I think you are giving too much credit to Nebraska.

I also don't think you realize how much some Big XII teams want to beat Nebraska. Teams like Kansas State were kicked around for decades by Nebraska. Then when KSU got good, their best team was beaten by Nebraska. KSU hates Nebraska and this is their last shot.

Mark my words, Colorado, KSU, Missouri and ISU will all be playing at a different level come Nebraska.

That's the beauty of college football.....we'll know who was giving whom too much credit tonight.

The series score is 77 - 15

yr m d - NU - OP Margin - Location - - - - AP R
NU | ANK
OP Att.
2009 -11- 21 W 17 - 3 14 # Lincoln | 85,998
2008 -11- 15 W 56 - 28 28 # Manhattan | 48,444
2007 -11- 10 W 73 - 31 42 # Lincoln | 84,665
2006 -10- 14 W 21 - 3 18 # Manhattan + 21 | 50,723
2005 -11- 12 W 27 - 25 02 # Lincoln | 77,761
2004 -10- 23 L 21 - 45 -24 # Manhattan | 52,234
2003 -11- 15 L 9 - 38 -29 # Lincoln 18 | 78,014
2002 -11- 16 L 13 - 49 -36 # Manhattan | 11 52,221
2001 -11- 10 W 31 - 21 10 # Lincoln 02 | 77,818
2000 -11- 11 L 28 - 29 -01 # Manhattan + 04 | 16 53,811
1999 -11- 13 W 41 - 15 26 # Lincoln 07 | 05 77,744
1998 -11- 14 L 30 - 40 -10 # Manhattan 11 | 02 44,298
1997 -10- 04 W 56 - 26 30 # Lincoln + 03 | 17 75,856
1996 -10- 05 W 39 - 3 36 # Manhattan 07 | 16 43,916
1995 -10- 21 W 49 - 25 24 # Lincoln HC 02 | 08 76,072
1994 -10- 15 W 17 - 6 11 # Manhattan 02 | 16 42,817
1993 -10- 16 W 45 - 28 17 # Lincoln HC 06 | 75,721
1992 -12- 05 W 38 - 24 14 # Tokyo ^ 11 | 50,000
1991 -10- 19 W 38 - 31 07 # Lincoln HC 09 | 76,209
1990 -10- 06 W 45 - 8 37 # Manhattan 08 | 35,757
1989 -10- 07 W 58 - 7 51 # Lincoln 04 | 76,265
1988 -10- 22 W 48 - 3 45 # Manhattan 05 | 35,000
1987 -10- 24 W 56 - 3 53 # Lincoln HC 02 | 76,106
1986 -11- 01 W 38 - 0 38 # Lincoln 09 | 75,893
1985 -11- 02 W 41 - 3 38 # Manhattan 05 | 41,200
1984 -10- 27 W 62 - 14 48 # Lincoln 04 | 76,068
1983 -10- 29 W 51 - 25 26 # Manhattan 01 | 44,150
1982 -10- 16 W 42 - 13 29 # Lincoln HC 06 | 76,268
1981 -10- 17 W 49 - 3 46 # Manhattan 19 | 45,915
1980 -11- 08 W 55 - 8 47 # Lincoln 05 | 76,121
1979 -11- 10 W 21 - 12 09 # Manhattan 02 | 43,210
1978 -10- 14 W 48 - 14 34 # Lincoln HC 08 | 75,818
1977 -10- 08 W 26 - 9 17 # Manhattan 09 | 41,100
1976 -10- 16 W 51 - 0 51 # Lincoln HC 03 | 76,150
1975 -11- 08 W 12 - 0 12 # Manhattan 03 | 41,300
1974 -11- 16 W 35 - 7 28 # Lincoln 06 | 76,188
1973 -11- 17 W 50 - 21 29 # Manhattan 10 | 42,000
1972 -11- 18 W 59 - 7 52 # Lincoln 05 | 75,079
