Nebraska Beats Mizzou: A Diary
I had no intention of going to this game. In fact, I had no intention, really, of acknowledging this game existed until exactly 2:30 pm on Saturday. With all the potential implications of this game, the less I thought about it, the better. (A strange thing to say, I realize, considering how many words we wrote about this game this week.) But when I ended up with an opportunity for a press pass (I drove up with SleepyFloyd7 Friday night -- and by the way, ghtd36, Sleepy can now also verify that my wife does indeed exist), I leaped at it. I knew that even if a loss was in the works, the disappointment from that loss probably would not be as strong as the disappointment in the end of one of Mizzou's longest-running, most intense series. Many of the most memorable games in Mizzou's history have been against Nebraska, and though the 1980s and 1990s all but laid waste to this series as a true "rivalry," it was just beginning to realize its potential again. And now it's over.
When the announcement came down this summer that Nebraska was getting the Big Ten invitation for which Mizzou fans were yearning, I was, by that point, completely and totally beaten down. June had been, to that point, the best month in Rock M Nation's history, and I had not enjoyed a second of it. It was the most stressful, high-anxiety month that I could remember as a Mizzou fan … and not a single sport was going on. You could say that there was a period in 2004 where things were less enjoyable, either because of the basketball or football team, but I didn't have a blog then -- and was going out of my way to avoid Tigerboard -- so I didn't have to write about it every day. Plus, there were days off between games. Every morning Mizzou was getting dumped on by a new news outlet, and every morning there were new possible scenarios to discuss. I knew that things probably wouldn't work out terribly for Mizzou, but the threat and the negative sentiment (Who does Missouri think they are, saying they deserve a Big Ten spot?) seemed so much more stressful than the upside and potential (Big Ten! SEC! Big Ten!) seemed exciting.
Because of this, I was just numb. When we put the pieces together and realized that Mizzou's Halloween weekend trip to Lincoln would be its last (at least for the foreseeable future), there was no regret, just "whatever." Now? Regret. Serious, serious regret. After hitting the 20-year pause button on what was an intense rivalry, things had just started to get good again. Both teams are on pace to possibly win double-digit games this year, and if that happens, it would be the first time since the 1960s. Mizzou has finally beaten Nebraska enough in recent years to get their attention, and looking at the North division as it is currently constituted (for another month or so), Mizzou and Nebraska -- who will almost certainly have combined to win the final five North titles -- were poised to continuously battle for titles year after year. But that won't happen now. Instead, we will just continuously talk about what could have been with this rivalry while getting back into the Oklahoma series full-force (and hopefully finding some new rivals along the way) and watching Big Ten fanbases slowly come to realize they don't enjoy Nebraska fans nearly as much as they thought they would in this summer's group hug stage. (And yes, Big Ten fans, it will happen. Quickly. You have no idea what you're getting yourself into.)
1924. Riding high into Lincoln, undefeated Mizzou advances, time after time, into Nebraska territory. But after taking a 6-0 lead, they cannot put the game away. A fourth-quarter touchdown gives Nebraska a 14-6 win and Mizzou their only loss of the regular season (and a frustrating one at that).
11:00 - I wait for Sleepy to pick up the credentials and parking pass, stuck listening to local sports radio. One of the Mackovikas has a Saturday morning show, and the conversation I was dreading begins: "Is Missouri a rival of Nebraska?" Of course not! Here's what I learned:
* You can't be Nebraska's rival until you've won some national titles recently. Sorry, Iowa, Wisconsin, and probably even Penn State (1986 was likely too long ago to matter for them). Only Michigan and Ohio State can be their rivals, as only they meet the qualifications.
* Just beating them "a couple of times" recently (four of seven heading into yesterday) doesn't matter. Why? Because any wins over Nebraska during the Bill Callahan Era do not count. They magically no longer exist. As far as Nebraska is concerned, their history stops in 2003 and picks up in 2008. (In which case, Mizzou has still won two of the last four with Nebraska, but I'm sure Solich and the Callahan remnants don't count either, so let's just say it stopped in 1997 and started again last year.)
* Gary Pinkel has somehow turned Mizzou into something resembling a mediocre program, even though he's clearly a terrible, terrible coach. ("Must be the assistants or recruiting or something. It obviously isn't him.")
(I also learned that Kansas State -- while foolishly considering themselves NU's equals for a few years there -- never actually turned the corner and won a Big 12 title … which would be news to K-State fans.)
Typically I would never have begun listening to a program like this in the first place, but this being the last true experience with Nebraska for a long time, I wanted to soak it all in. And by the way, they spent 30 minutes on this topic … which makes you wonder who they were trying to convince -- the listeners or themselves.
What are my own "rivalry" thoughts? Obviously this is, for the most part, a semantics debate. We can all define "rivalry" in our own way, but I have always believed that Mizzou-Nebraska was the absolute definition of a rivalry -- even though Nebraska was more historically successful -- until the dormant period in the 1980s and 1990s. As I mentioned in the Colorado diary a few weeks ago, rivalries are created by moments and big games. Mizzou and Nebraska played in a ton of huge games in the 1960s and created a ton of amazing moments in the 1970s. Nebraska had more national success in that period, obviously, but they also lost three straight at home to the Tigers at one point. These schools hated each other in the late-1970s and early-1980s, when Mizzou was ruining Nebraska's national title hopes and Tom Osborne was suggesting that Mizzou played dirty. This was as intense as a series can be.
But then Mizzou didn't hold up their end of the bargain. They gave Nebraska no reason to continue to care about them; we have no one to blame but ourselves. Larry Smith obviously led a brief resurgence when Mizzou almost pulled the big upset in 1997 and should have won in Lincoln in 1998. But then four more years went by with easy Nebraska wins. Even with a memorable game in 1997, you can't consider anything a rivalry until Team B actually knocks off Team A a bit. With the last two Nebraska wins, these teams have now split the series since 2003. Only one of the two teams has finished in the Top 10 in that period, and it isn't Nebraska (though that could obviously change soon). Nebraska fans have spent so much time denying that Mizzou is a rival (and in most cases, they have been the ones bringing up the topic to begin with) that it's pretty clear that, at the very least, the stage was set to bring it all back.
Again, though, that will not be happening. No more MU-NU games are on the schedule, Nebraska gets to keep The Bell, and they get to tell themselves that since they won the last two games, they were right all along (again, it's Missouri's own fault). That's life. It's regrettable, but life is regrettable sometimes. And now we turn to the rebuilding of a couple of rivalries (Oklahoma, Oklahoma State) and hopefully the in-earnest building of some more (Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor).
1926. From the Savitar: "On October 9, in the great grey walls of the Cornhusker Stadium at Lincoln from which, until then, no Missouri Valley eleven had ever departed victorious and where Notre Dame, Illinois, New York University and other heralded teams had met their downfall; the Tigers squared their shoulders and by a great display of speed and skill and courage shattered whatever title hopes Nebraska might have had, 14 to 7."
