combination of Big XII South schools.

In the face of that topsy-turvy environment, you make the smart move. You join the conference that's got a ton of academic prestige, has been around for 100 years, offers you insane money, and is anchored by 3 traditional blue bloods and another 3-4 historically solid teams who seem content to never leave that conference.

If we'd stayed? The SEC would still have come calling for A&M, plus OU and UT (eventually). Maybe we'd have been better just playing Iowa State, KU, KSU and whomever we could dredge up out of C-USA to join that sinking ship.

Is Nebraska a perfect fit in the Big Ten? No. But we're a much better fit here than in the old, crumbling Texas XII.
Click to expand...
Agree. The problem isn't that NU, MU, and A&M left the conference. The problem is that Don Beebe is an absolute disaster as a leader who couldn't unite the conference, build its brand, and get member institutions to act in the interest of something bigger than themselves. He fomented pettiness and division.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top