November 17, 200619 yr ^ I haven't heard that. In a way I hope so bc Bama and Auburn play at 3:30 also and I could watch both w/o recording one.
November 17, 200619 yr ^ I haven't heard that. In a way I hope so bc Bama and Auburn play at 3:30 also and I could watch both w/o recording one. I guess not. ESPN updated their "Countdown Clock". At 7:30 it said 48+ hours. It has since been corrected...
November 17, 200619 yr I am pretty Ohio State has the bigger payroll. They have become the Yankees of college football. I hope Aaron Pettrey does well but I have two friends that are most obnoxious and delusional Buckeye fans and I would like nothing more than to call them each as the ghost of John Cooper and the 1995 Buckeyes (who choked out quicker than Ken Shamrock in a Tito Ortiz match to the Wolverines after going 11-0 all year) on Saturday night. But I bet O$U wins. Bucks 24 Michigan 21
November 17, 200619 yr May the best team win! CONGRATULATIONS BIG BLUE!!!!!!!!!!!HAHAHAHA :fight: GO BIG BLUE:fight: :flame: OSU:cry:
November 17, 200619 yr Well I hate Michigan because of the '97/'98 season when ESPN did everything in their power to give them the title. Heck, the championship trophy was even at the Rose Bowl incase they won and Nebraska didn't play until the next night. Funny how things look differently from my perspective. I saw a team that played in a completely inferior conference(the Big 12 back then was A LOT worse than it is now, and it still ain't good now), BUT Nebraska did have a legend coaching for them. Amazingly enough, he announced just days before Nebraska's bowl game that he would retire. Sympathy votes come out and magically we get a split title. Michigan was ranked ahead of them in both polls prior the bowl games. And let's not forget about the kicked ball TD. Nebraska has had many excellent football teams, and has a great tradition, but the '97 team isn't even close to that caliber IMO.
November 17, 200619 yr Funny how things look differently from my perspective. I saw a team that played in a completely inferior conference(the Big 12 back then was A LOT worse than it is now, and it still ain't good now), BUT Nebraska did have a legend coaching for them. Amazingly enough, he announced just days before Nebraska's bowl game that he would retire. Sympathy votes come out and magically we get a split title. Michigan was ranked ahead of them in both polls prior the bowl games. And let's not forget about the kicked ball TD. Nebraska has had many excellent football teams, and has a great tradition, but the '97 team isn't even close to that caliber IMO. Funny how things look from my side too. Woodson was given the Heisman in the pre-season because ALL ESPN talked about was him. Prior to the Rose Bowl, ESPN showed stats comparing the two teams. What they did was label one something like "Team A" and "Team B." They looked at number of opponents that made bowl games. The bowl record of those opponents. Each teams PPG, yards per game, and some other stats. One of the teams CLEARLY had better stats. And that was Nebraska. Michigan's opponents that made bowl games was like 1-5, while Nebraska's opponents was like 4-1. Nebraska was averaging about 14 more points per game. They had more yards per game. Nebraska KILLED #3 Tennessee and Peyton Manning. Michigan squeaked by #8 Washington St. and Ryan Leaf. We know which of those QBs is better don't we? You talk about the kicked ball against Missouri. What about the clock operator in the Rose Bowl helping Michigan? You're telling me that with like 3 seconds on the clock, Washington St couldn't spike it? They did and the clock kept running. It was obvious Leaf had spiked the ball with time left on the clock. As for Osborne announcing his retirement, he had to do something to counteract the media's love and constant praising of Michigan. Aside from Notre Dame, Michigan is the media's precious little baby. Anytime they get 10 wins, they think the should play for the title. It's ridiculous.
November 17, 200619 yr Just a guess, but there will be more NFL players in this game... I doubt it, but you never know. It would be an interesing question to revisit in a few years. As for the game, I'll take the Wolverines. Despite my reservations about Tressel vs. Carr and the game being played at the 'Shoe...Michigan is the better team, IMO. I agree with what RP said earlier. I think Michigan has a superior defense and that will play a big role in this one. Michigan - 28 Ohio State - 17
November 17, 200619 yr Funny how things look from my side too. Woodson was given the Heisman in the pre-season because ALL ESPN talked about was him. Prior to the Rose Bowl, ESPN showed stats comparing the two teams. What they did was label one something like "Team A" and "Team B." They looked at number of opponents that made bowl games. The bowl record of those opponents. Each teams PPG, yards per game, and some other stats. One of the teams CLEARLY had better stats. And that was Nebraska. Michigan's opponents that made bowl games was like 1-5, while Nebraska's opponents was like 4-1. Nebraska was averaging about 14 more points per game. They had more yards per game. Nebraska KILLED #3 Tennessee and Peyton Manning. Michigan squeaked by #8 Washington St. and Ryan Leaf. We know which of those QBs is better don't we? You talk about the kicked ball against Missouri. What about the clock operator in the Rose Bowl helping Michigan? You're telling me that with like 3 seconds on the clock, Washington St couldn't spike it? They did and the clock kept running. It was obvious Leaf had spiked the ball with time left on the clock. As for Osborne announcing his retirement, he had to do something to counteract the media's love and constant praising of Michigan. Aside from Notre Dame, Michigan is the media's precious little baby. Anytime they get 10 wins, they think the should play for the title. It's ridiculous. I'm not really interested in getting in a big debate on this issue, but Nebraska was the best team. I think most neutral football observers would echo that sentiment. The Huskers were a juggernaut during that time...but Michigan did what they had to that season, so I wouldn't call them undeserving. I just think Nebraska was clearly better and had they played each other that would have been verified.
November 17, 200619 yr I'm not really interested in getting in a big debate on this issue, but Nebraska was the best team. I think most neutral football observers would echo that sentiment. The Huskers were a juggernaut during that time...but Michigan did what they had to that season, so I wouldn't call them undeserving. I just think Nebraska was clearly better and had they played each other that would have been verified. Thank you.
November 17, 200619 yr I don't disagree with you much, "Gametime", but maybe here. The USC and Texas game last year might have had more future pros playing in it than any game in history. I would say The 'U' vs Nebraska in 01 probaby had the most. They were all on the same team though.
November 17, 200619 yr I'm going with the team with the most all time wins in the history of football. I always hear how it's so important in basketball, so why not... Cheap shot. Should be a fifteen yarder.
November 17, 200619 yr Cheap shot. Should be a fifteen yarder. The truth hurts sometimes. I understand...
November 17, 200619 yr I would say The 'U' vs Nebraska in 01 probaby had the most. They were all on the same team though. Perhaps. But the '96 Fiesta Bowl between Nebraska and Flordia had a ton of pros. Some of them didn't last long, but they were there nontheless.
November 17, 200619 yr Perhaps. But the '96 Fiesta Bowl between Nebraska and Flordia had a ton of pros. Some of them didn't last long, but they were there nontheless. If you need a disclaimer that they ended up not being very good, you're disqualified...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.