11:30 - Time to do what I didn't get to do in my last trip to Lincoln in 1998 -- check out the pre-game environment and campus. Imagine if Faurot Field were actually located where Jesse Hall is. This is how the Nebraska campus and downtown interact. There is not nearly as much of a tailgating scene, at least not on the south and east sides of the tracks, but downtown is just a couple of blocks away from the stadium. Sleepy and I stop at the Embassy Suites on P Street, which has to make an absolute killing during football season. They open up their downstairs area for whoever wants to stop by for an (expensive) drink. Sleepy and I do our best to bring black and gold amid the sea of red.

Seriously, Embassy could charge $800 a room on home game weekends, and they would probably still sell out all their rooms.
12:15 - We have made our way down to Brothers on O Street, a pretty nice college bar with the welcome presence of mini-bowling. Here, we learn that Nebraska fans love their Jock Jams. That Alan Parsons Project song to which the Huskers come out during the Tunnel Walk starts playing and everybody immediately puts their beers down and start cheering/clapping. Considering how many times I've heard this song in my life and not reacted to it, this is a bit of a jarring experience. The fight song then plays ... and then we go back to the basic Def Leppard/Journey bar mix.
(By the way, if nothing else the trip to Brothers confirms one thing: take our actual teams out of the equation, and Missouri and Nebraska fans are very, very similar. Just do your best not to actually bring up football, and you'll all get along just fine.)
1938. Paul Christman's first trip to Lincoln sets abuzz the folks back in Columbia. The precocious Pitchin' Paul runs for a touchdown and throws for another, and Mizzou returns home with a thrilling 13-10 win. They will win five of six games to finish the season, building toward a 1939 campaign that goes down as one of Mizzou's best ever.
1:30 - Greetings from the Memorial Stadium press box!

1:35 - Oh holy crap, they seated us right next to Eric Crouch's seats! I am totally going to try to interview him ... and ask him why the hell he couldn't just let Nick Tarpoff tackle him in the end zone in 2001.
1:40 - Dammit. He gave his tickets away to some friends. Same with Johnny Rodgers on the other side of him. What a tease.
2:15 - The Husker fans in Crouch's seats are chatting with other Huskers in the general vicinity. "Have you been to Missouri's stadium?" "Yeah. It's ... cute." (Same fans later on: "Oh, Missouri's still undefeated? Huh." They had absolutely no idea. Stereotypes are often stereotypes for a reason.)
1940. The return trip for Paul Christman and Faurot's Tigers does not go as well as it had in 1938. In a game not dissimilar to this one, Nebraska scores twice early on (the equivalent of about four scores today), and Mizzou doesn't get on the board until they are down 20-0 in the fourth quarter. The 20-7 loss punctuates what will be a reasonably disappointing senior season for Christman after the thrilling heights of 1939.
2:25 - Considering how hard it obviously is to get extra tickets, Mizzou has represented pretty well today. They seem to have bought most of their allotted seats in the southwest corner, along with a patch in the northeast corner as well. There are random specks of gold strewn about the stadium.
I really am glad I came, just to get a more vivid memory of this stadium as a whole. (My only other trip was in 1998, and I went on a student bus trip. We were taken right to the alumni luncheon, then to our seats, so I really only experienced about 10 percent of the stadium and its surroundings.) What's most interesting about this place is ... in terms of its actual footprint, it's probably barely bigger than Mizzou's stadium. The difference is, the stands seem to go straight up on the east and west sides. As I will learn on the field later, the resulting noise level really is incredible. If Mizzou's Memorial Stadium is laid out like Dodger Stadium (wide and expansive), Nebraska's is, what, Tiger Stadium (tall, with the crowd right on top of you)? There's probably a better example than that. But combined with the (obvious) sellout crowd, it is both an impressive and rather shrilly loud experience.
In all, this atmosphere is what you would expect given the geographical and historical circumstances. Missouri's fanbase almost immediately gets split into factions because of the whole "KC vs StL" battle (not to mention a certain "rural vs city" tension as well). They also tend to split their sports budget between Missouri and the Cardinals, or Missouri and the Chiefs, or ... etc. In Nebraska, the Huskers are both the college team and the pro team, and half the state doesn't root for one team while the other half roots for another. This is the major show in town, and ... good for them. It works out well. I wish Missouri had the same great arrangement (easy for me to say, since I have no attachment to the Cards, Chiefs, Royals, Rams, Blues, or any other team in the area).
Of course, there is also the historical factor: give Mizzou 50 years of winning and watch them fill an 80K+ stadium as well. Hell, they were getting reasonably close in the 1970s with no breakthrough season. No sport is more married to its history than college football, and there are some decades Missouri will never get back. The program creates the fanbase, and then the fanbase reinforces the program. That's the way it works.
(And in fairness to Nebraska, despite all the arrogance and condescension I clearly experienced around me on Saturday ... it's not like Mizzou's fanbase would be any less arrogant or condescending if they had been winners for most of five decades.)
What strikes me as the most surprising, however, is how so much of what makes the Nebraska experience stand out has so little history attached. Everybody loves the Tunnel Walk, and it really is pretty neat to watch (I'd say Mizzou should do something similar, but the "tunnel" between their locker room and the stadium is open-air ... and about 12-feet long) ... but they really do use a classic Jock Jams track in the background. They don't show nearly as many historic Nebraska clips in the pre-game as I had envisioned (though personalizing the intro to show the Matt Davison catch and Ndamukong Suh's play from last year was a nice touch). I expected to feel 100 years of history during the game environment, and really I felt about 15. I don't really say this with any negative tone -- it is just an observation.
It isn't like Missouri does much better in that regard, obviously. But we don't have the history that Nebraska has; despite all the years of winning, the vibe I got in the stadium was basically that Johnny Rodgers was about the only memorable thing that happened before 1995. It just wasn't what I expected, is all. Oklahoma does a much more thorough job of nodding toward their history in the gameday experience.
1952. This is not a high point in either team's history (both teams won five games that season), but Missouri takes a tight 10-6 win in Lincoln. The Tigers' defense steals the show -- they stop Nebraska four times inside the Missouri 25-yard line, and Ed Merrifield returns an interception 25 yards for the deciding touchdown.
2:33 - After Tunnel Walk, we get the "No cheering in the press box" announcement. Bless their hearts, they try as hard as they possibly can to follow this rule. It won't work, but they do try.
First Quarter
2:37 - Mizzou will receive to start the game. Who knew? Predictably, it's a touchback. Adi Kunalic leads the nation in touchbacks percentage, and he will only add to his lead today.
The first possession goes ... well ... exactly how Mizzou didn't want it to go. Nebraska gets pressure without blitzing on first down (they did a solid job of confusing Mizzou's offensive line early on by disguising who was rushing and who wasn't ... and by the time the line figured things out, they were down 24), and Gabbert is lucky to scramble back to the line of scrimmage He throws wide of Michael Egnew on second down and has to throw it away on third down. One minute into the game, Mizzou punts. Grabner hangs one out for 51 yards, and the return is short.
