Tons of bitterness over Iowa's schedule.
- Thread starter archiehawk
- Start date
Are you talking about Iowa? Yes, I thought 1 TD would do it in this game. You might have just seen the best two defenses in the BIG 10. Plus I knew it was going to be windy.
geez for really a pretty lucky start to the season - you guys are a bit obnoxious to say the least - ou barely beat ISU - you need quite a bit of luck to beat Pitt and you need Wi to fumble a snap on your 2 yd line to beat WI
I know Iowa has absolutely sucked as of late but that team is a long way from having anything to crow about
I know Iowa has absolutely sucked as of late but that team is a long way from having anything to crow about
The exact same windy conditions in Illinois, or close to, were they not? 14-13 was that result.
Also, many keep bringing up the fumble on the one. Anyone notice Iowa was deep in the red zone twice in the first half and came away with only three points? The score easily could have been anywhere from 13-6 to 20-6 & in between at the half.
So to say Wisconsin pissed that whole game down their leg? Those deficits would have burried a terrible throwing Stave.
I don't like playing the hypotheticals, but as long as they are brought up I'll partake.
Both defenses will win plenty of games for these two teams.
Funny when they are terrible you dont hear a peep and then when they have a little success they are like cockroaches coming from all around.
Iowa should be 3-1 in the series since Neb joined the B1G. This Iowa team won't find a way to choke a game away. We all know what happened last time in Lincoln
We are level headed compared to this guy....
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/outkick-s-top-ten-for-week-5-100315
He must have been drunk when he wrote this.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/outkick-s-top-ten-for-week-5-100315
He must have been drunk when he wrote this.
Good lord. Give me what he is drinking.
Since when is beating Pitt and Wisky better than beating VT and Oregon
Serious? This year easily so far.
Also, Sagarin says:
21 Wisconsin
36 Pitt
42 Oregon
49 VT
Every Iowa thread turns into a pissing match... The OP was a little confused and I think trying to stir the pot which doesn't need more stirring. The fact is that Iowa is 5-0 regardless of ugly wins, weak schedule or luck... Nebraska has had some bad luck, injuries and some baaad coaching decisions. Iowa was missing their best receiver and a starting tackle and were very lucky to get a win at Wisconsin due to their QB fumbling at the one. That being said, Sometime it takes luck on your side to win championships. Hopefully we can keep lady luck on our side for the rest of the season.
That was not a "fortunate fumble". It was caused by the D end who moved inside and hit the guard so hard he stepped back and stepped on the QB's foot. It was caused by Iowa's hard hitting
Alabama beat Wisky at Alabama
Iowa beat Wisky at Wisky
Iowa > Alabama
Come on man get it right thats how we teach over here! 4+1 is 5-0!
Lets not re-hash this again... We all know that Iowa has been a more successful program in the last 15 years then Nebraska! There ya go...now you got me in your pissing match!
This century sense 2001 how many BCS games have the programs seen? IOWA 2 NEB 0 Ok how about Conference Championships? IOWA 2 NEB 0. You guys remind me of Minny always bringing up your National Titles from the 20th century. Welcome to the BIG10 and the 21st century!
Lets not re-hash this again... We all know that Iowa has been a more successful program in the last 15 years then Nebraska! There ya go...now you got me in your pissing match!
Okay, I'll bite. Since you want to limit it to a small sample size to suite your argument (because you know you are no competition before that) lets examine:
Iowa win loss record since 2000: 115-75
Nebraska win loss record since 2000: 130-64.
Hmm...are you sure you wanted to compare that time frame? You picked it, I didn't.
Want to talk about natties...that would be Nebraska 5 and Iowa 0.
Total program wins? No you don't want to discuss that either.
Lets try head to head...that will show the better program. Ooops Iowa lifetime win % against Nebraska is .322
Wait...How about since Nebraska joined the Big...according to you, you have been the dominant program right? Iowa is only 1-3 against Nebraska.
Well partner, I am shit out of ideas on how to support your argument.
You claim conference titles in a time frame when Nebraska had to earn them in a championship game and Iowa didn't. If you want to compare apples to apples, in that time frame Nebraska won their division 7 times ...that would be the equivalent to Iowa's big claim to fame for conference championships. Nebraska played for a national championship in 2001...how many has Iowa played for in that same time frame...or ever for that matter.
Wins since 2000: Iowa 115, Nebraska 130. Nebraska whips your ass head to head too....yet here you clowns are, shooting off your mouths and you have never accomplished anything in the entire history of your program.
The point being it was caused by a hard hitting D-end not just a lucky break. Had he not done that, the fumble would have never occurred. Most times good luck comes from hard work. Hard work is not a "fortunate" break.
Yes, Iowa forced the turnover. Kudos for that. It was still a fortunate break for Iowa to have had that situation occur. What I am saying is had Wisconsin scored there, I don't think the Iowa offense has enough that day to come back and score.
