Who was the best team in 1997/Nebraska or Michigan/Discuss

[7Samurai13]

Then why are you assholes here talking about it?

A Oklahoma fan made the thread. Nearest I can tell only 3 Husker fans have commented in a thread of 21 pages.

Husker fans don't talk about this because there is no discussion.

Would any ohia state fans like to talk about how your god urban covered up domestic abuse for ten years?

See this is why I stay in my yard. If Nebraska is so irrelevant then don't talk about us. But you can't because you are jealous and you know ohia state is about to shit the bed

And nearly every time this thread gets bumped, it’s by an Oklahoma fan.

 

[TexasExes98]

Nebraska is the clear loser here because they've been obsessed about this for over 20 years.

Oh for fuck's sake, let the Corn holers have this. They will never sniff another natty again, so let them have this one shiny moment.....

 

[7Samurai13]

Oh for fuck's sake, let the Corn holers have this. They will never sniff another natty again, so let them have this one shiny moment.....

And Michigan will sniff another natty?

 

[wazzu31]

Its really not debatable. The 97 Michigan team was essentially UCF the past two season except they had the brand.

 

[huskers1217]

If you read my posts in this thread, it is clear.

.......damn...where is my mind again?

 

[Rolltide94]

If you read my posts in this thread, it is clear.

.......damn...where is my mind again?

That looks painted on...I'm pretty good at finger painting...I volunteer as tribute.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Oh for fuck's sake, let the Corn holers have this. They will never sniff another natty again, so let them have this one shiny moment.....

Texas started in 1893. Realistically has 3 national titles (1963, 1969, 2005). Don't kid yourself about 1970, hell you didn't even go undefeated. The other 3 are at least respected via the AP and/or Coaches. So Texas has been around for 125 years and claimed 3 national titles. That means that 2.4% of their history they have won titles.

Nebraska started in 1890. Has 5 titles (1970, 1971, 1994, 1995, 1997) all 5 are undefeated seasons. So Nebraska has been around for 128 years and claimed 5 national titles. That means that 3.9% of their history they have won titles.

So for a Texas fan to say that Nebraska "will never sniff another natty again" sounds funny... at least get where we have gotten, before you talk shit.

And Michigan will sniff another natty?

This is a whole different thing with Michigan. Michigan has a brand and is respectable enough that they can definitely get there again, I don't think many seriously doubt that. But they are definitely the most overrated blue blood program by far. Counting them in the top 6 or 7 of all time programs is a huge stretch in my opinion, particularly when you delve into the facts behind their "records".

 

[TexasExes98]

Texas started in 1893. Realistically has 3 national titles (1963, 1969, 2005). Don't kid yourself about 1970, hell you didn't even go undefeated. The other 3 are at least respected via the AP and/or Coaches. So Texas has been around for 125 years and claimed 3 national titles. That means that 2.4% of their history they have won titles.

Nebraska started in 1890. Has 5 titles (1970, 1971, 1994, 1995, 1997) all 5 are undefeated seasons. So Nebraska has been around for 128 years and claimed 5 national titles. That means that 3.9% of their history they have won titles.

So for a Texas fan to say that Nebraska "will never sniff another natty again" sounds funny... at least get where we have gotten, before you talk shit.



This is a whole different thing with Michigan. Michigan has a brand and is respectable enough that they can definitely get there again, I don't think many seriously doubt that. But they are definitely the most overrated blue blood program by far. Counting them in the top 6 or 7 of all time programs is a huge stretch in my opinion, particularly when you delve into the facts behind their "records".

