Pelini needs to follow his own advice with social media beehive

“There is no place like Nebraska,” or so say the fight song lyrics. On two occasions this past offseason and at various other times in his five-year tenure as Husker head coach, Bo Pelini has spoken of the challenge Nebraska football coaches face in keeping their players on an even keel amid constant fan rabidness.

Seems a good challenge to have.

“LSU is into it, Oklahoma was into it,” Pelini said in a Lincoln Journal Star blog entry. “But the constant seven days a week, 365 days a year, it’s different here than those places. It’s not as constant a barrage of it at some of the other places I’ve been. It’s kind of compartmentalized a little bit where the players aren’t slammed over the head with it every day of the year. That is a challenge here.

“But it just is the way it is. It’s not going away. And believe me, the fans’ passion for it, and the media, that’s a positive. But there are issues with that, too, that relate to our football team and how you keep them focused and heading in a certain direction.”

With some Husker fans, that statement goes over like a turd in a punchbowl. However, two things are equally true. Pelini came to Nebraska in 2008 looking to breathe life back into a program that became dormant under former head coach Bill Callahan, who went 27-22. The Huskers have gone 39-16 in Pelini’s four seasons but have yet to make the jump from good to great and for a program that has not won a conference title since 1999 that makes for an impatient fan base, which has very little in the first place.

In Pelini’s initial press conference he spoke with high expectations and after Nebraska demolished Arizona 33-0 in the 2009 Holiday Bowl, Pelini proclaimed that “Nebraska is back and we’re here to stay.” There is nothing wrong with having confidence but the pitfall is that if the team fails to live up to its advanced billing, criticism will follow.

As a broad generalization, however, while Nebraska fans are very knowledgeable, they do tend to overreact such as getting too high after wins but overly cynical after the team loses.  

Pelini, however, can’t control what media and fans think and how it impacts his team or certain players on the team. Part of his job is to manage the issue and with the advent of internet message boards, blogs and social media, the problem is much tougher to manage than it was 20 years ago.

By his own admission, Pelini is “old school” and longs for the days where leading a college program involved coaching young men and preparing them for the future.

I’m not necessarily saying that Pelini was right to say what he did but let’s face it; the same fans that are mad at him for sharing his opinions are also the same fans that thought Tom Osborne, Frank Solich and Callahan were milquetoast in their interviews. Just remember, you were the same ones that lauded Pelini for his brutal honesty. However, in every walk of life I have discovered that people who want you to “be honest” really don’t want the truth. They want the truth according to them.

The part of Pelini’s comment that truly resonates is where he mentions how LSU and Oklahoma fans are whereas with Nebraska, fans talk Husker football 365 days per year. What makes Nebraska different from most places is that there is no other Div. I-A college football program in the state, which means no competing loyalties to divert attention. Also, there are no professional sports. Husker football to Nebraskans is their NFL, MLB, NHL and NBA rolled into one. In Oklahoma, you not only have OU football but there is also Oklahoma State and on the professional sports side there is the Oklahoma City Thunder. Granted, OU football will always be ticket No. 1 in Oklahoma even with the rise of OSU and the Thunder, it means there are other teams to divert fans attention.

LSU football does not have any competing loyalties within the state when it comes to college football but you also have two professional sports teams (New Orleans Saints and New Orleans Hornets) to divert attention. The Saints have certainly attracted their share by winning the Super Bowl in 2009 and having the recent Bountygate scandal.

It appears to me in this article that Pelini is simply stating; the negativity the fans voice towards the players can be a bit overwhelming. Let’s also remember that while most Husker fans see Osborne as this iconic figure, those same fans wanted to run him out of town on various occasions.

While I enjoyed watch the team win three National Titles in the 1990s, the negative side is that fans expectations have become skewed. Though I agree that 2012 represents a crossroad for Pelini, the same fans that point out that he enters Year #5 are also the same fans that forget that Osborne took seven years to win a conference title and 21 years to win a National Title.

However, maybe Pelini needs to take the same advice he offered his players, and stop reading all of the social media. If you’re just reading Lincoln Journal Star and Omaha World Herald and seeing the same complaints from the same ten people all the time, it doesn't necessarily reflect the views of the entire state. If you’re making $3 million a year, you need to grow some thicker skin and stop paying attention to the criticisms of every single armchair quarterback in America.

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.

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.

Huskers not alone in needing to iron out rough edges

The perfectionist Nebraska football fan would like to have seen the Huskers season-opening 40-7 win over Tennessee-Chattanooga have a lot fewer rough edges.


However, there are a few things that miss the point about that argument. For openers, if quarterbck Taylor Martinez plays the entire game, Nebraska probably wins 54-7 but in a lopsided game it is much more prudent to get the second and third teamers some much need playing time. If you hadn't watched the game, you would have immediately thought the Huskers were a powerhouse but a 40-7 win is nothing to complain about whether it's Game #1 or Game #10. Consider what else took place around the naton. No. 2 Alabama beat a Kent State team that is probably just as weak as UT-Chattanooga 48-7. No. 6 Florida State was a 34-0 winner over Louisiand-Monroe, an opponent just as weak as Kent State and UT-Chattanooga. No. 18 Ohio State beat Akron 42-0. Not that big of a deal considering Akron is consistently one of the worst teams in the nation.


The point is that other teams had their problems Saturday, too, and we haven't begun to mention reigning National Champion Auburn needing a miracle to beat Utah State 42-38. While we're at it, let's mention Sacramento State going into Oregon State and winning 29-28. Sac State, people! Div. I-AA Sac State. Oklahoma is the top-ranked team in the nation and played like it n beating Tulsa 47-14 but keep in mind led the Sooners 17-0 in the Big 12 title game only to lose 23-20.

