Husker-Sooner rivalry renewal surface oriented at best

A Lincoln Journal Star blog entry on Thursday revisited the possibility of a home-and-home series between former Big 8 rivals Nebraska and Oklahoma, which would take place in 2020-2021. That is, if it even takes place at all.

Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne said Thursday that the home-and-home proposal remains a possibility but until there is resolution to Big Ten Conference scheduling requirements are going to be, firming up a commitment is going to be iffy. The Big Ten currently requires eight conference games but that number could increase to 10 at some point. The Big 12 requires nine such games.

Interestingly enough, the 2021 season would mark the 50th anniversary of the Game of the Century in a game that pitted No. 1 Nebraska vs. No. 2 Oklahoma. The reigning National Champion Huskers won their 21^st consecutive game in beating Oklahoma 35-31.

I should be excited about the possibility, except I’m feeling lukewarm. After all, eighteen times, both carried top-10 rankings into their matchup. Twelve times, the winner went on to a national title. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

This traditional college football rivalry, however, lost its significance in 1996 with the forming of the Big 12 Conference. This was due to the split-division nature of the Big 12 that scheduled the Cornhuskers and Sooners to meet only twice every four years. Prior to the beginning of Big 12 play in 1996, the Cornhuskers and Sooners had met for 71 consecutive seasons.

However, it should also be dually noted that Oklahoma didn’t even as much as lift a finger to keep the rivalry afloat. In all fairness though, the rivalry carried more significance for Nebraska than Oklahoma.

After the Sooners fell on hard times between 1994-1998 late in the Gary Gibbs era and then under Howard Schnellenberger and John Blake, Nebraska rose to prominence by winning three National Titles. At that time, Johnny Come Lately programs like Kansas State and Colorado became bigger obstacles for the Huskers than Oklahoma. I know I speak for at least some Husker fans but while I despised the Sooners, I actually gained some respect for them after listening to a large segment of Colorado and Kansas State fans become overly arrogant about their program’s newfound success after eons of insignificance. My reasoning became, well since Oklahoma has won National Titles, at least they have reason to be arrogant.

For that reason, Oklahoma remained the center of whom Nebraska viewed as a rival while the Sooners already had Texas and Oklahoma State. Therefore, diminishing Nebraska’s rivalry significance for the Sooners.

Granted, Nebraska and Oklahoma playing again is nice for nostalgia purposes but there’s only so many times you can play up the “Stoops and Pelinis grew up together” angle. However, given the transient nature of college football coaches, Bo Pelini and Bob Stoops might not be at Nebraska and Oklahoma when 2020 rolls around.

The truth of the matter is, as great as Nebraska and Oklahoma rekindling their flame sounds good, you can never go back. As much as we want it too, it will not be the same.

It would take a while to rebuild the rivalry, and because of all the changes plus time, that might not happen and it may not have that "Game of the Year" feel it once had.

Mike Stoops would be a great catch if Carl Pelini bolts

The notion of “I can neither confirm nor deny it” is essentially like a “non-denial-denial.”


There is nothing publically official from the University of Nebraska or Florida Atlantic but all signs point toward Husker defensive coordinator Carl Pelini (brother of Nebraska head coach Bo Pelini) heading to become Florida Atlantic’s head coach to replace the retiring Howard Schnellenberger.

The Owls went 1-10 this past season which could be good or bad. The former because expectations would not through the roof and Florida is a very fertile recruiting area. Therefore winning four games next year would be considered a great success.
The next question becomes who replaces Carl Pelini? Current Husker assistant John Papuchis? He has been a vital member of Bo Pelini's staff since coming to Lincoln four years ago. He currently wears many hats for the program, including defensive line coach, special-teams coordinator and recruiting coordinator.

Mike Stoops? The recently deposed Arizona head coach would be a splashy hire plus, the Pelini and Stoops families are lifelong friends from Youngstown, Ohio. Plus, it has been rumored that newly appointed Ohio State head coach Urban Meyer might make a play for Stoops in which case Nebraska hiring him would be a defense mechanism as much as anything.

