ijohnb

May 14th, 2010 at 9:20 AM ^

Nebraska in conference, semi-annualish, inter-pod action would be outstanding.  Seriously, the more I thinik about this expansion, the more awesome it sounds.  Michigan v. Nebraska as the 3:30 nationally televised Big Ten game-must see TV. 

M-Wolverine

May 14th, 2010 at 9:22 AM ^

But Michigan is 3-2-1 vs. Nebraska (.583).  But an interesting link, I'll check it out.

MattisonMan

May 14th, 2010 at 9:38 AM ^

What's with calling us the 'weasels'?  I thought the Ann Arbor/whore thing was the height of uninspired stupidity but I guess I underestimated the cornhuskers here.  I think the comeback here isn't even needed; we might simply remind them that it's Nebraska. 

MGoBender

May 14th, 2010 at 7:05 PM ^

I mean most of there large towns are still forts, aren't they?

Ha!  I LOL'd.

Yeah, the weasels comment is weak sauce.  Kinda equivalent to certain Michigan fans throwing around "Bucknuts" or "hairless nuts."  Yeah, you may say that at a bar or with your buddies over a beer, but would you really say it on television and expect to keep any semblence of professionalism?  No.  Same goes for someone trying to write a serious/professional blog post. 

M-Wolverine

May 14th, 2010 at 9:38 AM ^

From all the typos and poor sentence structure, I couldn't take anything he was writing seriously.  I mean, it's one thing to whip out a quick post on the board, to be buried and forgotten...but if you're doing a major post on the main part of a blog or such, spell check might be nice.  And not having. periods in the middle. of sentences.

Being a Red Fan in Big Ten Country and not knowing it's not M-U might help too. (Or linking back to 3 year old National Championship whining articles). 

But it IS interesting that over there they're talking like they ARE leaving for the B10, profiling each team.

MattisonMan

May 14th, 2010 at 10:44 AM ^

I couldn't care less about the shoe thing.  I think if we as michigan fans have a gripe about 1997 it's that we would've destroyed them, plain and simple.  Has nothing to do with how they won their games. 

wolverine1987

May 14th, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^

Usually I look at "we would have destroyed them" talk as homer talk, but I agree totally here. In '97 our only difficulty on defense within a great defensive team was occasionally against the pass--vs. the run we were lights out.  Nebraska that year could not pass if their lives depended on it.  I think we would have won easily, 14 points or more.

formerlyanonymous

May 14th, 2010 at 9:43 AM ^

That post is like 4 months old in internet time. I commented on it 4 days ago! But really, it's the same as anything else - just another team that calls us a rival, like Illinois or Wisconsin or Iowa or whoever.

That said, the volleyball matchups make me all tingly inside for so many reasons.

M-Wolverine

May 14th, 2010 at 9:49 AM ^

That going into the bowls WE were the #1 team.  And that #2 had never leap-frogged #1 in the polls EVER before that.  Which they didn't seem to have a problem with when PSU went undefeated.  Consistency, that's all we ask.  If PSU had shared (which I wasn't really hoping for), I wouldn't have half the problem with it as I do.

Also, he forgets to mention that WSU was like #5, so they weren't chopped liver. And Tennessee was WAY overrated (still didn't beat Florida).

In reply to by M-Wolverine

Baldbill

May 14th, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^

ok I mixed up the kicked ball TD and the 5th down, I got confused on a couple of old plays. I just remember thinking they didn't really belong with a MNC that season.

Beavis

May 14th, 2010 at 11:28 AM ^

Yeah man, total fail.

Nebraska versus Mizzou: Kicked ball touchdown.

Colorado versus Mizzou: 5th down.

Michigan versus Mizzou (2015): Fake field goal, pass back to the kicker for TD as time expires.

blueheron

May 14th, 2010 at 9:51 AM ^

I'll probably always find the outcome of that process annoying.  To hear BIG RED tell it, Michigan was a middle-of-the-road school from a mediocre conference who got lucky that year.  They weren't BIG RED, by gosh.  Forget trying to reason with those types (e.g., pointing out how much talent UM could put on the field that year).

V-Link

May 14th, 2010 at 9:55 AM ^

Apparently saying your team didn't play its best makes you an ignorant slut and arrogant too. That was just beautifully written and well supported.