The truth of the matter is, nobody is a juggernaut. Yes, the Huskers need to learn to develop consistency, but there is no team that resembles the 1995 Huskers let alone say, the 2004 USC Trojans or the 2001 Miami Hurricanes out there. Yes, Nebraska has a long way to go, but the Huskers can get better.


True, there were some impressive performances around the Top 25 ike No. 11 Wisconsin rolling UNLV 51-17. In some circles, Wisconsin is consdered the favorite to win the Big Ten conference and they certainly played like it Thursday. The Huskers have three more nonconference games (Fresno State, Washington and Wyoming) before vsitng Wisconsin on Oct. 1. Fresno State lost to a pretty meidocre (and frequently overrated) California team 36-21 but a garbage time touchdown made that game closer than it appeared. Washington narrowly escaped at home with a 30-27 win over Div. I-AA Eastern Washington. Wyoming also narrowly beat Div. I-AA Weber State 35-32.


Point being, the Huskers have a month to clean up their mistakes before the aforementioned road trip to Madison, Wisc. so there is no need to panic.


True, the Huskers' season-opener was more ragged than you would have liked, especially on offense as the timing and spacing in the backfield seemed surprisingly bad on several occasions. However, I didn't see anything that priactice and time shouldn't overcome. The young offensive line needs to come together -- and very quickly at that. They had a few good moments but to many not so good.


No need to worry yet. Let's see how much the Huskers get cleaned up this week and what they put on the field Saturday against a Fresno State program that has had a history of knocking off college football's giants.

So how good are the Huskers?

It felt strange for the second Saturday in a row to be a Nebraska football fan.

On Saturday Oct. 3, the Huskers were enjoying a bye entering a game on the ensuing Thursday night on ESPN at Missouri. Two days after rallying for a 27-12 come-from-behind victory over the hated Tigers, the Huskers enjoyed a Saturday free of games seven days before yet another of which figures to be a “swing game” in Lincoln against the Texas Tech Red Raiders, who hammered Kansas State 66-14 with starting quarterback Taylor Potts sitting out with a concussion.

The Red Raiders have won the last three head-to-head meetings against Nebraska. There was the 70-10 debacle in Lubbock in 2004 and two heartbreaking losses (34-31 in 2005 and 37-31 in overtime in 2008).

The Huskers are 4-1 at the present time and entered Thursday’s game rated No. 21 in the AP poll. How much will the Huskers climb in the polls this week? No. 17 Auburn lost 44-23 to unranked Arkansas on the road. No. 3 Alabama pounded No. 20 Mississippi 22-3. Losing to the Crimson Tide is no disgrace but that is two losses for the Rebels to Nebraska’s one. Perhaps Nebraska gains a spot or two anyhow.

My question about Nebraska now is how good is this team, which has fashioned a 14-5 record under second-year head coach Bo Pelini? That’s something I’m still trying to read, however, I can already sense Pelini's MO will be that his teams will grow and get better as the season goes along -- and that will be a trend.

And if this team gets better (and it should) I now wonder -- what exactly is the ceiling this season?

Keep in mind, the Huskers outplayed No. 5 Virginia Tech in its building only to lose 16-15. Nebraska is much better than Missouri but despite the crucial road win Thursday the Big 12 North title path is not totally clear. No. 16 Kansas, where the Huskers visit on Nov. 14, might have something to say about who wins the division title.

No. 15 Oklahoma State and No. 19 Oklahoma would probably be favored to beat Nebraska if the two teams met. Well, the Huskers host OU on Nov. 7. The Sooners defeated Baylor on Saturday 33-7 in a game in which Heisman Trophy winning quarterback Sam Bradford returned from a collar bone injury. However, even with Bradford’s return, OU has flaws that it did not have last season.

As things stand now, I think Nebraska is no lower than the third best team in the Big 12 and Top 15 nationally. Well, with a few breaks perhaps Top 10. That said, the Huskers are flawed enough to lose a game or two.

Nebraska has a legit chance at running the table and playing Texas for the Big 12 title with OU and TTech coming to Lincoln. That’s not to say it will happen but it definitely can.

Sizing up the rest of the season in blackjack terms

Preseason predictions by game are always compelling if not conjecture. Well, I contributed to such a matter back in June: http://napavince.blogspot.com/2009/06/2009-nebraska-football-game-by-game.html

As I expected, Nebraska stands at 3-1, predicting relatively easy wins over Florida Atlantic (49-3), Arkansas State (38-9) and Louisiana-Lafayette (55-0) along with a close loss to Virginia Tech (16-15). Of course, who could have predicted the defeat at Virginia Tech to be of such heart-breaking proportions.

The Huskers enjoy a bye this week entering their Oct. 8 Thursday night ESPN telecast at Missouri. Faurot Field has been a house of horrors lately for Nebraska, which has given up 41 points in each of the last three head-to-head meetings in Columbia, Mo. And has not won their since 2001.

Excluding any Big 12 championship or bowl games, most people tabbed Nebraska as 8-4 on the low end and 10-2 on the high end. Our minds might change of course but we size up the Huskers remaining games and their chances for victory in blackjack terms:

Oct. 8 at Missouri:

Victory odds: No worse than even money.

The Tigers are 4-0 but it’s also a soft 4-0. Quarterback Blaine Gabbert, everyone’s favorite in Nebraska for de-committing two years ago, has looked very good but the Tigers ground game and run defense are less than stellar. Mizzu also struggled to put away Bowling Green (27-20) and Nevada (31-21). Whoever is favored will be a slight one.

Oct. 17 vs. Texas Tech

Victory odds: No worse even money.