Another subplot, remember in 2003 when Frank Solich was fired and then Husker defensive coordinator Bo Pelini was named interim head coach for the Huskers’ Alamo Bowl win? Most people then were clamoring for him to be the head coach. Then athletic director Steve Pederson hired Bill Callahan, who then chose not to retain Bo Pelini. Not long after that, Oklahoma head coach Bob Stoops (Mike Stoops’ brother) hired Bo Pelini as the Sooners defensive coordinator. Would Bo Pelini do the same with Mike Stoops? I think it’s a definite maybe or better.

Perhaps Indiana defensive coordinator Mike Ekeler? Probably the least likely scenario. Ekeler was Pelini’s linebackers coach from 2008-2010 before leaving Nebraska to become the Hoosier defensive coordinator. That was a capacity Ekeler wanted but knew was unlikely to get at Nebraska as long as Carl Pelini was there. The Hoosiers, however, rank at or near the bottom in many national defensive categories. To be fair, it’s not as if Indiana is ever loaded with high end football players. Plus, would Bo Pelini bring him back one year after having left?

Mike Stoops would definitely be a great catch assuming Carl Pelini leaves. The question is, would Mike Stoops stay long term or would he desire to be a head coach again someday?
Stability is something every program desires but Bo Pelini is a young coach (43) and there will be a few changes here and there until it sorts itself out. It’s not about changing to change or keeping to be consistent. Every situation is a little different but if you get the right guys that get things done and work well together at the right place and time with the right attitude and mentality you keep them. There are ways to do that. Right now they need to find and keep the right guys. If your team doesn’t play well, has letdowns or the process isn’t working you have to look at ways to get from Point A to Point B. That’s what this is about. There’s more to it than football and that’s another part of what it’s about. Culture and mentality. There’s a lot to address and this is a good move. This is a team with talent, it's a matter of culture and getting them to respond and reach their potential.
Of course, there is the whole matter of Nebraska has yet to approach Mike Stoops because there is still nothing concrete about Carl Pelini moving onward. However, Stoops would be a great catch.

9-3 is in the eye of the beholder

With Nebraska’s regular-season ending 20-7 win over Iowa having come and gone, Lincoln Journal Star columnist Steve Sipple posed the question of “how do you feel about the Huskers’ 9-3 season?”


It’s certainly not the end all, be all that comes from any fan over the age of 30 that truly remembers Nebraska winning national championships (five to be exact). Keep in mind, Nebraska won three in the 1990s and went 60-3 from 1993-1997. However, I have said for a long time that we, as Nebraska fans, had become so jaded because of the long run of success we had during the Bob Devaney/Tom Osborne eras that we had lost sight of the definition of success.

Winning a national championship is every team’s goal, but only one team gets to do it. Does that mean every other team failed? Certainly not. We’ve had more than our share of success and failures this season, but any time you win 75 percent of your games, especially in a meat-grinder of a conference such as the Big Ten, you’ve got to look at that as a success (at least on some level).

You have to remember what Nebraska had for a leader in the athletic director’s chair and where that leader took this program (namely Steve Pederson). We didn’t “gravitate toward mediocrity” under his leadership, we sprinted toward it.

Could the Huskers have done better in 2011? Certainly, short of going undefeated, teams can always do better. They crapped the bed against Northwestern and didn’t play well against Michigan or Wisconsin. In the grand scheme of things, though 9-3 is a pretty good season. Great season? No but it certainly beats the 7-5 saddle Iowa has to ride on.

Osborne made a living on nine win seasons in a conference where you had six blowout wins a year and one legit game against Oklahoma. Well, when the Sooners started to backslide that the legit games later became Kansas State and Colorado. In the Big Ten, there is quality at the top and lack of quality at the bottom but the quality in the middle is much better.

The nine win benchmark was what everybody pointed to when Frank Solich broke that streak with a 7-7 season in 2002. Now, we have Bo Pelini winning nine games for the fourth year in a row and people are mad. Those same people who point to the 1990s don’t remember the 1970s and 1980s. They only remember the 1970 and 1971 seasons ending with national crowns. They don’t remember that from 1972 to 1979, the seasons ranged between 9-3 and 10-2. Those same people also only remember the 1980s for the consecutive 12-1 seasons in 1982 and 1983. They don’t remember that the rest of that decade ranged between 9-3 and 10-2. They also don’t remember that it took nine years for Osborne to win a conference title; something Pelini has had Nebraska on the doorstep of doing twice in his four year span.