 End of the day, we're Michigan and you're UNO (fans, at least). That's fine by me. Enjoy the WCHA.

willywill9

May 14th, 2010 at 9:54 AM ^

Seriously people, is it really that hard to spell Rodriguez correctly?  It's one of THE most common Spanish last names.  It's not like it's Echeverría or Velastegui.  I really don't understand why a Nebraska fan can deem Rodriguez as a "coach you can hate."

And we're still bitter about sharing a national title?  We don't (and no one really) even acknowledges Nebraska that year.  Okay, maybe that's my 'weasel' arrogance showing. 

Go Blue, Eat Maíz!

jeag

May 14th, 2010 at 10:04 AM ^

Rodriguez was the ninth most-common name in the US as of 2000; I assume it's at least held that spot over the past ten years.

And that's not even how it sounds! Anyone who has never pronounced the name "Rodriguez" is hereby invited to join my fantasy baseball league.

Double Nickel BG

May 14th, 2010 at 9:55 AM ^

Can the Michigan fan base be arrogant and full of ourselves? Sure, at times. But you can't question our love for Michigan.

 

Can you point out perceived flaws in a logical way? Sure, but when you start using "weasles" and stuff like that, your whole arguments get thrown into the blind hater folder. Its so stupid. I'm glad that most Michigan fans don't go the route of Spartina and Suckeyes.

jcgary

May 14th, 2010 at 10:34 AM ^

"when you start using "weasles" and stuff like that, your whole arguments get thrown into the blind hater folder. Its so stupid. I'm glad that most Michigan fans don't go the route of Spartina and Suckeyes."

But isn't using the term "Suckeyes" doing the same thing? 

dnak438

May 14th, 2010 at 7:15 PM ^

For what it's worth, I was at the Alamo Bowl in 2005 and the Nebraska fans there as a whole seemed polite but enthusiastic about their team -- i.e., positive about Nebraska and not negative about Michigan.  Obviously they were in a position to make fun of me and the other Michigan fans, but they didn't.

ijohnb

May 14th, 2010 at 10:12 AM ^

this particular thread, but what the hell is going on that it can just be assumed that all Big 12 schools are fair game and are likely to accept offers.  Is the Big 12 having money, attendance, enrollment, academic, all of the above type problems?  I guess I could go ahead and go to google and waste important search time on this issue, but why bother doing so with all the great minds on this very blog.  The Big 12 has been o-so-relevant in recent years in pretty much all major sports, why are all these schools apparently there for the poaching?

jcgary

May 14th, 2010 at 10:31 AM ^

From what I know the Big 12 does not share their revenue evenly.  So schools like Texas and Oklahoma get most of the money because they bring in the most.  But in the Big 10 the revenue sharing is equal so Indiana gets the same pay day as UofM from the Big 10. 

Maizeforlife

May 14th, 2010 at 10:13 AM ^

There is a comment at the bottom of that article in which somebody says that 1997 shared National Championship was a media gift to UM.  Nevermind the fact that the reason Nebraska won the Coach's Poll was because Phil Fulmer (spit) voted Michigan 4th at the end of the season, behind Tenessee (with a loss).  The AP trophy was the legit one, and the clusterfuck-of-a-system known as the BCS is what we all got because of it. 

I have hated Nebraska and Tennessee ever sinse 1997, if NU joins the Big Ten, I will hate them even more.

Seth9

May 14th, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^

Losing one mid-level bowl game is not a reason to hate them. Besides, I hate the Sun Belt Conference refs for calling the game so badly that it was hopelessly muddled by the end more than I hate Nebraska for winning it.

M-Wolverine

May 14th, 2010 at 11:00 AM ^

Tenn- Rolling over and bending for Nebraska in that Orange Bowl (way to prove you deserved the Heisman Peyton!)

Neb-the so called "classy" fans who all were flabbergasted before the Alamo Bowl that someone from Michigan might think that we would have a chance against them in '97. Not "oh, we were the better team", but really can't believe that anyone would think they could be beat. And weren't that "classy" about it after the game, either. (Hell, you just benefitted from the worst officiated football game of all time.  Shut up and enjoy it.)