The Red Raiders are not the juggernaut they were last season, and keep in mind Nebraska was a desperation Joe Ganz interception away from pulling off the upset in Lubbock in a 37-31 overtime loss. Texas Tech might not be offensive machine it normally is but they are still like a fast break basketball team that needs to be lured into a halfcourt game.

Oct. 24 vs. Iowa State

Victory odds: Blackjack

The Cyclones are 3-1 but got hammered 35-3 by instate rival Iowa, the only team Iowa State has played with a pulse. There’s a good chance the Cyclones won’t win a game the rest of the way. OK, at best they win one or two but don’t count on it happening in Lincoln.

Oct. 31 at Baylor

Victory odds: Blackjack

With quarterback Robert Griffin healthy, Nebraska had about a 65 percent to win. With Griffin on the shelf the rest of the season with a knee injury, the Huskers victory chances go up to about 85 percent. The Bears have been overmatched since entering the Big XII in 1996 but were viewed by some prognosticators as a “bowl eligible candidate but seriously, even with Griffin who else were they going to beat in Big XII besides Iowa State?

Nov. 7 vs. Oklahoma

Victory odds: Likely dealer win

The Sooners have shown no shortage of resilience since falling 14-13 to BYU in a game that saw quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner Sam Bradford sustain a broken collar-bone. OU has since rebounded to defeat Idaho State (64-0) and Tulsa (45-0) with backup Landry Jones at the helm. The Sooners will probably face a pretty pissed off Miami team. Keep in mind, the overhyped Hurricanes got taken to the woodshed with a 31-10 loss at Virginia Tech Saturday. Bradford might be back by the time OU comes to Lincoln but even without him, the Sooners will be tough to beat.

Nov. 14 at Kansas

Victory odds: No worse than even money

This game will have plenty of Big XII North implications. The Jayhawks are 4-0 and faced their first true test last week at home against Southern Mississippi. Kansas did not pass with flying colors but a 35-28 win against a good Conference USA team is nothing to scoff about. KU will be a tough out as long as Mark Mangino is the coach but Nebraska does have a talent advantage not to mention equal if not superior coaching with Bo Pelini.

Nov. 21 vs. Kansas State

Victory odds: Blackjack

The Wildcats are showing far greater signs of life in Bill Snyder the Sequel than they did under Ron Prince but let’s face it, this is a reclamation project. If K-State lost 73-31 to a down and out Nebraska team in 2007 what makes you think they’ll beat what figures to a Husker team that is getting better at this stage of the season.

Nov. 27 at Colorado

Victory odds: No worse than even money

I know most Husker fans are thinking this game is a slamdunk and that it’s not a rivalry. Unfortunately, the latter misses the point. Nebraska has won the majority of head-to-head contests but very few have been blowouts.

CONCLUSION

With Pelini’s coaching staff, Nebraska will occasionally win a game you don’t think it’ll win. They’ll rarely if ever loss a game that looks like a slamdunk to win. They’ll win no worse than half of their bubble games.

A 9-3 regular season looks like a pretty solid bet.

Will the North rise up?

Some conversations you can absolutely count on hearing. When it comes to Big XII football, you can definitely count on media members and/or message board posters to talk ad nauseam about the South division’s supremacy over the North.

It’s hard to argue against that idea now because since the conference was formed in 1996 since the South has won nine of the 14 Big XII championship games. The last time a North division team won it was 2003 (Kansas State).

However, the question that bears asking is will the pendulum swing back toward the North any time soon? Listening to some people you would think the answer was a resounding “never.” Unfortunately, those same people forget that when the conference was initially formed the North was the superior division. Nebraska was at its zenith in the midst of a 60-3 run with three National Championships in four seasons as well as four undefeated regular seasons in five years. Colorado and Kansas State also had outstanding teams in that stretch and if not for Nebraska, who’s to say they might not have won a National title? Of course, it wouldn’t be the same without Kansas State and Colorado fans living in the world of “if.”

In that same stretch, keep in mind that the South division teams that were strong now were not strong then. Oklahoma was pathetic. Texas was decent but far from what it is now. Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were so-so but not as prominently on the radar as they are now.

So will the balance of power ever shift back to the North? Some people seem convinced that it will never happen. Granted, the South already has a built-in leg up over the North in that you have two brand name programs (Texas and Oklahoma) while the North has one (Nebraska). It’s hard to imagine Kansas State being at that level any time soon. Kansas, Missouri and occasionally Colorado are solid. The one with the best chance of staying power might be Missouri because Columbia lies between two pretty fertile recruiting areas (Kansas City and St. Louis).

Because Texas and Oklahoma are in two fertile and highly coveted recruiting areas, most people seem convinced those programs will stay ahead of the pack. Unfortunately, what those same people forget is that Texas and Oklahoma have always had that recruiting advantage over Nebraska. Yes, that includes the years they both stunk. I just find it laughable how people only talk about those advantages when a team is good.

David McWilliams had the same recruiting advantage at Texas when he was the head coach from 1986-1991. What did that get him? A mediocre 31-26 record. His successor, John Mackovic had the same advantage from 1992-1997. What did that get him? A mediocre 41-28-1 record. Look at Oklahoma. John Blake had the same recruiting advantage from 1996-1998. What was his record? A most impressive 12-22.

Look at USC in a recruiting ground like Los Angeles. That’s about as fertile as it gets. That advantage got Paul Hackett a whopping 19-18 record from 1998-2000. It got Larry Smith a 44-25-3 record from 1987-1992 but not consistent success. Lest we forget it got Ted Tollner a pretty average 26-20 record from 1982-1986.

Granted, it’s hard to imagine Texas, Oklahoma or USC going in the tank barring NCAA sanctions, disastrous coaching changes or other bizarre acts of implosion.

Keep in mind, though, it wasn’t long ago that we could not have imagined Nebraska imploding but it happened. And if it can happen them it can happen now.