2:45 - Nebraska's first possession ... goes exactly how Mizzou didn't want it to go. Mizzou overplays Taylor Martinez, and Roy Helu, Jr., goes untouched for 66 yards. The blocking was good, and Carl Gettis took an absolutely atrocious angle. Helu isn't as fast as Martinez, but he's much faster than Gettis apparently thought he was. Just like that, it's 7-0 Nebraska.
1960. It's Homecoming in Lincoln, but the festivities are ruined by a rude bunch of Tigers. The fifth-ranked Tigers score once in each quarter. In the third quarter, Norris Stevenson rips through a third-down hole for a 69-yard touchdown, and Mizzou coasts, 28-0. Their last two trips to Lincoln have netted two wins and a 59-0 scoring margin.
2:50 - After another touchback (they're all touchbacks today), Gabbert keeps the ball when he should hand it off, then hands it off when he should have kept it (though it looked like that one probably wasn't an option), and very quickly, it's third-and-11. Gabbert flees the pocket into pressure and throws it away again.
Mizzou's Leverage Rate on the first two drives: 33%. That's as low as you can get considering one-third of a set of downs is a first-and-10 (which is a standard down). Nebraska has three primary strengths: they are great in the first quarter, their offense is great on standard downs, and their defense is great on passing downs. Early on, when the game was being decided, Mizzou failed to neutralize any of these strengths.
2:54 - After a rollout pass gets a first down, Martinez fires a very pretty ball downfield to Niles Paul. Paul found a spot in the zone, but if the pass had been off-target in any way, it would have either been broken up or picked off. Quickly, the Huskers are already to the Mizzou 25. Two short runs generate seven yards, and Nebraska faces its first third down of the game. Zaviar Gooden makes a perfect play on a scrambling Martinez, however, and the Huskers will settle for a 41-yard Alex Henery field goal. 10-0 Nebraska. As Dave Matter points out on Twitter, however, this means Mizzou still has the best red zone defense in the country. So we've got THAT going for us!
1962. Nebraska is thriving in Bob Devaney's first season, and the 6-0 Huskers host 5-0-1 Mizzou in front of 38,000 and a national television audience. Johnny Roland unleashes a 46-yard touchdown run in the first quarter, and a short Jim Johnson touchdown finalizes a 16-7 Mizzou win. This was potentially the best Mizzou team of all-time, and they took care of business for their third consecutive win in Lincoln. Dan Devine didn't actually lose in Lincoln until his seventh season in charge.
3:02 - Positive yardage! After another touchback, Gabbert finds T.J. Moe for a 20-yard gain, and Alfonzo Dennard is injured. (He will miss the rest of the game, making Nebraska's ridiculously good coverage job that much more impressive.) Jerrell Jackson then drops a quick out on first down, however, and that's predictably a drive killer. After a short run by Kendial Lawrence, Gabbert is tripped up for a sack on third-and-7, and Grabner is already punting for the third time (it's another nice one, by the way). You can move the ball on Nebraska, but you simply have to get yards on first down to do it.
3:05 - Nebraska continues with the passing on standard downs. Martinez finds Ben Cotton for a nice gain on another rollout, and the Huskers are across midfield. Jarrell Harrison stops Martinez for no gain on a first down from the Mizzou 40, but then Kyler Reed -- a tight end, mind you -- burns Carl Gettis with a double move (Gettis very lazily reacted to the first move, and Reed was already on to the second) and gets open deep for a touchdown. 17-0 Nebraska. As co-founder and co-president of the Carl Gettis Fan Club, I can say that he played absolutely horribly in the first quarter. He was at least partially to blame on both of the first two touchdowns.
3:12 - Hey, look! A passing down! A forced incompletion and a one-yard gain lead to third-and-9. Gabbert throws it away, but Mizzou is bailed out by a defensive hold. First down! You take what you can get. Given new life, Mizzou finally gets a nice gain on first down; a screen (nearly broken up) to Egnew generates nine yards. Here's where I go deep on Playstation ... but instead, Henry Josey is tripped up for a loss of one. Third-and-2 from the Mizzou 39, and Gabbert throws wide to a well-covered Moe. Mizzou stayed in standard downs on that set of downs, and it didn't matter. Grabner punts for the fourth time.
3:15 - Okay, I get it, Roy Helu. You're faster than I thought you were. Fine. Point taken. Now stop. Helu gets the corner and, with no safeties anywhere in the picture (not sure what happened there), he only has to beat Andrew Gahkcar to the end zone. 73 yards, 24-0 Nebraska, and Mizzou is getting embarrassed. After outscoring the Huskers 119-33 over 13 quarters from 2006 to 2009 (and 17-7 over the final three of this game), they have been outscored 51-0 in the last two. That's ... hard to do.
(In the midst of dumping on Mizzou for this awful first-quarter performance, I should also compliment them. This had the look of a 66-7 route at this point, and they sucked it up and started playing better. Now, I mentioned all week how leverage-dependent Nebraska is -- they are not good offensively on passing downs, and they are the best in the country defensively on passing downs. They are exactly the type of team that probably isn't going to blow a 24-point lead against anybody in the country. Every down was basically a passing down the rest of the way for Mizzou, but Gabbert showed some serious guts and fortitude while getting wailed upon, and Mizzou moved the ball rather well over the final three quarters. The game was completely over at this point, but Mizzou kept fighting, and they do deserve credit for that.)
1972. Against the defending national champion Huskers, Mizzou fights to keep the score at just 21-0 at halftime, but after Johnny Rodgers rips off a great punt return and the Huskers intercept John Cherry, it is quickly 42-0, then 48-0, then 55-0. Mizzou loses, 62-0, setting the table for one of their most starting bounceback wins, an upset of Notre Dame in South Bend, just the next week.
3:18 - Drive No. 5 starts with a huge run by Gabbert, but it is negated somewhat because somehow Wes Kemp grabbed a facemask at some point. Not what one would call focused blocking. It's officially a 25-yard gain with a 15-yard penalty. Gabbert broke off what was probably a 50-yarder ... and it goes for 10 yards.
Moe gets ten yards on a slant, but then the offensive line says "¡Olé!" Gabbert is sacked as soon as he takes the snap on first down, then is sacked again by Jared Crick. Fortunately, Crick went hands-to-face for an easy 15-yard penalty. The crowd is outraged ... outraged!! (It was an easy call.) They will apparently guilt the refs into ignoring future penalty-worthy hits on the quarterback.
The line finally does its job on the resulting first down, but there is not a single receiver open, and eventually Gabbert is dragged down for the third straight play. So that's Line Sack, Line Sack (with penalty), Coverage Sack if you're scoring at home. On second down, Gabbert gets the pass off! It's wide of Moe, but ... progress! On third down, Gabbert lobs it to Jackson deep, and it is intercepted. Jackson was well-covered, but Gabbert had to throw to somebody, now didn't he. It basically serves as another punt.