I recently went to an Oklahoma message board after they lost to Texas Tech and they were calling for Stoops head. One post read like this “If you want to win a conference championship every other year Stoops is your guy, but if you want to win a national title we need a new coach.” Really? It’s about the perspective of fans. We would be thrilled with a conference championship but I dare say if we won a couple of those our fans would then elevate their expectations to winning national titles and if we didn’t do that they would still want Pelini fired.

Look, there’s no way in hell I want to have Iowa’s standards. They’re happy with seven wins but do you hear Iowa fans calling for Kirk Ferentz’s head right now? Hell no because their standards are nowhere near ours (which is why they've never won a national title).

What people don’t seem to realize is that the days of Nebraska beating the living crap out of teams week in and week out are long since passed. College football has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. The playing field is a lot more level than it once was when an elite list of teams like Nebraska, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State and others were dominant year in and year out. Northwestern isn’t the weak sister they once were because they’re now capable of playing at a more competitive level than they used to. Conversely, look at Colorado, they had risen up to an elite level not that long ago, and now they’re the Pac 12 doormat. Osborne averaged ten wins a year in 25 years as head coach, and there were a ton of 9-3, 9-2-1 seasons in that legendary era.

I remember in the early 1990s about how Husker fans had to make a choice whether we could be happy with nine wins a season with Osborne or hire somebody who can get us to “the promised land.” Well, a few years later, he got the Huskers to the promised land three times in four years, and it wasn’t until we got an underhanded sleeze of an AD like Pederson that the program fell from the elite.

Nebraska is back where it once was with nine wins a year, and I think it can get back to the promised land with the current setup. I appreciate those years under Osborne today more than I did at the time they happened, and I think the frustration of losses like those the Huskers experienced this year are far outweighed by the overall success and direction the program is now headed but beating Iowa was helpful.

The rise and fall of Nebraska's rivalry games

The term “dog days of summer” is normally associated with Major League Baseball pennant races but it can apply to college football too.

Here we are in the second week of July. Most teams are a few weeks away from reporting for fall practice. You’ll get a smattering of games on Labor Day weekend and thereafter the schedule gets into full bloom.

For us Husker fans, Lincoln Journal Star columnist Steve Sipple had a palate-whetting blog entry pertaining to the notion of “rivalries” in sports but specifically college football. Sipple, who has done an outstanding job of covering Husker football for many years, addressed a statement that Kansas head coach Mark Mangino made on ESPN that answered the question of who is Kansas’ more heated rivalry, Kansas State or Missouri?

“We have a great rivalry in-state with Kansas State as well,” Mangino said. “But I think our fan base has made it pretty clear to me that the Missouri game is very important.”

When I think of rivalry, I mostly think of a few things: a) There is definite polarization as in there’s no way in hell you could root for the other team, b) The game usually means something when the two teams play, and c) Fans will watch the game even if they don’t care about either team.

Michigan-Ohio State, Alabama-Auburn, Texas-Oklahoma and others fit that description. OK, sure, you can say Harvard-Yale but how many people are going to drop whatever they are doing to watch that game? Since I have lived much of my life in Northern California (save for four years while attending the University of Nebraska), I have found it also comical how Cal-Stanford is called “The Big Game.”

Sure, there was the game in 1982. After Stanford had taken a 20-19 lead on a field goal with four seconds left in the game, the Golden Bears used five lateral passes on the ensuing kickoff return to score the winning touchdown and earn a 25-20 victory. Members of the Stanford Band had come onto the field midway through the return, believing that the game was over, which added to the ensuing confusion. The game might be a rivalry but it is hardly big because unless you live in Northern California and have a rooting interest in either team, you’re not going to watch it.

For years, Nebraska was rivals with Oklahoma. The interesting thing is that OU has generally considered Texas its biggest rival but Nebraska-Oklahoma was the traditional game that took place the day after Thanksgiving. Plus, both teams were good at the same time for many years, combining for 12 National Championship (OU has seven, NU has five) and dominated the Big Eight conference, which has since expanded to the Big 12.