Huskers need to conquer road challenges to return to elite

With all the good things that the Nebraska football team did in 2008 under first-year head coach Bo Pelini, some people have their expectations tempered by the team having to break in a new starting quarterback (most likely Zac Lee) and losing wide receivers Nate Swift and Todd Petersen to graduation.

“Expectations” are certainly a word that will likely be uttered often as Big 12 Media Day begins Monday in Dallas. Defensive end Ndamukong Suh, running back Roy Helu and offensive guard Jacob Hickman will make the trip with Pelini.

The Huskers, who went 9-4 in 2008, are tabbed a slight favorite to win the Big 12 North with Kansas being the team’s biggest threat but I would not sleep on Colorado or Missouri just yet either, especially the former.

Omaha World Herald columnist Tom Shatel addressed in his recent column that the Huskers status as “favorite” to win the Big 12 North might be by default as much as anything based on the team’s aforementioned situation at quarterback and wide receiver. Shatel reasoned that Nebraska’s defense should continue to improve in Pelini’s second year along with the fact that the team should be a solid running team on offense. Shatel also added that every other Big 12 North team has its issues as well.

The biggest reason to hedge slightly on expectations for the 2009 Huskers is their recent history as a road team. Since the infamous Black Friday 62-36 loss at Colorado, the Huskers are 16-25 away from Memorial Stadium (neutral site games included) and 13-21 in non-neutral site games.

That stretch has included its share of decisive losses (two defeats by 40 or more points, six by 30 or more, 11 by 20 or more, and 16 by 10 or more). True the loss in 2006 at USC (28-10) was no disgrace. After all, the Trojans went 11-2 that year finished as the No. 4 rated team in the nation. However, the embarrassing defeats were not just against quality teams like the 2004 and 2008 Oklahoma Sooners, whom Nebraska suffered 30-3 and 62-28 defeats to in Norman. Both years, the Sooners reached the National Title game only to lose. In 2007, Nebraska losses 41-6 to a Missouri team that finished the season ranked No. 4 and 76-39 to a Kansas team that finished year rated No. 7. And we won’t even begin to address the 70-10 debacle at Texas Tech in 2004. The Red Raiders finished the 2004 season rated No. 18.

The Huskers also got their doors blown off by mediocre to crappy teams. In 2002, the Huskers lose 36-14 to an Iowa State team that went 7-7. In 2004, Nebraska loses 45-21 to a sorry ass Kansas State team that goes 4-7. In 2005, the Huskers lose 40-15 to a pretty average Kansas team that went 7-5. In 2006, the Huskers allow a 16-0 lead to an ordinary Oklahoma State to slip away into a 41-29 loss. To quote legendary Green Bay Packers coach Vince Lombardi, I say, “What the hell’s goin’ on out here!”

Very few of the 13 wins have come against quality foes. The Huskers scored come-from-behind wins at Texas A&M in 2002 (38-31) and 2006 (28-27). The former Aggies club went 6-6. The latter went 9-4, finishing the year ranked No. 24. There’s two ways to look at those wins. One, those Texas A&M teams were fairly ordinary but it also takes some moxie to go into College Station to win because the crowd noise creates a home field advantage that is among the best in the nation. There’s a reason why their crowd is referred to as “the 12th man.”

In 2004, the Huskers scored a 24-17 win at Pittsburgh against a Panther team that went 8-4 and finished ranked No. 24. In 2007, Nebraska went into Winston-Salem, North Carolina and beat eventual ACC champ Wake Forest 20-17. OK, two wins against good clubs but it’s not we went into Tuscaloosa and beat Alabama.

In 2005, Nebraska’s 30-3 win over Colorado in Boulder was a big win at the time in the Bill Callahan era because it was shocking and unexpected but the fact that the win was part of a four-game losing skid by Colorado took some of the shine out of that win.

Point being, as much as Nebraska improved last season, it still lacked a quality “true” road win. The Huskers went 2-2 on the road last season (3-2 away from Memorial stadium. Beating Clemson 26-21 in the Gator Bowl was impressive since Jacksonville, Fla., is near the Tigers home turf in Clemson, South Carolina but there were plenty of Husker fans in attendance.

Nebraska defeated Iowa State (which finished 2-10 in 2008) 35-7 and Kansas State (which finished 5-7) 56-28. The wins count, no doubt, but the Huskers should win those games whether they are played in Lincoln, Ames, Manhattan or the North Pole. You can make the argument that Nebraska was a play or two away in losing 37-31 in overtime against Texas Tech team that went 11-2. True but if Pelini won’t accept moral victories why should we? Also, losing 62-28 at Oklahoma is one thing but the Huskers need to at least look like they belong on the same field as the Sooners.

If the Huskers want to take a step forward and improve on the 2008 progress – it will have to gain no worse than a split in their road games at Virginia Tech, Missouri, Kansas, and Colorado. Even Baylor won’t be a sure thing.

Good teams win, period, no matter where they're playing. It's always a challenge to win consistently on the road. It's definitely one of the best feelings a team can have -- go into someone else's place and come out with a win, but that is what the good teams do. Being able to win on the road is what sets teams apart.

However, it isn't only intangibles that make for successful road teams. It also is not just a lack of character that accounts for bad road performances. There is a football element involved, too, and that should not be overlooked.

Good road teams that run the ball well tend to be success. Why? Because even in an era of highly sophisticated passing games and spread offenses, running the ball is the surest recipe for victory. On the road, it often takes the home crowd out of the game because, for fans, there is nothing more energy-sapping than watching the opposition's offense monopolize the ball. Teams that win on the road tend not to panic and abandon their game plan if they fall behind early, and they find a way to hang in against adversity. And they don't turn the ball over -- a transgression in any contest, but particularly in road games.