Second Quarter
3:28 - Life from the Mizzou defense! Rex Burkhead finds a nice hole for seven yards on first down, but after Martinez is crushed throwing a deep ball (almost intercepted), Michael Sam blows him up for a third down sack. (It's odd to say this, but in a game where a Nebraska runner set a school record, I think Mizzou's defensive ends actually played really well -- for the most part, it was in the linebacker corps and secondary where the glitches occurred.) The crowd boos lustily because ... well ... because Nebraska was penalized when they hit the quarterback, therefore it's only fair if Mizzou is flagged too, apparently. Gettis puts together a decent punt return, and Mizzou takes over.
3:30 - RPT on Twitter: "Hey Michigan State, you want to get a beer later?" (Michigan State is losing 23-0 to Iowa, and unlike Mizzou, they won't really bounce back.)
1974. No. 5 Nebraska leads 2-2 Missouri, 10-0, heading into the final quarter, but after Husker quarterback David Humm gets hurt, Mizzou plows ahead for three fourth quarter touchdowns and a shocking 21-10 win, just two years after the 62-0 loss. Mizzou wins five of their final seven games to finish 7-4.
3:37 - Mizzou's first successful drive comes an hour after the game began. Two passes to Jackson and Egnew generate a first down, then Moe goes for nine yards. Gabbert pump fakes and goes long on second-and-1 (my play!), but the throw is predictably well-covered, and it falls incomplete. On third-and-1 from the Nebraska 33, Mizzou brings out a pretty sweet seven-lineman double-jumbo package. Nebraska coaches are as taken aback as anybody, and they call timeout.
After the timeout, Gabbert plunges for the first down ... but one of the seven linemen moved. Sigh. Third-and-6, and Gabbert scrambles and finds a diving Egnew for five yards. Egnew justified every bit of the mid-season All-American hype with the way he played on Saturday. His growth this season has been simply incredible.
Fourth-and-1 ... double-jumbo package again ... and Gabbert quick-pitches wide to De'Vion Moore, who gets the corner and goes 33 yards for a touchdown. Great call, great run, great blocking. 24-7 Nebraska. Or, to put it another way, Teams Going Toward the South Endzone 31, Teams Going North 0. Wonderful job by the offense on this drive.
3:40 - Not as wonderful: a short kick by Trey Barrow and an easy 40-yard return by Niles Paul. The Huskers are near midfield without snapping the ball. As devastating as first downs and the first quarter were for Mizzou, Nebraska gave them no hope of truly coming back because they are one of the best in the country at playing the field position game. Mizzou started every possession at their 20-yard line, and after Mizzou scored, Nebraska tended to start closer to the 40. And against a team that fumbles over three times per game, Mizzou was unable to force a turnover and do their offense any favors. You must give yourself some short fields against this defense, and Mizzou just couldn't do it.
Despite the field position, Mizzou's defense continues to step up. Jacquies Smith forces Martinez to reverse field on first down, and Aldon Smith stops him for a loss of seven. Mizzou goes deep on second down, and Kevin Rutland is in position to make the interception, but he is tackled and can't reel it in. (In other words, it was a very obvious offensive pass interference, with no call. And now that I've set up the "Nebraska outrage!" meme, I feel hypocritical complaining about calls or no-calls ... but this one was a bad no-call, the end.)
On third down, Martinez scrambles forever and is gang-tackled for a loss of two. Once again, the crowd is shocked and boos because they want a flag. What flag, I have no idea. Another nice Gettis punt return gives Mizzou the ball at their 41. A small window of opportunity has opened for Mizzou to get back in this game.
1976. One of the greatest and most frustrating seasons in Mizzou history continues with a shocking Tiger win in Lincoln. Having already defeated No. 8 USC and No. 2 Ohio State on the road, the Tigers are far from intimidated in facing the No. 3 Huskers. With Mizzou down 24-23 in the fourth quarter, Pete Woods finds Joe Stewart for a shocking 98-yard touchdown. Mizzou pulls away to win 34-24 ... and then proceeds to lose three of four down the stretch.
3:48 - Nebraska's defense responds. Gabbert gets two yards on a keeper, and Kemp gets three on a quick slant. Gabbert gets great protection on third down, but there's nobody open yet again, and he throws it away. Grabner angles the punt out around the Nebraska 16, and the crowd boos the spot. Of course they do.
3:52 - The start of Nebraska's next drive is marred by a chop block on a Helu run. It's quickly third-and-15 (with press box attendees grumbling about the lack of play-calling creativity, which surprises me); Martinez shot puts a pass to Helu for 14 yards. He's clearly short ... and the crowd boos the spot. I have officially gotten Outrage Fatigue, even from the press box, where the crowd noise is muffled. Then, it gets worse. Gettis fair catches the ensuing punt, and his momentum carries him into an NU cover guy a bit. They jaw for a second, and the crowd reacts as if Gettis whipped out a shiv and stuck it in his belly.
Somebody behind me then gives the first "The Big 12 clearly wants Mizzou to win this game" rant of the day. Because ... the calls ... have been ... so much ... in Mizzou's favor ... I guess? Outrage Fatigue has turned into Outrage Exhaustion. Seriously, have fun with them, Big Ten fans. They're all yours. Did I say I'm going to miss this rivalry? I'm having second thoughts.
(And this says nothing of Gabe's experience Saturday night.)
4:01 - After Gabbert fires too hard for Moe (it bounces off his hands and is almost picked off), De'Vion Moore rips off a beautiful, strong, 13-yard gain in traffic. Kendial Lawrence runs for another first down, but two quick incompletions (one almost pass interference, the other a great piece of coverage on a deep ball) lead to third-and-10. Getting into field goal range is imperative here ... but they go long instead. Rolandis Woodland gets a step on his man but can't quite reel in the pass. The Nebraska defender grabs at Woodland's hand, which could be called pass interference, but I can't blame the ref for not calling it -- he'd have feared for his life if he threw that flag. And regardless, Woodland needs to get catch that ball anyway. He got a few opportunities to prove that he is more than just a Greg Bracey-type (a great athlete who isn't really a great football player), and the opportunities mostly fell to the turf.
On fourth-and-10 from the Nebraska 35, Mizzou once again has no good options. With their play to date, they probably had about a 3 percent chance of converting on fourth-and-10, so they tried a low-percentage field goal instead. The snap is poor, and Ressel's kick comes up short. Major-league missed opportunity there. Woodland should have caught the deep ball for seven, and a good snap might have meant three points. Instead, it's still 24-7.
4:04 - Starting from their 35 following the miss, Nebraska needs just one nice Martinez run to get back into Mizzou territory. Two more runs set up a third-and-3 at the Mizzou 43. Martinez somehow fires the ball right into Ebner's back, however, and Henery sand wedges one to the Mizzou 10 with 1:59 left in this miserable first half. Goal No. 1: make sure Nebraska can't expand their lead before halftime. Goal No. 2: try to steal some points. Mizzou goes one-for-two.