Must be real proud of those division titles beating out the Kansas schools lol. It's not Iowa's fault they have the best record in conference and couldn't play in a championship game. They are still conference champs. The 21st century also started in 2001, not 2000. There's that Nowledge at its finest. Might wanna re-adjust those win totals
In 2001 Nebraska played in the Rose Bowl......not only a BCS game, but the BCS National Championship Game.
As far as conference titles, no Nebraska has not won any since 1999, while Iowa has won twice. Nebraska did make a conference championship game, and thus was one win away from a title, four times.
And why, when discussing "in this century" do Iowa fans always want to start at 2001 instead of 2000? A convenient way to leave a 3-9 record off the table? I have a feeling that had Kirk Ferentz found some success a year earlier, all these comparisons would start with year 2000 instead....and the Iowa fandom would hark that the century begins there instead of 2001.
You also claim a Big Ten Championship with Michigan and Michigan beat Iowa that year.....
....oh and speaking of Kansas level schools....in regards to your other other "Big Ten Title"...you lost to Iowa State that season. Congrats on your shared Big Ten Title with a team who beat you on the same playing field....it really helped you to go 1-3 vs NU since we have joined and pushed Iowa to have a record .500 since NU joined the conference.
You also claim a Big Ten Championship with Michigan and Michigan beat Iowa that year.....
Congrats on your shared Big Ten Title with a team who beat you on the same playing field....it really helped you to go 1-3 vs NU since we have joined and pushed Iowa to have a record .500 since NU joined the conference.
So you're hating on shared conference championships in a conference with no championship game? Maybe you could help me out then and explain what happened in 2001 when Neb couldn't win their own division but somehow played in a Nat'l Title Game
So you're hating on shared conference championships in a conference with no championship game? Maybe you could help me out then and explain what happened in 2001 when Neb couldn't win their own division but somehow played in a Nat'l Title Game
We shouldn't have been in the National Title game...no doubt about it. And yes, I'm hating on a supposed conference "title" shared with a team that you could not beat.
All of Michigan's resources claim co-champions as well even though they played in a Rose Bowl. It has happened numerous times in the conference. Iowa also demolished an Ohio St team that Michigan could not beat that season.
Sounds like NE equal to or greater than IA 2001 to present and NE superior to IA 1901 to 2000.
Impartial view based on the stats.
Impartial view based on the stats.
Are you on acid? Where did I say anyting about the 21st century? One of your posters said 15 years-which would go to the year 2000 and another said something about the 21st century. I used 15 years. No matter what, it would not change which program has more wins. I know with Iowa math-you probably weren't sure.
Enjoy being "paper" champs as your claim to fame.
I'm kind of fond of comparing success with Nebraska "in this millennium". When did this millennium begin?
Ask Google.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=when+did+this+millennium+start
Just one of thousands of responses.
www.timeanddate.com ›
The reason why the 3rd Millennium / 21st Century starts in 2001 is because there was no year 0 (or AD 0, 0 BC). The year before 1 A.D. is defined as year 1 B.C., so year 0 was skipped. (See below. Therefore, January 1st, year 1 is defined to be the start of the 1st century and the 1st Millennium.
But not hating on shared "National" titles when you didn't even play the other team? Shared titles only count if YOU SHARE THEM?
1970
Arizona State 11–0 Frank Kush PS
Nebraska 11–0–1 Bob Devaney AP, BR, CFRA, DeS, DuS, FN, FWAA, HAF, NCF, R(FACT), SR
Notre Dame 10–1 Ara Parseghian MGR, R(FACT), SR
Ohio State 9–1 Woody Hayes NFF
Texas 10–1 Darrell Royal B(QPRS), L, NFF, R(FACT), UPI
1997
Michigan 12–0 Lloyd Carr AP, FN, FWAA, NCF, NFF, SN
Nebraska 13–0 Tom Osborne A&H, AS, B(QPRS), BR, CCR, DeS, DuS, ERS, MGR, NCF, NYT, R(FACT), SR, USAT/ESPN
or
1994
Florida State 10–1–1 Bobby Bowden DuS
Nebraska 13–0 Tom Osborne AP, AS, B(QPRS), BR, FN, FWAA, NCF, R(FACT), SN, SR, UPI, USAT/CNN, USAT/NFF
Penn State 12–0 Joe Paterno CCR, DeS, ERS, MGR, NCF, NYT, R(FACT), SR
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_football_national_championships_in_NCAA_Division_I_FBS
Due to the lack of an official NCAA title, determining the nation's top college football team has often engendered controversy.[5] A championship team is independently declared by multiple individuals and organizations, often referred to as "selectors".[6]:74–75[7] These choices are sometimes not unanimous.[5] While the NCAA has never officially endorsed a championship team, it has documented the choices of some selectors in its official NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision Records publication.[6]:74–83 In addition, various analysts have independently published their own choices for each season. These opinions can often diverge with others as well as individual schools' claims to national titles, which may or may not correlate to the selections published elsewhere.
And yet the hawkeyes are not afraid to count shared conference titles. How many natties do the hawkeyes claim, shared or outright?