Generally, teams that succeed on the road are simply good teams but they are also teams with collective will, resilience and staying power, and those are traits only the best teams possess.

Mizzu, Texas Tech games are psychological hurdles

When breaking down the 2009 Nebraska football schedule, marquee games such as the Sept. 19 game at Virginia Tech and the Nov. 7 home game against Oklahoma are the ones that stand out as well as the Nov. 14 road game at Kansas.

After all, VaTech is a Top 15, and in some cases Top Ten, team in most preseason polls. The Huskers have home against Florida Atlantic and Arkansas State to precede the road game to Virginia Tech. Nebraska should beat both Sun Belt teams but don’t expect either to be a “name the score” type of win. The game at VaTech will be a tell-tale sign of how far the Huskers have come (or still need to go) under second-year head coach Bo Pelini. The Hokies outlasted Nebraska 35-30 in Lincoln a year ago.

If Nebraska wins at Blacksburg this season, I think a 10-2 season very likely. A respectable loss (say 7-14 points), I think 9-3 becomes a realistic expectation. A blowout loss, which I don’t believe will happen, then I think matching last year’s 8-4 regular season becomes a battle.

Oklahoma, meanwhile, is one of about four or five teams that you can make a legitimate argument for winning the National Championship. Although you never know, the Huskers will most likely fall to the Sooners. I don’t think OU is 44 points better than Nebraska despite outgunning the Huskers 62-28 in last year’s meeting but the Sooners are superior nonetheless. I just think that superiority is closer to three touchdowns than six.

As for Kansas, most preseason prognosticators are listing the Jayhawks as the co-favorites with Nebraska to win the Big 12 North. Though Colorado or Missouri might have something to say about that.

Speaking of Missouri. The two games that are not drawing huge conversations among Husker fans are the Oct. 8 road game at Missouri, which is a Thursday night ESPN telecast, and the Oct. 17 home game against Texas Tech.

Since 2003, Nebraska has gone a combined 2-7 against Missouri and Texas Tech. That stretch has included defeats of embarrassing proportions such as a 70-10 loss to Texas Tech in 2004 in Lubbock, a 41-6 loss to Missouri in 2007 and 52-17 defeat to the Tigers in 2008.

It is generally assumed that the Huskers will continue their ascension in Pelini’s second year in 2009. Nebraska went 9-4 in Pelini’s first year and would appear to be a solid bet to at least match that record.

It is also generally assumed that Texas Tech, which enjoyed an 11-2 season in 2008, will falter after losing numerous players including quarterback Graham Harrell and wide receiver Michael Crabtree.

It is also generally assumed that Missouri, which went 10-4 in 2008 and 12-2 in 2007 en route to winning Big 12 North titles, will slip after losing quarterback Chase Daniel, wide receiver Jeremy Maclin and tight end Chase Kauffman.

All three things are likely to happen in 2009 but that said despite last year’s improvements, Nebraska is not good enough to be counting victories just yet. While every win is important, beating Texas Tech and Missouri would be psychological hurdles. Plus, despite those losses in personnel, Gary Pinkel (Missouri) and Mike Leach (Texas Tech) are two flawed but bright offensive minds as coaches.

With Texas Tech, most Husker fans still have the 2004 debacle fresh in their mind. However, Nebraska was a fumbled LeKevin Smith interception away from winning in a 34-31 loss in 2005 and a desperation Joe Ganz interception away from winning in a 37-31 overtime loss in 2008.

With Missouri, they creamed two teams coached by Bill Callahan and another (the 2008 team) still had many Callahan remnants. They also lost to a 2002 Nebraska team that went 7-7 and a 2004 Husker club that went 5-6, making former defensive coordinators Craig Bohl and Kevin Cosgrove look like Charlie McBride.

In that respect, the 2009 games against Missouri and Texas Tech are similar to say the home game last season against Kansas. The Jayhawks obliterated Nebraska 76-39 in 2007 on the way to a 12-1 season. The Huskers won last year’s game 45-35 but outplayed the Jayhawks to a larger extent than the final score suggests. One KU touchdown came with the game out of reach in the fourth quarter and another was set by a Nate Swift muffed punt near the Huskers 25 yard line.

After the game, Lincoln Journal Star columnist Steve Sipple, whose work I respect greatly, referred to the game as a landmark win. I disagreed with that notion at the time and still do now because in going 8-5 in 2008, the Jayhawks (who beat Nebraska 40-15 in 2005 in Lawrence, Kansas) did not approach their 2007 success.

I viewed the 2008 Nebraska win as psychological not only based on the aforementioned defeats but Nebraska’s ugly 14-8 win in 2004 and its 32-25 overtime win in 2006 in which the Huskers let a 24-7 lead evaporate before prevailing.

Every win is big for the Huskers getting back to prominence but wins over Texas Tech and Missouri would be of the psychological kind.

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.

2009 Nebraska football game-by-game crystal ball

Huskers Illustrated, you have inspired me to reach to greater heights. I just had my official 2009 football yearbook mailed to my home in Napa, CA this past weekend.

The magazine previews the 2009 season in-depth with Ndamukong Suh -- the Huskers hulking defensive tackle featured on the front cover. If looks could kill quarterbacks like Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy, Todd Reesing, Zac Robinson and Robert Griffon would be a pile of dust.

The edition includes but is not limited to roster breakdown, opponent breakdown, position breakdown and media breakdown. Media members that cover the team regularly pick the Huskers record plus a synopsis for the reason behind their picks. The most pessimistic are Ken Hambleton (Lincoln Journal Star) and Terry Douglass (Grand island Independent). Both pick the Huskers to finish 8-5 including their bowl game.