1978. Did you see him? Did you see him take that man and throw him down?
4:09 - Nice passes to Jerrell Jackson and Brandon Gerau (love that kid!) get Mizzou quickly to their 36, then Prince Amukamara knocks away a pass to Moe ... because that's what he does. Gabbert scrambles for three to set up a third-and-7, then lobs a pass just inches too far for a diving Moe. As with the San Diego State, some of Gabbert's long passes are just barely failing. But they're failing nontheless. Grabner crushes a 50-yard punt to a back-pedaling Burkhead, and though Helu comes this close to breaking another long touchdown, he doesn't, and Nebraska runs out the rest of the clock. It's 24-7 at halftime. It could have been much, much worse ... but if one of those deep balls had found its mark, it could have been a lot better.
Third Quarter
4:33 - Wait ... Nebraska is kicking off again? Didn't expect that, but okay. Mizzou ball at the 20 (because I didn't need to tell you it was a touchback). Gabbert finds Egnew for five, then jukes a guy to the ground (seriously) for five more. All options are covered to start the next set of downs, however, and Gabbert is sacked for a seven-yard loss. After a lunging Jackson drops a tough-but-catchable pass 15 yards downfield, the drive ends with Gabbert having to throw the ball away yet again. Grabner comes on for his 26th(ish) punt of the game.
4:40 - And Zac Lee is now in for the hobbled Martinez, who got hit quite a bit in the second quarter and at some point suffered a bone bruise in one leg. For an offense that basically just needs to avoid killer turnovers, Lee will work just fine ... perhaps better than Martinez, actually. Penalties mar Lee's first drive, however. A dropped pass on third-and-penalty-aided-14 leads to a punt, and Mizzou takes over at their 22.
1982. From the Omaha World-Herald: "The fifth-ranked Huskers won 23-19, as Mike Rozier had his gutsiest day running for 139 yards over MU with a hip pointer. But the headline, again, was a "cheap shot’’ when Missouri defensive end (and Omaha native) Randy Jostes pushed Gill down after he had released the ball. Gill was knocked out of the game. Emotions got ugly again, even up in the press box, where the public address man announced it as a 'cheap shot.' Former Missouri sports information director Bill Callahan — the real Bill Callahan — charged up and scolded the PA guy."
4:56 - Here comes another strong Mizzou drive. Josey runs for six on first down, but a second-down out is broken up. (I probably would have just run the ball again there.) Third-and-4 for Mizzou turns into third-and-9 when Jayson Palmgren jumps (he is easily the most penalized Mizzou lineman), but great Nebraska coverage actually backfires on the Huskers; nobody notices Gabbert leaving the pocket, and 25 yards later ... IT'S MIZZOU'S FIRST THIRD-DOWN CONVERSION OF THE GAME!!! CUE CELEBRATION DOG.

Welcome to the game, puppy.
Opportunity No. 2 for Woodland once again comes within inches of paying off. Gabbert fakes the zone read keeper and quickly pitches to Ro, who almost splits two blockers and breaks free for a touchdown, but instead gets tripped up for six yards. After Gabbert scrambles for nothing, it's third down again. Gabbert is in a rhythm (sort of) at this point, however, and Egnew makes a gorgeous catch with Lavonte David on his back and going for the pick. First down at the Nebraska 39.
By the way ... I don't know if you've heard us say this (a million times since Saturday) or not, but Nebraska's secondary is really good. Gabbert is getting more comfortable, and the protection is getting better, but twice in a row he is forced to just throw the ball away. (Of course, that probably means Mizzou should be running more ... but down 17, they have all but given up on that.) Third-and-10, and Egnew makes another great catch over the middle for 11 yards. Mizzou wide receivers had a horribly forgettable day, but Egnew was just plain awesome.
Now inside the Nebraska 30, Gabbert fakes another handoff and plows ahead for four yards. After Nebraska perfectly sniffs out a screen, he has to scramble for a loss of one. Third-and-five, and Mizzou uses their second timeout of the drive (ouch), as Gabbert didn't realize the play clock was down to :01. Points are what is most important here, but losing two timeouts wasn't a good thing. BUT...
...the timeout was worth it. Moe motions all the way from the left sideline to the right sideline, then runs a pretty post route, shakes his man, and gets into the endzone. Well done on all accounts. 24-14 Nebraska. Mizzou's drive: 12 plays, 78 yards, 4:20. If Mizzou can make another stop, they are right back in this game.
4:59 - They do not make that stop. Not even close. Will Ebner horribly over-pursues to the right, and Helu stops and finds a huge hole up the middle. Fifty-seven yards later, it's 31-14 Nebraska, right back to a 17-point lead. These are Nebraska's only points of the game's final three quarters, but the score is just perfectly timed. Mizzou worked really hard to get the game back to 10 points, and Nebraska extended it back to 17 in one play.
1990. Riding a bit of national momentum after losing to Colorado via Fifth Down the week before, Mizzou thought they might be able to stand up just as well to No. 5 Nebraska. A win would likely mean their first Top 25 ranking in years. Instead, they couldn't force a single Nebraska punt. The Huskers led 45-14 at halftime on the way to a humbling 69-21 win, and the Bob Stull era, really, would never recover.
5:24 - Okay, this penalty doesn't end up mattering because Mizzou quickly responded with a first down, but Gabbert got called for intentional grounding despite almost hitting T.J. Moe's foot with the pass. Why? Because the ref says, "In college football, the ball has to be somewhat catchable." Maybe this is a rule, but I've never heard of it. As Sleepy says next to me, "That's science fiction." It's a good thing Big 12 refs want Mizzou to win this game, huh?
Anyway, after Gabbert (on second down) and Lawrence (third) combine to get the first down anyway, Moe makes a diving catch and temporarily injures himself. On third down, Gabbert buys time forever before heaving the ball downfield ... and Egnew makes a simply ridiculous leaping catch on the sideline. In real time, I decided there was no way in hell he secured the ball and got a foot down inbounds. Upon further review, he secured the ball and might have gotten two feet down. (That doesn't stop the fans from incessantly booing when the replay confirms the call on the field, of course.) I have compared him to Martin Rucker with increasing frequency recently, but that was, dare I say, Coffman-esque.
First down from the Nebraska 31. Mizzou goes deep immediately to Kemp, but Ciante Evans (in for Dennard) almost makes a gorgeous interception. Instead, he drops the ball and hurts himself. Gabbert goes right back at Kemp against the third-stringer, Anthony West, and it's almost picked off. Instead, however, Kemp catches the pass and breaks ahead for 16 yards.
