Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Eight blue-blood programs -- is Nebraska one of them?

[gardenjam]

Its good we still have that Natl perception, but that is fast disappearing. Another 10 yr without a conf title or appearance in the football final four, and we will be a full generation (25-30 yr) removed from any serious football accomplishments, recruits parents will mostly have forgotten that Nebr used to be a name brand. Much like most of us in the 35-60 yr bracket now have forgotten about how Minn and Pitt and Army used to be a Name brand.

We dont want to be part of the past, we want to be the here and now.

Here's one opinion:

Travis Haney: Nebraska
For me, it was Nebraska (my score for the Huskers: "9"). It was challenging to balance the program's rich history and tradition with the fact that, really, it has been mostly irrelevant since the turn of the century. Even a move to the Big Ten has not returned the Cornhuskers to national prominence. Coaches see a program that, largely due to location, has struggled to keep up with the recruiting boom. It makes you wonder whether Nebraska will eventually be a museum relic, a storied program we look back on fondly, or if it can find a way back to elite status in modern college football. Count me among the doubters.

 

[HuskerGene]

Well I just unfriended Travis Haney

 

[Sooner 24]

What's the truth exactly then? The playoff has destroyed the bowl system? Seriously? You mean the bowl system that is seemingly always adding a new bowl each year with one ridiculous name after another just so the NCAA could make more money? You mean the bowl system that is pretty much an example of the "everyone gets a medal" sports culture in today's society? Or the one where it seemed like almost every single year there was some sort of controversy in the final rankings or bowl selections? I think that without a doubt, in most years, the playoff system will select the 4 best teams to play for the national championship. There will always be some discussion on 4th team to be selected, but the top 3 will almost always be the legit top 3 teams.

The NCAA makes no money off of the bowl games.

 

[BigRedDave]

The NCAA makes no money off of the bowl games.

Ah, I thought they did for the establishment of them or something of that sort. Thanks for the correction. :Thumbsup:

 

[Suhperman]

Interesting that the B1G now has 3 of the 8 blue-blood schools and one could make an argument for Penn St. had they listed 10.

 

[solesrfr]

The NCAA makes no money off of the bowl games.

Neither do most of the schools that go. Read a few interesting articles showing how the majority of schools end up losing a bunch of money if they accept a bowl bid. The bowl committees sure do make out though.



C

 

[CPD924]

Of course NU is.

 

[gardenjam]

Well I just unfriended Travis Haney

Although I don't agree with him that it will happen, I do think we need to pick it up over the next 10+ years or we may well be the next Minnesota. Or.....more likely, Iowa.
The good old Nebraska we all knew would now be playing Ohio State for the conference title most every year as we did Oklahoma for decades.

 

[Trojan Husker]

I love love LOVE that we made this list. Phew, it was close too. To me it's no question but I'm slightly biased.

Did you see the follow-up article where they basically put us on notice? Linked below. Let's win some championships soon! GBR.

http://www.espn.com.au/college-football/story/_/id/17379567/why-college-football-blue-bloods-matter

 

[jpmandm]

Yes. If you just go to Winsipedia, you will see Nebraska in the top ten in EVERY category they have except first-round draft picks (15th) and bowl record (34th). There's really no way you could credibly create a top 8-10 all-time list and not include Nebraska, even including the last 15-18 years (gosh, has it been that long?). It's hard to really fathom HOW elite we were from 1969-2001 (really 1962-2001 if you exclude 1968). There's been nothing like it by ANY school in that time. Everyone else had bad down times then. Not us. At all. Even 1990. And even NU since 2001 has had only 2 losing seasons and almost always 9+ wins. I know the quality of the divisions, etc., but still. Everyone other team has had much worse down periods than us (OU and Bama in the 1990s, etc.). I know we absolutely need to win national championsips (first) and Big Ten titles (second), but even ESPN can't deny we are the winningest team since 1970 by far, even considering the last 20 years. And if you exclude the 1950s, we would be the winningest program of all time by a long shot. (Ifs and buts...) So, be down in February if you must, but AUGUST IS A TIME FOR HOPE AND PRIDE!! GBR!!

If you just look at the Top Ten teams in BOTH total wins AND winning percentage, you'll get those eight plus Tennessee and Penn State,

 

[SoCalRed]

What's the truth exactly then? The playoff has destroyed the bowl system? Seriously? You mean the bowl system that is seemingly always adding a new bowl each year with one ridiculous name after another just so the NCAA could make more money? You mean the bowl system that is pretty much an example of the "everyone gets a medal" sports culture in today's society? Or the one where it seemed like almost every single year there was some sort of controversy in the final rankings or bowl selections? I think that without a doubt, in most years, the playoff system will select the 4 best teams to play for the national championship. There will always be some discussion on 4th team to be selected, but the top 3 will almost always be the legit top 3 teams.

I have to agree with you Dave. The play-off has not destroyed the bowl system. The BCS did that when they tore apart traditional bowl match-ups.

And you are correct, bowl games continue to mean just as much as they ever did beyond the top two bowl match-ups every year, which are now play-off games.

 

[HUSKER HOT SAUCE]

Did anyone one here really need ESPN to tell them that Nebraska is a "Blue Blood" in the college football world? Of course we are, does the term, "No crap Sherlock" ring a bell with any of you.


Nice edit....HAHA.... I didn't type in crap(well, debatable I 'spose, but still....LOL)

 

[Sooner 24]

Neither do most of the schools that go. Read a few interesting articles showing how the majority of schools end up losing a bunch of money if they accept a bowl bid. The bowl committees sure do make out though.



C

Most conferences compensate the schools so they just break even.

 

[Sooner 24]

Although I don't agree with him that it will happen, I do think we need to pick it up over the next 10+ years or we may well be the next Minnesota. Or.....more likely, Iowa.
The good old Nebraska we all knew would now be playing Ohio State for the conference title most every year as we did Oklahoma for decades.

At least Minnesota has 4 NC while Iowa has 0.

 

[solesrfr]

Most conferences compensate the schools so they just break even.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/...make-sense-for-schools-sponsors/#d8b5e434af4e

But it is well documented (here is but one source) that each year at least 10 and perhaps as many as 20 schools lose money after subtracting travel expenses and mandatory ticket purchases. Plus they only receive a share of the total bowl payout since the payout goes to the conference.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/26804/bowling-no-dollars-college-bowl-game-economics

The San Diego Union-Tribune ran a story in 2009 detailing the Western Michigan Broncos’ 2008 trip to the Texas Bowl in Houston. The school had to spend $450,000 to buy a block of 11,000 tickets. It sold 548 of them and ended up with a loss of $412,535. Ouch.

C