The X-Factor is taking into account which media members pick the Big Red to reach the Big 12 Title Game. Keep in mind, some people are favoring Kansas. The ones are definitely picking Nebraska to win the division are Dave Hunt (KLKN TV Lincoln). Chris Schmidt (Huskers Illustratred radio), Lane Grindle (Husker Sports Network), Brian Christopherson (Lincoln Journal Star), Brian Rosenthal (Lincoln Journal Star), Jeff Wilkerson (KLMS, Lincoln), Sean Callahan (Huskersillustrated.com), Dirk Chatlain (Omaha World-Herald), John Schuetz (KETV, Omaha), Mike’L Severe (KOZN, Omaha) and Matt Schick (KETV, Omaha). The records range from 9-5 to 11-3. The last time the Huskers won the Big 12 North in 2006 under Bill Callahan, the team went 9-5 but perhaps should have gone 11-3 -- or at least 10-4 anyhow.

Though I am a member of the mainstream media here in the Napa Valley, I am not among the mainstream media in Nebraska covering the team even though I was at one time in my life. So here at Wine Country Husker headquarters at my non-palatial condo here in Napa, CA, I have decided to get bold and take a stab at the Huskers 2009 game-by-game breakdown. Last season, I picked 10-3 in Bo Pelini’s first season with Nebraska beating Wisconsin in the Alamo Bowl. I was one game off as Nebraska went 9-4, beating Clemson in the Gator Bowl.

I have sipped a little bit Kool-Aid as we speak. The Napa Valley kind but here’s our breakdown:

Nebraska 38, Florida Atlantic 17

The Howard Schnellenberger storylines resonate throughout the week. Florida Atlantic is one of the best the Sun Belt has to offer but the Huskers race to a 21-3 lead at halftime and that advantage swells to 35-3 after three quarters. Roy Helu rushes for three TDs and Zac Lee throws for two more. The Owls get two touchdowns in garbage time. Nebraska’s more experienced defense generates three turnovers and five sacks.

Nebraska 41, Arkansas State 14

For the second time in as many weeks, the Huskers produce a big lead, this time 24-7 at halftime and 31-14 after three quarters. Prince Amukamara’s interception (one of three picks for the Blackshirts) for a touchdown in the fourth quarter punctuates the win. Quentin Castille rushes for three touchdowns while Zac Lee throws for another.

Virginia Tech 24, Nebraska 20

Both offenses moved the ball efficiently in the first half in front of a nationally televised audience. The Hokies lead 21-14 at halftime but in the second half both defenses bowed their necks, especially in the red zone. The Huskers are still seeking that truly signature win against an elite club. Nebraska battles hard but falls short. Bo Pelini says in his postgame press conference, “moral victories suck.” Pelini does not need to make that statement but further cements his status among Husker fans as “Our guy.”

Nebraska 44, Louisiana-Lafeyette 10

The Huskers start like a house of fire looking to put the Virginia Tech loss behind them on the way to a 27-7 halftime lead. Nebraska’s best defense was a keep-away offense as Quentin Castille rushed for 136 yards and two touchdowns. Helu added 65 more while Lee threw for a pair of touchdowns. Kody Spano gets into the box score with a fourth quarter scoring pass. The Huskers are 3-1 heading into Big 12 play with two dragons to slay.

Nebraska 41, Missouri 24

The real Missouri is back and the Huskers slay a dragon in what has been a House of Horrors. The first three quarters are a seesaw battle in front of a Thursday night ESPN audience as the Tigers erase a 20-10 Nebraska lead at halftimes to take a 24-20 lead after three quarters. Bo Pelini challenges his team on the sideline and they respond. The Huskers dominate the fourth quarter as Lee throws for two touchdown tosses while Blake Lawrence’s 57-yard interception return to paydirt seals the win late in the fourth quarter.

Nebraska 35, Texas Tech 24

The Huskers slay yet another dragon as the Memorial Stadium noise is deafening as the Huskers play their 1,200th game in school history. Just like last year, the Husker offense plays keep-away led by Roy Helu’s 146 yards rushing and two touchdowns. The Huskers lead 14-10 half but made the Red Raiders fight uphill even further as Zac Lee connected with Mike McNeill for a touchdown pass. The Blackshirt defense bends but does not break. Ndamukong Suh intercepts a pass – shades of LeKevin Smith’s INT – only he holds on to the ball and the Huskers seal the win.

Nebraska 34, Iowa State 3

Coming off two emotional wins, Nebraska starts slow as the game was a scoreless tie after one quarter but takes a 14-0 halftime lead as Zac Lee connects with Mike McNeill for a touchdown and Quentin Castille powers his way into the zone. The Huskers control the line of scrimmage with the O-and-D Lines. Defensively, the Huskers produced five sacks and two interceptions.

Nebraska 31, Baylor 20

The dreaded trap game in Waco before a marquee matchup the following week in Lincoln. Baylor quarterback Robert Griffin gives the Huskers headaches in the first half as the game is tied at 17-all at intermission. The Blackshirts put the clamps on Griffin in the second half while Zac Lee connects with Menelik Holt for two second half touchdown tosses to seal the Husker win.

Oklahoma 38, Nebraska 21

The crowd noise is off the hook, just like old times for NU-OU matchups. The Huskers show they have narrowed the gap but OU still has superior talent and depth. The Sooners lead 24-17 at halftime before pulling away in the second half. Sooner head coach Bob Stoops, known for his arrogance, says, “Don’t be fooled, Nebraska is on its way back.”


Nebraska 31, Kansas 21

The Huskers see this as a chance to close in on the division title and they do in a hard fought road victory. The Jayhawks strike first but Castille answers with two rushing touchdowns to give the Huskers the lead for good. Nebraska puts it away in the second half with an Alex Henery field goal and a Zac Lee to Chris Brooks touchdown. The Blackshirts force three turnovers and harass Todd Reesing throughout the day.