After two tough yards for Moore, Gabbert goes to the end zone to Jerrell Jackson, but again it is broken up, this time by Amukamara. Jackson probably should have caught it anyway (he got both hands on it), but I'm not sure why you would ever throw at Amukamara. (At one point, Amukamara broke up a pass intended for Woodland, and my immediate reaction was ... "You threw it to him? With him covering?") Third-and-8 ... make that third-and-13 after a delay of game penalty (Gabbert tried calling a fourth timeout) ... and Gabbert breaks for the end zone. As he lunges for the end zone, he is face-masked pretty badly and goes down at the one-foot line. The ball comes loose, and the officials will review the play and say that he was down. ("BOOOOOOOOO!!!") Whether he was down or not, I figure they reviewed the play, saw the facemask, and figured ... we'll split the difference. Mizzou ball.
* First-and-goal from the one-foot line: Gabbert gets about an inch under center.
* Second-and-goal from 11 inchces away: Josey gets about eight inches.
* Third-and-goal from three inches away: out of the shotgun, Gabbert fakes the handoff and is pinwheeled at the goal line. No score. Oy.
Fourth-and-goal ... Mizzou's going for it, of course ... at least until Gabbert tries a hard count and Josey moves early. False start. Field goal. 31-17 Nebraska, 1:35 left in the third quarter. With the reviews and penalties, that drive took 22 minutes in real time. Holy moly.
1995. Following a shutout loss to Kansas State, a desperate Larry Smith attempts to shake things up by tearing the redshirt off of prized freshman quarterback Corby Jones. Nebraska (whom Jones spurned to stay closer to home) is unimpressed. The Missouri defense holds on as long as it can, and Nebraska leads only 7-0 after one quarter ... but it is only a matter of time. The points pile up in nuclear fashion, and Jones' debut ends with a 57-0 defeat.
5:27 - And the steady diet of Roy Helu begins. Three runs generate exactly ten yards, and that's the end of the longest third quarter in the history of the world. Just imagine how long it would have been had Nebraska attempted more than two passes.
Fourth Quarter
5:35 - Two more Helu runs generate exactly ten more yards, then two Lee keepers do the same. Nebraska is to the Mizzou 38 now -- this has been the perfect clock-eating drive so far. Two more Helu runs get six yards, giving Mizzou their first opportunity for a stop. Helu is strung wide and wrapped up for a two-yard loss, bringing up fourth down and a long field goal attempt ... which is blocked by Jacquies Smith! Mizzou (technically) has life for a little while longer. Still 31-17, 10:30 left.
5:44 - Mizzou's following drive starts with a defensive holding penalty ("BOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!") and a four-yard De'Vion Moore run to the Mizzou 48. After a Mizzou substitution infraction, however, it's second-and-long, and Nebraska can bring the blitz. Oh, do they. Safety Courtney Osborne comes off the edge and lights Gabbert up. Gabbert stays down a while. It's an uncalled helmet-to-helmet hit ... and quite possibly also an uncalled fumble. It's likely another split-the-difference replay review ... Mizzou keeps the ball ("BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!"). For now. Gabbert (who, to his credit, is upright yet again) gets 12 yards back on 3rd-and-22, but Mizzou punts with about nine minutes left.
1998. Nebraska is ranked seventh in the country, but they are on approximately their 13th-string quarterback, walk-on Monte Christo. No. 19 Missouri plays inspired defense all game, returning a fumble for a touchdown and setting up a short touchdown with a blocked field goal and return. But with Corby Jones severely limited with turf toe, the Tigers just cannot move the ball. They gain just 166 yards all game, and a desperation heave falls between John Dausman's hands. Mizzou cannot get revenge for 1997 and stumbles, 20-13.
5:48 - Two Helu runs get a first down, and as we're packing up to head down to the field, the event staff lady behind me is complaining that "somebody took all my pro-grums." On third-and-2 from the Nebraska 31, Lee runs a play-action rollout to Kyler Reed, and apparently he gets a foot down inbounds. When the play happened, I thought he was about seven feet out of bounds. Replay confirms, so there you go. The chains move, and any remaining hope Mizzou had fades away.
5:56 - We're down on the sideline, and Nebraska still has the ball. As Mizzou higher-ups like governor Jay Nixon and Mizzou president Gary Forsee prepare to leave, the 80K+ in attendance start a rather impressive "Helu, Helu, Helu" chant.
5:58 - Less impressive: the "Overrated" chant that follows. Ah yes, the "Ha ha, we're beating you, so you must not be as good as people thought" chant. That'll show us.
2006. In a game almost identical to this one, Nebraska breaks open a surprising early lead and Mizzou faces a 27-6 halftime deficit. They improve in the second half, but the damage is done, and in Chase Daniel's first truly poor start, Mizzou falls 34-20.
6:00 - Nebraska calls timeout with 2:17 left, then converts a fourth-and-1 to basically end the game. Here comes victory formation. This game was lost in the first quarter, but Mizzou made them fight as long as possible to officially wrap it up. That's something, I guess.
2008. Revenge! For the first time in 30 years, Mizzou actually gets it done in Lincoln, and in vociferous fashion. Jeremy Maclin scores less than a minute into the game, and Mizzou's offense operates at perhaps the highest level in the school's long history. Mizzou leads 52-10, until Nebraska's first-stringers finally score on Mizzou's scrubs as time expires in a 52-17 route.
6:14 - Pinkel's opening statement at his postgame press conference almost literally lasts eight seconds. His answers are as succinct as Post-Loss Pinkel's typically are (Most disappointing aspect of today's game: "Losing." Hangover eff--"No. That's an excuse."). Sleepy gets the audio he needs, and we get on the road. Sort of. It takes more than an hour to actually get out of Lincoln.
Leaving Lincoln, I predictably begin to face the layers of "what could have been" thoughts. If only Carl Gettis had only made one egregious error in the first quarter instead of two, or Rolandis Woodland had caught the second-quarter deep ball, or Will Ebner hadn't overpursued in the third quarter ... Nebraska still probably would have won, but Missouri would have given themselves much more of a fighting chance. And if only things had played out a little differently over the summer, this might not be my final trip to Lincoln. Granted, the Big Ten could always re-open the can of expansion worms again this offseason, and who knows what would then unfold, but it goes without saying at this point that the odds of Mizzou and Nebraska being conference rivals in the future are not amazingly high.
Mizzou players and staff now shift their attention to the coming weeks, but as we drive home in the pitch black landscape of eastern Nebraska and northern Missouri, there is no future -- only a past.
122 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
For the record, I was sitting 13 rows behind the 'R' in the left end-zone in the shot of the field
Great seats, but the people around me apparently thought that any call (even if it was a non-call) that wasn’t overwhelmingly in favor of the Huskers was proof of a conspiracy against them.
I spent 5 minutes trying to explain to the people around me why it wasn’t a fumble when Gabbert let go of the ball while laying on his back on the 1/2 yard line in the 3rd quarter. Never mind the fact that in our seats, you couldn’t SEE that (I was relying on the replay board), every single person around me swore that they were getting screwed since that wasn’t ruled a fumble.