That was back in the Big 8 where NU only had to worry about 1 opponent every year and that was OU, so your path to an undefeated season was as easy as it got. that was back when the Big 8 allowed NU to recruit all of those illiterate dumb as fuck partial qualifiers who could not qualify academically at any school in the country (and that's saying a lot). That was back when the NCAA shut down OU's program in the 90's and Osborne's daddy (Switzer) had to resign, which was the only reason NU dominated. Had NU been a part of the Big 10 their entire existence, NU wouldn't have a single natty, mainly b/c of strict academic standards. Once the Big 8 broke up and NU had to play in tougher conferences where they couldn't recruit dumb as fuck partial qualifiers anymore and they had to play more than one tough conference opponent their program went to dog shit and will NEVER recover unless tOSU, UM, Wiscy, etc all receive sanctions from the NCAA and they shut their programs down for a decade or unless the B1G grants NU permission to recruit dumb as fuck partial qualifiers again. There was a reason Osborne was adamantly against the Big 12 wanting to raise academic standards and end the offering of unlimited scholarships to partial qualifiers; he knew without the help of all of those dumb as fuck, illiterate as fuck partial qualifiers (who as I said before, would not qualify academically at any other school in the country) would end NU's football program FOREVER (and he was right, btw).

No doubt Texas should have more NC's; no argument from me. HOWEVER, the big difference between Texas and Nebraska is that we will win NC's again. Could be next year, it could be 50 years from now, but it's going to happen again. We're in a state full of talent; you're in a state full of fucking corn. You boys are done forever. You now know what it's like to be KU and have your season end before it even starts. I highly doubt Nebraska ever wins another conference title since tOSU is your daddy now. Your women's volleyball program is badass though.......

 

[OregonDucks]

Debating in 2018 who was better in 1997...……?

Next we will be debating who was better between Harvard and Yale in 1923.

 

[TheReal_NU]

Debating in 2018 who was better in 1997...……?

Next we will be debating who was better between Harvard and Yale in 1923.

Yale. Fur surz

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@TexasExes98

That was back in the Big 8 where NU only had to worry about 1 opponent every year and that was OU, so your path to an undefeated season was as easy as it got

So you start off dumb, ok. You really want to talk about the Big 8 when your team was part of the SWC? That's really what you want to do. Everyone knows... its not even debated nor debatable that the Big 8 was better than the SWC. Sure, the Big Ten was better than the SWC, but again, that isn't saying much. Big Ten being better than the Big 8? I would be willing to listen to an argument, problem is that you take Ohio State out and the Big Ten is nothing in that era. Just like taking Nebrask and Oklahoma out of the Big 8 renders the Big 8 useless. Unfortunately, Texas kills everything it touches.... which included its own conference in the SWC.

But lets look at the years each of our teams won championships to see if any of this holds up.

Texas 1963 - other than Texas, Baylor was ranked #20 in the coaches. So there is that one, oh and Rice was the only other team in the entire conference that had a winning record. In that same year, Nebraska and Oklahoma happened to be the only two ranked in the Big 8, with Missouri also having a winning record.... Texas/Baylor or Nebraska/Oklahoma..

Texas 1969 - other than Texas, Arkansas was ranked #7. In the Big 8, Nebraska, Colorado, and Missouri were all ranked and Oklahoma had a winning record.

Nebraska 1970 - other than Nebraska, Oklahoma was ranked #20, with K-State and Colorado both having winning records. The SWC had Texas and Arkansas ranked with Texas Tech having a winning records. You lose.

Nebraska 1971 - other than Nebraska finishing #1, Oklahoma finished #2, and Colorado finished #3... do I even need to post the SWC? I mean really. You wanted to talk conference strength??? Anywho, on top of that, Iowa St finished with a winning record. In the SWC, Arkansas and Texas finished ranked #16 and #18 respectively, with TCU boasting the only other team with a winning record.

Nebraska 1994 - other than Nebraska, Colorado and K-State were ranked with Kansas having a winning record. In the SWC, A&M and Texas barely making it at #25 with Baylor and TCU having winning records.

Nebraska 1995 - other than Nebraska; Colorado, K-State, and Kansas all finished ranked.... oh and all in the top 10. In case you missed that... that is 50% of the conference being not just ranked, but ranked inside the top 10. The SWC had Texas, A&M, and Texas Tech ranked.


You lose. But allow me to keep on going... let's look at the number of ranked opponents faced in those championship years...