Nebraska 41, Kansas State 7

Bill Snyder has the Wildcats playing better but they still lack the depth to beat the Huskers. Nebraska leads 17-0 after one quarter and 27-0 at halftimes and wins going away on Senior Day. Nebraska gets its backups some much needed work heading into the bye week.

Nebraska 23, Colorado 17 (OT)

Husker fans might not like calling this a “rivarly” game but anything can and does happen when these two teams meet. With the Big 12 North title in hand, the Huskers fight off a gallant Buffs effort. Nebraska wins the overtime coin toss and defers. Ndamukong Suh gets a sack, forced fumble and recovered fumble all in the same play. The Huskers get the ball back and go for the jugular as Zac Lee hits Mike McNeill for a 25-yard strike to win the game. Denver Post communist, err columnist Woody Paige writes his typical diarrhea of the mouth column the next day.

Big 12 Championship Game

Texas 28, Nebraska 24

Nebraska needs a win to secure a BCS bowl game while Texas still has National Title hopes. The Longhorns break Nebraska’s heart again as Colt McCoy hits Jordan Shipley with just over three minutes remaining in a seesaw battle. The Huskers bid to respond with a game-winning drive falls short. Bo Pelini challenges his team to finish the season with authority.

Cotton Bowl

Nebraska 34, Alabama 17

The Holliday Bowl expresses interest in the Huskers while Nebraska has never been too keen on the Cotton Bowl. However, Cotton Bowl officials see a prime opportunity to match two brand name programs together – Nebraska and Alabama. Bo Pelini promises not to go for any fake punts on his own 30, a la Bill Callahan. Sorry -- could not resist.

The Huskers lead wire-to-wire as Zac Lee converts some clutch third down passes. Lee throws for two touchdowns and runs for another. The Blackshirts force four turnovers and record three quarterback sacks.

Husker fans say, “Take that, SEC!”

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.

Do you root for your conference in Bowl Games and March Madness?

To root or not to root. To be rooted for or not to be rooted for.

Every season when college football bowl games start or the NCAA basketball tournament gets underway, you frequently hear people talk about “rooting for teams in the conference.” The argument in favor of that is so the conference “looks good.”

While I can sort of understand that argument, I must say that I don’t just roll over on command when I hear it.

For example, I am a proud University of Nebraska graduate (Class of 1997). At Nebraska, football is king whereas basketball takes a backseat. Sorry, Husker fans. Let’s face it, if the football team went 5-7 and the basketball team made the Sweet 16, football would still be the No. 1 ticket. At other schools, the opposite would be true. At say, Kentucky, the football team could make a BCS bowl game and the basketball team could stumble to a .500. Basketball will always be king.

To take a Big 12 example, in 2007, Kansas’ football team went 12-1 including an Orange Bowl win over Virginia Tech. Three months later, the basketball team defeated Memphis for the NCAA title. However, when I think of the Jayhawks, I think basketball. Why? Because they are consistently good. Whereas football, while it has had a few spikes of success, never has enjoyed sustained success. What I mean by sustained is say 10-year period.

It’s definitely rare to be powerful at both sports. Oklahoma, Texas, Florida and Ohio State have bucked the trend in recent years and have been strong at both sports but they are the exception rather than the rule.

Back to this whole argument of “rooting for your conference so it looks good.” Yes, a strong showing by your conference in bowl games and the NCAA tournament adds credibility for the conference. However, my argument is that if I wouldn’t root for say Oklahoma at any point in the regular season why should I change now? Plus, shouldn’t I be more worried about how my own team does?

Speaking as a Husker fan, in basketball, I root for the Big 12 without reservation. In football, I tend to go back and forth with that belief.

Why?

We haven’t made the NCAA tournament since 1997-1998 and have had four losing seasons since that year. I feel confident about the direction head coach Doc Sadler is taking the team but let’s face it, because basketball is not woven into the culture like football, it’ll take Doc longer than it will football head coach Bo Pelini to get the Huskers among the elite.

That said, I root for the Big 12 across the board because it’s not as if we are a threat to the Big 12 powers and I look at it as “well, if we’re not going to have NCAA tournament success then why not see someone else do it?”

In football, despite our 5-7 to 9-4 turnaround in 2008 under Pelini in his first season, we are obviously not where we are accustomed to being but I don’t think it’s going to be long.

Since other teams are a threat to us, my dislike for say Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, Missouri and Kansas State runs deeper. Well, I can respect OU and Texas because while their programs and fan base have a cocky mentality at least they have produced National titles. Colorado, Missouri and Kansas State have not produced didley. Sorry, Colorado, your shared National title in 1990 will not get acknowledged since you needed five downs to beat a sorry ass Missouri team.

I will confess that one time in my life I did root for the Buffs was the 1995 Fiesta Bowl when a 10-1 Colorado team played a 6-4-1 Notre Dame team. Typical of Notre Dame getting bowl game preferential treatment. Damn elitists.

It might be blasphemy for a Husker fan to say this but I was glad to see Colorado kick Notre Dame’s ass 41-24. Another bit of irony with my dislike for the Buffs, one of my favorite Oakland Raiders from when I covered the team as a freelance writer from 1999-2005 was a Colorado Buffalo. He is Greg Biekert. I always admired the consistency in his performance and preparation.

This past bowl game season, I struggled with the idea of rooting for Missouri to beat Northwestern in the Alamo Bowl and Oklahoma to beat Florida in the BCS Bowl. On one hand, I want the Big 12 schools to win but my dislike for them runs so deep that it’s hard.

BCS not perfect but give it an edge over March Madness

I know many purists swear by the NCAA Tournament in college basketball and swear at the BCS in college football.