Thank you for explaining this:
5:24 – Okay, this penalty doesn’t end up mattering because Mizzou quickly responded with a first down, but Gabbert got called for intentional grounding despite almost hitting T.J. Moe’s foot with the pass. Why? Because the ref says, “In college football, the ball has to be somewhat catchable.” Maybe this is a rule, but I’ve never heard of it. As Sleepy says next to me, “That’s science fiction.” It’s a good thing Big 12 refs want Mizzou to win this game, huh?
The people around me (see above) swore that it was Intentional Grounding because the ball didn’t make it to the line of scrimmage, despite the fact that there was a receiver there AND he was clearly out of the pocket. Kinda made me question again why Landry Jones didn’t get called for IG last week when he tossed the ball sidearmed at the ground on the 5 yard line when we got called for DPI.
The 3rd Helu TD (and, I'm assuming all 3)
seemed to me (as they were RIGHT in front of me) to be great game planning. The LBs were super-aggressively pursuing to their left, and Helu just changed directions and hit the big hole between the Guard and Tackle and was gone. Was that actually a counter, or did he just see a hole and react? The “oh shit” reaction from Gachkar would have been funny if it wasn’t such a bummer.
Honestly, it looked to me like a reaction from Helu...
…he looked and saw a huge hole, stopped, and changed direction. Could have been planned, but it looked impromptu to me.
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
For the record, the ONE guy near me who didn't think everything was a penalty
Thought that THIS should have been Offensive Pass Interference, also.
MizzouNebraska goes deep on second down, and Kevin Rutland is in position to make the interception, but he is tackled and can’t reel it in. (In other words, it was a very obvious offensive pass interference, with no call. And now that I’ve set up the “Nebraska outrage!” meme, I feel hypocritical complaining about calls or no-calls … but this one was a bad no-call
I'm kind of curious about this, to be honest...
2:33 – After Tunnel Walk, we get the “No cheering in the press box” announcement. Bless their hearts, they try as hard as they possibly can to follow this rule. It won’t work, but they do try.
Regardless of what you think about us Nebraska fans . . .
. . . you’ve posted the best statistical analysis out there, Bill C. I learn something every time I read one of your columns.
Keep doing quality work. You have some fans on the Nebraska side of the border.
Thanks, Chris.
I tried to balance out my annoyance with the acknowledgment that Mizzou fans probably wouldn’t be any better in the same circumstances. It was a tough balancing act!
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
i LOVE these diaries, bill. even in defeat.
i never heard the overrated chant. i guess because i was in the mizzou sections, but that kind of surprises me. also the red “muck fizzou” shirt (switching of m and f mine) surprised me as well. seems they hate us much, much more than 2 years ago.
My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things.
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
Bill C.
Great read! You are doing some fabulous work here with RPT. I wish the fans didn’t boo so much since we were getting plenty of calls (or non-calls). I am glad your experience @ Lincoln was a good one. Our MU/NU story ends here for now. I look forward to the next time we meet on the field. I do have a question about Memorial Stadium which I would like some outsider perspective on. What did you think of the video board? Is it too distracting? Does it remove the fans from the game after each stoppage? Thanks!
And, I will definitely add
while the reactions to many of the calls were absolutely ridiculous, the people couldn’t have been nicer to me.
But, to illustrate a point – I SWEAR I heard an older Husker fan thanking the door of the elevator for opening as I was getting ready to leave the hotel on Sunday morning*. Kinda makes you wonder about the arrogance of a person who thinks an elevator opens for him… is it along the same lines of someone who thanks me for coming to his favorite team’s stadium? Uh, I didn’t come for you, but you’re welcome.
- It is possible that there was someone who was holding the “Door Open” button for him that I just couldn’t see.
surprised the door didn’t say “you’re welcome” :)
by JimmytheRed on Nov 1, 2010 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Lots of solitary hours on tractors . . .
… lead some of us to have no qualms about talking to machinery. It might just be the most intelligent conversation we have all day.
by Chris Wilson on Nov 1, 2010 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree,
While I was up there, the fans couldn’t have been any nicer to my dad and I. That all could have been different if the game results were a little different, but for the most part the fans there were great.
"Blaine Gabbert sucks at life, bring in little gabbert, he will do better."
-Girl behind me at a game
Ahem.
You are doing some fabulous work here with RPT.
I’m standing right here.
"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010
Fine. All the contributors on this site are doing an outstanding job. (Singled out Bill C and RPT because I actually had interaction on the site with them before.)
Just giving you trouble.
I thrive on disrespect. :)
"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010
I'm still upset
that I missed you meeting Trent Ratterree’s brother.
Pigskin Punditry
Follow me on Twitter
I reject your reality and substitute my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbusters
I'm typing this reply to you...
…so it went better than I had imagined it going.
"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010
Ugh... this summer...
Expansionpalooza is actually the reason I stopped posting on here for a while. I posted some things then that were overemotional and out of line, and felt embarrassed afterward.
Elke ware zoon, zo blij van harte / Hemels boven ons zijn blauw / Er is een geest zo diep binnen ons / Oud Missouri dit is voor jou / Wanneer de band het Tijger oorlogslied speelt / En wanneer de strijd over is / We zullen stampen, stampen, stampen, rond de kolommen / Met een kreet voor oud Mizzou!
by Dutch Missourian on Nov 1, 2010 3:24 PM CDT reply actions
Nobody remembers
That was such a cluster.
Whoever said, 'It's not whether you win or lose that counts,' probably lost.
Martina Navratilova
by tigers and chiefs fan on Nov 1, 2010 4:29 PM CDT up reply actions
The only thing that is remembered from all that
is MUTIGERS86’s sources, and he’s a pretty good sport about that.
by AlaTiger on Nov 1, 2010 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
What?
Nobody remembers Big 12 Didn’t Start The Fire?
I am way too irrationally proud of that post.
RockMNation.com (@rockmnation on Twitter)
The 2010 Missouri Football Preview - Available Now!
by RPT on Nov 1, 2010 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions
REC'd :-)
Elke ware zoon, zo blij van harte / Hemels boven ons zijn blauw / Er is een geest zo diep binnen ons / Oud Missouri dit is voor jou / Wanneer de band het Tijger oorlogslied speelt / En wanneer de strijd over is / We zullen stampen, stampen, stampen, rond de kolommen / Met een kreet voor oud Mizzou!
by Dutch Missourian on Nov 1, 2010 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions
I can't wait...
…for the first Nebraska fan to mention “5 National Championships” to an Ohio State fan, who replies, “Is that all?” Cue Scanners exploding head guy.
But seriously, the only thought I have regarding the end of this rivalry is “good riddance”. I’m sorry if that offends the decent Husker fans who have come around the last few weeks, but that’s the way it is. The institutionalized sense of entitlement, the irrational conspiracy theories, the condescending refusal to acknowledge any success by Missouri… we can get that from A&M every year now, so it will be like Nebraska never left.
So in the immortal words of Curly Bill, “Well… bye.”