Texas 1963 - 2; Oklahoma and Navy (#1 and #2)
Texas 1969 - 3; Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Notre Dame (#8, #2, and #9)
Nebraska 1970 - 4; USC, Missouri, K-st, LSU (#3, #16, #20, #5)
Nebraska 1971 - 3; Colorado, Oklahoma, and Alabama (#9, #2, #2)
Nebraska 1994 - 5; West Virginia, UCLA, K-st, Colorado, Miami (#24, #13, #16, #2, #3)
Nebraska 1995 - 4; K-st,Colorado, Kansas, and Florida (#8, #7, #10, #2)

Weird how evey number next to Nebraska is at Texas' highest number or even greater.

So if the Big 8 sucked... what in the hell was the SWC problem. I mean hell, everyone knew you were all dirty anyway. Cheating scandals left and right down there, even SMU got the death penalty... and even with that, you could never do better?

More to come.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@TexasExes98

that was back when the Big 8 allowed NU to recruit all of those illiterate dumb as fuck partial qualifiers who could not qualify academically at any school in the country (and that's saying a lot)

"The Big Eight had no league-wide policy on admission of non-qualifiers or partial qualifiers. The schools made their own decisions. Nebraska’s policy was to accept non-qualifiers and allow them to meet NCAA academic standards while sitting out of competition during their freshman year.

In a World-Herald story published in July 1995, Tom Osborne laid out his position on the subject:

“It's not smart to tell a young man that you can't even come and pay your own way and prove you can make the grade. If he can pass 24 [credit]hours in college with a 2.0 grade average, it seems he ought to be given a chance to play. That's quite a sacrifice." "

So... sitting out, making the grade, all while paying your own way.... that doesn't seem fair to you? Liberal or Conservative, that's fucked up. Check another reason to hate Texas, they don't like to see other people put the work in and succeed before ever taking a snap.


"World-Herald columnist Tom Shatel wrote this in December 1995: “There is a school of thought that their [Texas]aim is to knock the Nebraska football machine down to everyone else's level. There may be some truth to that. But closer to reality is that this is not about academics and whether the Big 12's reputation wears ivy or mud. This is all about power.” "

Texas... simply put... is a little bitch.

More to come.

 

[TheReal_NU]

@TexasExes98




"The Big Eight had no league-wide policy on admission of non-qualifiers or partial qualifiers. The schools made their own decisions. Nebraska’s policy was to accept non-qualifiers and allow them to meet NCAA academic standards while sitting out of competition during their freshman year.

In a World-Herald story published in July 1995, Tom Osborne laid out his position on the subject:

“It's not smart to tell a young man that you can't even come and pay your own way and prove you can make the grade. If he can pass 24 [credit]hours in college with a 2.0 grade average, it seems he ought to be given a chance to play. That's quite a sacrifice." "

So... sitting out, making the grade, all while paying your own way.... that doesn't seem fair to you? Liberal or Conservative, that's fucked up. Check another reason to hate Texas, they don't like to see other people put the work in and succeed before ever taking a snap.


"World-Herald columnist Tom Shatel wrote this in December 1995: “There is a school of thought that their [Texas]aim is to knock the Nebraska football machine down to everyone else's level. There may be some truth to that. But closer to reality is that this is not about academics and whether the Big 12's reputation wears ivy or mud. This is all about power.” "

Texas... simply put... is a little bitch.

More to come.

You left off the part about the only reason that Texas has a natty in the last 50 years...

Mr. Vince “Mensa full qualifier” Young only scored a 6 on his Wonderlic because he couldn’t answer question #7:
What’s the next number in the sequence 1,2,3,4,5?
When it was multiple choice.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@TexasExes98

That was back when the NCAA shut down OU's program in the 90's and Osborne's daddy (Switzer) had to resign, which was the only reason NU dominated.

shut down their program? The only team to receive the death penalty came out of the SWC. You know, the conference known for being dirty.

Switzer had to resign because he was doing shady shit, still a great coach though.

Only reason Nebraska dominated? LOL, I mean did you already forget about the 70's and 80's. You know, the 70's where Nebraska ranked 3rd in the decade with an average percentile ranting of 95.8% and a decade record of 98-20-4 and back to back national titles... a.k.a. Better than Texas.

Or the 80's where Nebraska is ranked #1 in the decade with an average percentile rating of 96.1% and a record of 103-20.

In the 90's, Nebraska was ranked #2 on the decade with an average percentile rating of 96.6% and a record of 108-16-1.