You can bet the deed to your house that people will go gaga for the next few weeks during March Madness and cries of a playoff in football will be in full bloom by early-to-mid October.

Heck, our president Barack Obama has already gotten on his soapbox about college football needing a playoff system. Don’t you think our country has more pressing needs at the moment? Like fixing the economy. Like addressing the war in Iraq.

I'm in the minority, while the BCS (Bowl Championship series) is not perfect, I don't think a playoff (a la NCAA March Madness in basketball) is the cat's meow either like some people are inclined to believe. OK, I know what you’re thinking. “Lay of the bong, Vince.”

For the record, I do enjoy March Madness. Like most people, I fill out my office pool but I refrained from asking Rick Neuheisul for any advice. Sorry, I could not resist. However, you’re not going to hear me say that March Madness is the greatest thing since the Great Wall of China.

You see, before the BCS came into being in the 1998 season, we frequently had two undefeated teams. The problem is that they seldom matched up against each either: 1991 Miami-Washington, 1994 Nebraska-Penn state, 1997 Nebraska-Michigan. Did those teams play each other on the field? No.

Why? Because the Pac-10 and Big 10 were so hell-bent on keeping their Rose Bowl tradition but when they had an unbeaten team, they'd whine about either getting a split National title (i.e. Michigan in 1997) or no National title (i.e. Penn State in 1994). I say, sorry folks. You can't have it both ways (i.e. keep your tradition and whine about a split National Title). The reality is that Penn State screwed itself out of the National title in 1994 by going from Independent to Big 10.

The BCS hasn't been without its controversies either. One loss Florida State instead of Miami (also a one loss team) played unbeaten Oklahoma in 2000. One loss Nebraska instead of Oregon (also a one loss team) played unbeaten Miami in 2001. One loss Oklahoma instead of one loss USC played LSU for the BCS title in 2003. One loss Florida instead of one loss Michigan played Ohio State in 2006. Of course, no one was complaining when in 2002 (Ohio State-Miami), 2004 (Oklahoma-USC) or 2005 (Texas-USC) were a battle of two unbeaten teams.

The 2006-2008 seasons, however, were jumbled beyond belief. In 2006, you had two one loss teams playing for the title as Florida met Ohio State, while one-loss Michigan and undefeated Boise State were left in the cold.

In 2007, you had a two-loss LSU team meeting a one-loss Ohio State team. In the two process, many people lobbied for USC and/or Georgia (a pair of two loss teams) to play in the title game.

In 2008, two one-loss teams (Florida and Oklahoma) met for the title while unbeaten Utah and one loss teams USC, Texas, Penn state and Alabama were left in the cold.

Ohio State lost both of its title games (41-16 to Florida and 38-24 to LSU) as viewers of the game wasted four hours of their lives they will not get back. Florida defeated Oklahoma 24-14.

The interesting subplot to the whole matter was that Boise State and Utah (two nonBCS schools) made noise. Boise State defeated Oklahoma 32-21 in the Fiesta Bowl in 2006. Well, 2006 regular season/2007 bowl game. While Utah defeated Alabama 31-17 in the Sugar Bowl in a game that really wasn’t even that close.

I’m perhaps in the minority but I think Boise State and Utah should have been awarded a share of the National Title or been allowed to play in the title game. And please, don’t come at me with the strength of schedule argument or the notion of “they would have gotten blown out.” And if they do, so what, I don’t see how it’s any worse than watching Ohio State get its doors blown off.

The BCS has been tweaked over the years with things such as quality win points, computer rankings, strength of schedule, etc. The anti-BCS folks have been equally tweaked and want say a four-team or and eight-team playoff with the preservation of the bowl games. Unfortunately, they forget one thing.
For example, suppose we have one undefeated team and four one-loss teams. How are you then going to justify leaving out one of the one-loss teams? Some would say make it eight teams. OK. Let's say you have two unbeaten teams, four one-loss teams and three two loss teams? How then do you justify leaving out one of the two loss teams.

I find it almost comical how fans, media and talk show hosts whine and complain about the BCS just like they whined and complained about Nebraska (2001) and Oklahoma (2003) not winning its conference but yet still playing for the title. Yet they don't say boo, yeah or neah about a team finishing seventh in its basketball conference and getting an NCAA tournament bid.

The pro March Madness folks would then say but "at least it's played on the court." True but it doesn't stop teams that were "on the bubble" from complaining about not getting an NCAA tournament bid.

The NCAA men's basketball tournament might be exciting but it's nothing more than a gimmick and de-emphasizes the regular season. Fans that love it say that a team can "get hot" all of the sudden. My argument is that any team can "get hot" all of the sudden but once they lose a game, the pressure is gone.
Whereas going undefeated is a bigger accomplishment. It's like pitching a perfect game in baseball. With each win, the laws of averages are not on your side because that team has a Bull's Eye right across its ever loving chest.

Again, March Madness is exciting but the field of 64 teams is watered down worse than a flat Budweiser and please don't come at with the George Masons of the world either. I say cut the field to 16 teams and have truly the best teams.
If the idea is to find out which college basketball team is the best by having a tournament and having everyone play it off, then when play the regular season in the first place? The BCS might need its share of tweaking but I've always argued that it comes closer to crowning a true national champion than college basketball does.

The best way to make a playoff in football a plausible situation is to make Notre Dame join a conference. I believe that’s as big of a reason as any why there is no playoff. Others have come up with a solution of matching up all conference winners. I like that scenario in that there is no ambiguity but some years one conference is appreciably strong while another is weak. I’d say just take the Top eight BCS teams, conference champ or not.

Of course, for a playoff to work Notre Dame must get off its high chair and join a conference but given their elitist mentality that’ll never happen.