1971 -11- 13 W 44 - 17 27 # Manhattan 01 | 42,300
1970 -11- 14 W 51 - 13 38 # Lincoln HC 04 | 20 67,894
1969 -11- 15 W 10 - 7 03 # Manhattan 17 | 40,000
1968 -11- 09 L 0 - 12 -12 # Lincoln HC | 67,466
1967 -10- 07 W 16 - 14 02 # Manhattan 07 | 20,180
1966 -10- 15 W 21 - 10 11 # Lincoln HC 06 | 64,108
1965 -10- 16 W 41 - 0 41 # Manhattan 02 | 19,660
1964 -10- 17 W 47 - 0 47 # Lincoln HC 06 | 46,056
1963 -10- 19 W 28 - 6 22 # Manhattan | 14,920
1962 -10- 20 W 26 - 6 20 # Lincoln | 30,701
1961 -10- 07 W 24 - 0 24 # Manhattan | 17,515
1960 -10- 08 W 17 - 7 10 # Lincoln | 35,102
1959 -11- 21 L 14 - 29 -15 # Manhattan | 8,318
1958 -10- 11 L 6 - 23 -17 # Lincoln | 37,596
1957 -10- 05 W 14 - 7 07 # Manhattan | 15,033
1956 -10- 13 L 7 - 10 -03 # Lincoln | 30,469
1955 -10- 01 W 16 - 0 16 # Manhattan | 12,500
1954 -10- 09 L 3 - 7 -04 # Lincoln | 34,000
1953 -10- 03 L 0 - 27 -27 # Manhattan | NA
1952 -10- 11 W 27 - 14 13 # Lincoln | 40,000
1951 -10- 06 W 1 - 0 01 # Manhattan * | 12,000
1950 -11- 11 W 49 - 21 28 # Lincoln 16 | 29,000
1949 -10- 08 W 13 - 6 07 # Manhattan | 17,000
1948 -11- 06 W 32 - 0 32 # Lincoln | 36,000
1947 -10- 25 W 14 - 7 07 # Manhattan | 17,000
1946 -10- 05 W 31 - 0 31 # Lincoln | 35,553
1945 -11- 10 W 24 - 0 24 # Manhattan | NA
1944 -11- 25 W 35 - 0 35 # Lincoln | NA
1943 -11- 06 W 13 - 7 06 # Manhattan | NA
1942 -11- 28 L 0 - 19 -19 # Lincoln | NA
1941 -11- 01 L 6 - 12 -06 # Manhattan | NA
1940 -11- 30 W 20 - 0 20 # Lincoln 08 | NA
1939 -10- 28 W 25 - 9 16 # Manhattan 10 | NA
1938 -11- 24 W 14 - 7 07 # Lincoln | NA
1937 -11- 27 W 3 - 0 03 # Manhattan 11 | NA
1936 -11- 21 W 40 - 0 40 # Lincoln 13 | NA
1935 -10- 19 T 0 - 0 00 # Manhattan | NA
1934 -11- 29 L 7 - 19 -12 # Lincoln | NA
1933 -10- 21 W 9 - 0 09 # Manhattan | NA
1932 -10- 29 W 6 - 0 06 # Lincoln HC | NA
1931 -11- 14 W 6 - 3 03 # Manhattan | NA
1930 -11- 27 L 9 - 10 -01 # Lincoln | NA
1929 -11- 23 W 10 - 6 04 # Manhattan | NA
1928 -11- 29 W 8 - 0 08 # Lincoln | NA
1927 -11- 19 W 33 - 0 33 # Manhattan | NA
1926 -11- 13 W 3 - 0 03 # Lincoln | NA
1925 -11- 14 T 0 - 0 00 # Manhattan | NA
1924 -11- 22 W 24 - 0 24 # Manhattan | NA
1923 -11- 29 W 34 - 12 22 # Lincoln | NA
1922 -11- 18 W 21 - 0 21 # Lincoln | NA
1916 -10- 14 W 14 - 0 14 # Lincoln | NA
1915 -10- 09 W 31 - 0 31 # Lincoln | NA
1914 -10- 17 W 31 - 0 31 Manhattan | NA
1913 -10- 11 W 24 - 6 18 # Lincoln | NA
1912 -10- 12 W 30 - 6 24 Lincoln | NA
1911 -10- 14 W 59 - 0 59 Lincoln | NA