With that expansion, both teams play each other two years out of every four since Nebraska is in the Big 12 North and Oklahoma is in the Big 12 South. Since 1993, the two clubs have only share two good seasons (2001 and to a lesser extent 2006). OU suffered some fallow years from 1994-1998 before Bob Stoops arrived to resurrect the program. Nebraska suffered mostly subpar years from 2002-2007 but appears to be on its way back to prominence under Bo Pelini.

Colorado, Kansas State and Missouri have had elements of the notion “rivalry” with Nebraska the last 15 or so years as the meetings have been testy at times. Bill McCartney was known for “red lettering” Nebraska on the schedule but a segment of Husker fans even to this day do not consider it a rivalry.

I would sort of disagree with that notion. Since 1993, the two teams have met 17 times with Nebraska winning 12 games but six by a touchdown or less and eight by ten points or fewer. To take it a step further, did you see CU’s 62-36 blowout over the unbeaten Huskers in 2001 or NU’s 30-3 blowout in 2005 coming?

Kansas State made a tremendous turnaround under Bill Snyder (now back for his second stint after replacing Ron Prince). The Wildcats defeated Nebraska 1998, 2000, 2003 and 2004. However, it should also be pointed out that the only one of those Husker teams that finished in the top ten was the 2000 club that went 11-2. The 2004 and 2007 Huskers went 5-6 and 5-7 respectively and were the worst in post Bob Devaney history. The 2007 Nebraska team trounced the Wildcats 73-31.

Missouri has been mostly fair-to-middlin before having a breakout 12-2 season in 2007. The 2008 campaign came with a lot of hype and while 10-4 and Big 12 North title is not a failure per se, it was not the enormous success most envisioned. Missouri beat Nebraska in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2008. Two of those wins were Bill Callahan teams (2005 and 2007) while the 2008 team had a lot of Callahan remnants. The timing of that game also came before Nebraska finished its season winning six of its final seven games.

As for Missouri, other than 1997, the Tigers were routinely hammered by the best of Nebraska. K-State was also routinely exposed by the best Nebraska teams as well.

Granted, getting blown out by the Huskers from 1993-1997 was hardly a disgrace but Colorado, Kansas State and Missouri’s success against Nebraska have almost as much to do with the Huskers fall as it does their rise.

Point being, of the three, Colorado is the closest thing to a rivalry because they have battled the Huskers close consistently when they were in their prime. Plus, the aforementioned 2001 game between the two teams sent Nebraska into a tailspin.

That said, I don't think Nebraska has a true rival. If they played Oklahoma every year like they did in the Big Eight, then I believe it'd be one of the best rivalry games in the country no matter if its one sided or not.The Huskers have had so much success over the years against the five other North teams, I don't consider them as a rival in the truest sense.

Reaching the Big 12 title game will be easier than winning it

“Expectations,” “progress,” and “process” are three terms that Nebraska football fans have heard ad nausea the past few years.

The context of those words have centered around how expectations were lowered in the Bill Callahan years and how winning the Big 12 North title in 2006 (its first since 1999) was considered progress. With Bo Pelini as the head coach, he has constantly talked about “the process.”

I remember in the moments after Nebraska’s 37-14 win over Colorado, players paraded around the field with the Big 12 North title trophy. You would have thought the Huskers won a BCS bowl game. I was happy as a fan because it was the first step necessary for the program getting back where it needed to be.

The Huskers then lost the Big 12 title game 21-7 to Oklahoma and then 17-14 to Auburn in the Cotton Bowl. The team plummeted to a 5-7 season in 2007, which would be Callahan’s last, and then rebounded with a 9-4 season a year ago in Pelini’s first season.

I remember conversing with many fellow Husker fans last year at this time saying that going from 5-7 to 9-4 is the easy the part. Going from 9-4 to 11-2 will be the hard part. There are two ways to look at that statement. Nebraska lost two games by less than seven points (35-30 to Virginia Tech and 37-31 in overtime to Texas Tech). So with a couple of breaks, Nebraska could have been 11-2. That said, the higher a team strives to climb the ladder, the smaller the margin for error becomes.

As for winning the Big 12 championship, “getting to” the title game should be the easy part but “winning it” will be the hard part.