If I remember correctly, Oklahoma was pretty good in the 70's and 80's. But go ahead and grasp at straws as to 'why NU dominate'... how about we ask another question; 'why wasn't Texas dominating in that weak ass excuse of a conference in the SWC'?

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@TexasExes98

Once the Big 8 broke up and NU had to play in tougher conferences where they couldn't recruit dumb as fuck partial qualifiers anymore and they had to play more than one tough conference opponent their program went to dog shit and will NEVER recover unless tOSU, UM, Wiscy, etc all receive sanctions from the NCAA and they shut their programs down for a decade or unless the B1G grants NU permission to recruit dumb as fuck partial qualifiers again.

Touger conferences... dude, c'mon. We already covered this. SWC couldn't hold the Big 8's jock strap.

More than one tough conference opponent? Dude... c'mon, already covered.

Never will recover unless yada yada yada... Ohio St will certainly be a road block, but hell we have already been to the B1G title game... which can't be said about Michigan. But nonetheless I find it funny that you want to say something like that... sure it has been a while since Nebraska has claimed a conference title, but it has been 10 years since Texas has claimed one too.

And the real funny part is that Nebraska still has 16 more conference titles than Texas. And we already covered that the SWC was utter shit compared to the Big 8. But go ahead... I picture you reading this going.....

But in reality...

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@TexasExes98

No doubt Texas should have more NC's; no argument from me. HOWEVER, the big difference between Texas and Nebraska is that we will win NC's again.

Suuuuuurrre and your opinion is validated by what exactly?

• The fact that Oklahoma is your daddy?
• The fact that your history already disproves this claim
• The fact that you have had 125 years inside PRIME recruiting grounds to do it and STILL HAVEN'T.
• The fact that you have all the money in the world and still can't do it.
• The fact that this is Nebraskas worst decade since the 1950's and yet since 2010... Nebraska is 70-47 while Texas is 63-52. While both went through the same number of coaches.
• Moreover, this is Nebraskas worst era in the same frame and yet since 2000, Nebraska is 154-91 while Texas is 173-71.

Your logic alone is dumb.

*We will win titles because we have recruiting grounds and we're Texas.
*Oh, so all the same stuff you had before... so why haven't you excelled well past measly little Nebraska by now?

I mean hell, you only recently past Nebraska in bowls and wins.... both coming from this same time frame and yet we still have more Nattys, Conference titles (no OU excuse... cause guess who we played for our conference titles too), Heismans, draft picks, weeks ranked, weeks at #1.

Keep trying though, eventually you will get there. I mean... if everything you said holds true and Nebraska doesn't win any more titles.... that means that at Texas' pace in ANOTHER 125 years, Texas will finally have more titles than Nebraska.

#fanGoals.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

@TexasExes98

Could be next year, it could be 50 years from now, but it's going to happen again. We're in a state full of talent; you're in a state full of fucking corn.

And has any of that changed? Ever?

The state of Texas has always had more talent, Nebraska has always had more corn. And yet, we still have more titles. Again, even your excuses don't even have weight.

 

[wazzu31]

Debating in 2018 who was better in 1997...……?

Next we will be debating who was better between Harvard and Yale in 1923.

If they had instant replay back then it would’ve proved the refs hosed Princeton in their games against Harvard and Yale so I’d give them the nod.

 

[HuskerinBig10]

@Blackshirts BLVD

@TexasExes98 gets like this once he thinks Texas is good. He usually posts stupid shit, but I have been correcting him since our days on ESPN from 2008 on.

When Texas goes back to stinking again, @TexasExes98 will slink away and disappear. Again.

For some reason he ignores which school has the MOST ACADEMIC ALL Americans. It ain't Texas, that is for sure.

Nevermind, that when it came to GSR and APR texas routinely was 11th or 12th in the Big 12. That is Graduation Success Rate and Academic Progress Rate.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Can we put a poll on this thread ex post facto? And people can come back and vote. ONLY for the sole purpose of rubbing it in the Michigan fans faces? Is that possible?


Turns out Rich Eisen = OP Michigan fan.

And I thought the AIDS epidemic was under control.