I've been a Big 8/Big 12 fan all of my life...i'm pretty aware of the dynamics of the conference. I just don't think KSU has the horses (Daniel Thomas notwithstanding), to hang that close to Nebraska. Any given day, anything can happen.....i just don't see it.

The post showing the series record between Nebraska and KSU is pretty much what OU's record looked like against every team in the old Big 8 not named Nebraska (against whom OU had a lead, but a competitive lead). The Big 8 was the Big 2 and the little 6. Ever since i can remember, OU and Nebraska got every other team's "best shot" and it rarely made any difference at all.

I am not sure how you always bring any post into an Oklahoma post but they do not have a "competative lead" on Nebraska. They are only up by 6 games. Nor was this an opportunity to talk up your Sooners, you do that in almost every other post.

Do you forget that Colorado won a National Championship as part of the Big 8 or that they finished in the top two of the Big 8 almost all of the last 6 years? I honestly am not sure I remember the last time Oklahoma even won the Big 8. I am going to guess sometime in the 80s? I just looked it was 1987 and the confrence disbanded in 1996.

I'm not sure what you are upset about (aren't I the guy who is picking Nebraska?).....but a 6 game lead over Nebraska isn't a competItive lead? I thought that characterized it pretty well. And yes, it's pretty well documented that OU in the 90s under John Blake went thru about the worst time in its history. I also wasn't aware that i "always bring any post into a Nebraska post"......um...i thought we were talking about Nebraska? If anything....i've been extremely complimentary about Nebraska (i happen to like them and have always rooted for them when not playing OU). Nebraska (41) and OU (33) won outright or shared 74 of the 88 Big 8 championships from what i see. I think that pretty well supports what i was saying (which again, i have no idea why that would upset you as a Nebraska supporter) that those two dominated the Big 8.

Gee, i started the thread....you put out a post stating what i already knew that Nebraska dominated the KSU series (for what purpose, i'm not sure, since you're picking KSU), so i simply stated what we all know....that OU and Nebraska historically dominated the other 6 teams. Sorry that that ruffled your feathers.

"Nor was this an opportunity to talk up your Sooners, you do that in almost every other post."

Not when you have played 75 games. Maybe competative lead would be 20 or so, you have what I consider a slim lead.



Thats fair I suppose you should just call it a College Football thread that I will use as an excuse to put some Oklahoma stuff in. Kind of like that thread where you claimed that the Tommy Frazier run was dwarfed by the OU RB run (the guy who wears the make up). Then posted a youtube link of the greatest runs ever but never checked it.... and the Tommy run was in it.

Lets also not forget that the 6 game lead is misleading because OU backed out of the series (yep look it up) with Nebraska once the Big XII started because they were too tough. They went with the weaker (at the time) Texas instead.

I didn't post any youtube link and never said Spencer Tillman's run was "better"....i just said it was a great run. But I'm not bout to apologize for being an OU fan. I also think you might need to look up the meaning of "competitive".

OU backed out of the series?????? There are two divisions in the Big 12 and OU, logically, is in the South. Nebraska is in the North. How did OU "back out"? But just for the record....if it ever did come down to "ok OU....you have to lose the Texas game or the Nebraska game", of course OU would keep the Texas game......it's a bigger rivalry. Why in the world would OU "back out" of a Nebraska series that they lead? Makes no sense and without something to back that up, i'll take it for what it appears to be: baloney.

Nebraska, being too "tough", would logically have more Big 12 championships than OU. But wait...Nebraska has 2 and OU has 6...that doesn't compute does it?

Not to hijack this thread or anything but since we obviously have some Big 12 fans here I hope it is OK that I pose a question. I'd like to get the opinion of long-time fans.

Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the 5th down game. Whenever discussion of that game comes up all I hear people say is how Colorado should never have won that game and they should have somehow "given it back" to Missouri. It seems to be hailed as the biggest travesty of all time. I'm not debating that Missouri was screwed but it seems to me that history is unkind to Colorado. They spiked the ball on what the referees were telling them was 3rd down. Obviously they would not have done that on 4th and we have no way of knowing whether or not they would have scored on that play had they not spiked it. Of course they should have been counting the downs and I'm sure some of them knew it was 4th. But it is not their job to referee the game in terms of tracking the downs anymore than it is to call penalties on themselves. Ref said it was 3rd so they spiked the ball and stopped the clock. Am I missing something? What is the historical perspective inside the Big 12?

My two cents: i see it pretty much as you do. The referees obviously screwed it up severely, but i don't blame Colorado for the reasons you state. If the refs tell you it's 3rd down and you act accordingly, you shouldn't be penalized IMO.

Interesting, you might be the first Big 12 fan I've heard that from. Thanks.

I'm not a Big 12 fan, but I do have an opinion (go figure!).. I don't think the refs should be held responsible for that.. I don't think the team should trust someone who isn't on it's own sideline to keep up with it.

But.....isn't the ref gonna have the final say on what down it is? If my sideline KNOWS it's 4th down..and the referees say "no, it's 3rd down".....whose opinion is gonna trump whose?

My opinion: The refs blew it and you can't blame the team for making the most out of the cards that were dealt.

Is CU the only team that has benefited from a blown call? Bad calls happen all the time (granted, maybe not as obvious as this one) and unfortunately play a factor in the outcome of games. Where do you draw the line - should every team that receives the benefit of a bad call "give it back"?

I am going to guess that Les Miles was an assistant on that colorado team....

XO!!!! how the heck are you?

Yea too much credit.......

!

The Huskers tore it up last night. It's hard to believe Martinez is only a freshman.

Yes they did. Tom Osborn came out and told the whole story when Nebraska bolted for the Big 11 or whatever they are called. He spoke about when the Big XII was being formed OU had the option. Nebraska wanted to be split with OU so they could play every year. He felt that OU backed out because Nebraska had not lost to Oklahoma in a long time.