With the Huskers developing their program the right way under Pelini, the team should win the Big 12 North division seven or eight years out of every ten. I say that because I do not see a program in the North that is going to go on a consistent run of success.

Iowa State will never be a long term threat and it certainly won’t be in 2009 since it is breaking in a new head coach. Yes, Iowa State upset the No. 12 ranked Huskers 19-10 in 1992 and bested Nebraska in 2002 and 2004 but let’s face it, aside from 1992; the Cyclones only beat Nebraska when it was down. The Huskers went 7-7 in 2002 and 5-7 in 2004.

Iowa State’s best chances to win the Big 12 North came in 2004 and 2005, it not only failed to win it but fell short when the division winner (Colorado) went 4-4 and then 5-3. Best case scenario, the Cyclones might have a few years where they go 7-5 or even 8-4 but they are not going to be churning out 9-3 or better on a regular basis because the Cyclones will get a lot of recruits that Nebraska or Iowa didn’t want.

Bill Snyder returns as head coach to Kansas State for a second stint. The Wildcats defense was rated a Kevin Cosgrove-esque 117th in total defense and had its starting quarterback (Josh Freeman) leave for the NFL. Best case scenario, K-State goes 6-6 in 2009.

Snyder deserves enormous credit for turning around a once moribund program that went 299-510 before 1989. Snyder posted a record of 136-68-1 at K-State but it should also be pointed out that the Wildcats went 9-13 his final two years. Plus, how many of these “coming home” stories really work? Not many.

I have to think that Colorado is not going to be bitten by the injury bug like last year during a 5-7 season. Yes, the Buffs have 15 starters returning but they still have the look of an 8-4 team at best – and that’s being charitable. Colorado won the Division four times from 2001-2005 but in two of those years they had conference records of 4-4 (2004) and 5-3 (2005). That’s not exactly taking control of the division.

I also do not think Dan Hawkins is the right guy. Hawkins went 53-11 at Boise State but is overmatched at the Big 12 level, going 13-24. Plus, CU football is not woven into the culture. When people think of football in Colorado, they think of the Denver Broncos.

We’ll find out how good of a coach Missouri’s Gary Pinkel really is because the Tigers lose seven players on defense, and its offense will be gutted with the graduation of Chase Daniel and Chase Coffman and Jeremy Maclin’s departure to the NFL.

Because Columbia, Mo., is between Kansas City and St. Louis (two fairly fertile grounds for talent), the Tigers will always have some talent but they just don’t strike you as a program that will put together runs like the last two seasons (22-6). While I wouldn’t consider the 2008 season a failure as the Tigers went 10-4, it was a disappointment given the preseason hype they had.

Kansas is perhaps the Huskers biggest threat for the 2009 season. For starters, the Jayhawks get Nebraska at home and have a returning starter in Todd Reesing at quarterback while the Huskers will have a first-year starter.

Kansas will be a “tough out” because Mark Mangino (45-41) knows how to maximize the talent he has. The Jayhawks football program, however, despite its success under Mangino is always going to fight the perception of being a “basketball school,” which means Nebraska will generally have a talent advantage.

As for the hard part of “winning the Big 12 title.” In the South division, Baylor won’t be a factor any time soon. Texas A&M will probably bounce back to some degree. Oklahoma State and Texas Tech have done a nice job under head coaches Mike Gundy and Mike Leach respectively. However, those two programs might have reached their ceiling because both programs will get their share of players that Oklahoma and Texas did not want.

As for OU and Texas? Both schools enjoy a recruiting advantage over Nebraska because of their success this decade and being in fertile recruiting areas. Texas has enjoyed a 115-26 record under head coach Mack Brown with a National title in 2005. Oklahoma has gone 109-24 under Bob Stoops with a National title in 2000.

What gives the Huskers hope is that both coaches have lost as many big games as they’ve won. And both teams should enter the 2009 season in the conversation of National title contenders.

Oklahoma is like the Atlanta Braves of college football. Yes, they have one title but they have been there three other times and had their doors blown off in the other one (55-19 loss to USC in 2004). Again, for as great as Oklahoma has been this decade, you can’t help but feel to some degree that it has underachieved.

As for Texas, which is 4-6 against OU this decade, you also get the feeling that with all of the talent, it acquires, it should have more than one title.