"Smell the perfume but don't drink it because it might kill you." Erin Andrews recounting advise from Gary Pinkel
So when Minnesota fans say “Is that all” to the Nubbies as well, are they going to sit and cry?
Great writeup. But the game was still atrocious.
"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan
Oh yes..
for a post on the Huskers Rivals free board, I had to research 100+ years of B10 games (something about Nebraska having “relationships” with B10 schools that Mizzou didn’t), and I found that Minnesota literally owned Nebraska for a long, long time (Nebraska’s now won 14 straight). Minnesota still has a 9 game lead in the series… so they can talk about tOSU and Michigan, but from the numbers I crunched, Nebraska’s rivalries are Minnesota, Iowa, and maybe Penn State.
"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan
It doesn't feel like a rivalry at all
because I have grandkids starting elementary school and Minnesota hasn’t beaten me in my lifetime,
They haven't beaten Nebraska either.
I need an edit button. Or better proofreading skills.
Ergh
I could hardly read the game part of the diary.
Harsh.
But let’s go get our frustrations out on the Red Raiders – eh?
Whoever said, 'It's not whether you win or lose that counts,' probably lost.
Martina Navratilova
by tigers and chiefs fan on Nov 1, 2010 4:37 PM CDT reply actions
Well Done
You know you’re a good writer when a fellow Missouri fan can enjoy reading the description of a 31-17 loss. Hilarious at times.
I was just thinking...
Isn’t this rivalry kind of like the Little Brown Jug? Sure, one team has a big lead in the series, but it doesn’t mean the games don’t mean anything to the fans…
"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan
I think it's funny that we Nebraska fans are so upset at the refs over everything
(And let’s be honest, as Bill acknowledged above, everyone gets irrationally angry at the refs during games, but anyway.)
But I’ve never seen so many Nebraska fans so openly into conspiracy theory territory as they are right now. And really, it all comes down to only two calls – the 0:01 fiasco during last year’s conference championship game (compounded with the consistently execrable refereeing that took place throughout that game), and Martin’s suspension last week.
That’s really it. Nebraska didn’t get screwed in the K-State game, didn’t get screwed in the Texas game (the calls were pretty poor and in Texas’ favor, but they obviously didn’t cost Nebraska the game), actually got the benefit of the doubt from the refs in the Okie State game, and generally came out ahead in this game, too.
I think the appeal of the outright hatred and distrust of the refs/Big 12 head honchos this year is that it seems to make so much sense on the surface: Everyone at the Big 12 offices has to loathe Nebraska right now, and it would be terrible for their image if Nebraska won the conference going out the door. So if the officials’ bosses hate Nebraska and really don’t want to see them win, they have to be telling the refs explicitly or implicitly to make calls against them, right?
That’s silly, of course. But you can see why it’s pretty seductive as faux-logic goes, even if the facts on the field don’t back it up. Now, of course, if Osbourne gets suspended this week, I might given pause too … :-)
That's the great thing about a good conspiracy theory...
…any fact can be considered support that something is going on.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Nov 1, 2010 10:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Another problem
is that the local media seems to be subtlety (?) playing the conspiracy angle.
Bill mentions the amount of booing, I was surprised too. After a while it got old, mostly because I kept trying to figure out what the hell we were booing about.
Well. Hell. Wish you Mizzou guys were coming with us to the Big Ten. Maybe in a couple years, who knows.
Take care all y’all.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
by Jon Johnston on Nov 1, 2010 10:47 PM CDT up reply actions
I am, and always will be, a Husker. I totally understand why you all hate us and wont miss us. But do you all understand why we want out so bad, why we wont miss you either, or why we act the way we do? I loved the Big 8, hate the Big 12. Nothing to do with Texas “owning” us but with you all deserting the Big 8 in favor of Texas. The votes in almost everything were 11-1, and guess who the lone 1 was? Now what will happen to everyone that supported Texas when the Big 12 dissolves? Do you think they will stand by any of you? I am sure it was just our arrogance that wanted some votes to go our way, but are you all really happy when every Big 12 Championship gets moved to Texas? I know we are arrogant, and I dont apologize for it, but for the most part we are gracious and good people. We have one thing to support and we do it well. Most universities would love to have our records, our sell-out streaks, our all-americans, and the fan base we enjoy just to name a few. We do have an “us against the world” attitude right now and that probably accounts for us seeing the refs and announcers, and of course Mr Beebe, all against us. I think we will hold our own in the Big 10 with our measely 5 Nat’l Championships, better than going in offering none?!?! We are just ready for new challenges, new venues, and a new sharing caring family—not a dictatorship! We wish you all well and hope the Big 12 survives but it will be tough. But hopefully we all can just get thru this year without too much bashing and Husker hating. I feel part of the problem comes from us getting into Big 10 and Mizzou not, its hard to be on a sinking ship. Good Luck in the future and GBR!
by Penny Ritz Smith on Nov 1, 2010 7:00 PM CDT reply actions
Every time I see GBR
I think Great Britain Rules! Man I hate Nebraska. And no I don’t really understand why Nebraska acts the way they do. The poster I’m replying to is trying to be nice so I’m not hating on him specifically etc. but I can’t say I’ll stop Husker hating or Husker bashing.
I hate Nebraska. Almost as much as I hate Kansas. Nebraska played a helluva game and definitely deserved to win no matter how you look at the game. But while I’ll miss playing them every year, I won’t miss Nebraska in general.
by mizzousundevil on Nov 1, 2010 7:18 PM CDT up reply actions
I had to think REALLY hard to figure out GBR, and I heard it eleventygajillion times this weekend
I think I was stuck on PBR.
Nebraska=Northern Kansas
Whoever said, 'It's not whether you win or lose that counts,' probably lost.
Martina Navratilova
by tigers and chiefs fan on Nov 1, 2010 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions
My only problem with Nebraska leaving
is that they took a cheap shot swipe at us when they left. Even if what they were accusing us was accurate, it would still be a cheap shot.
They left to get a better position for their school/program, good on ya, I’d have wanted us to do it, too.
by Andy--01 on Nov 1, 2010 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bingo.
They called Delany the moment the Big 12 issued its ultimatum and told him “If you want us, now’s the time.” Then they said they had no choice to leave because we weren’t committing (as if they were). That was such a bush league move. We of course wanted to leave too (let’s be honest—we almost certainly still would if asked), but that was such a cheap thing to do.
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
Say what you want...
But let’s not pretend that we, as bloggers (and I use even that term loosely for some of us), have the inside transcripts of the communication between UNL and Delany.
Nebraska has done nothing wrong, period.
Well, maybe it's a crapshoot.
If those types of hits are the ones giving MU fans hissy fits, maybe MU should stick to Candyland and Darts – with plastic tips, of course.
Anyway, I’m out. You guys enjoy the rest of your season, though, it will be a long one with some of the crybaby attitudes here.
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Didn't say it was wrong...just bush league.
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
Interesting.
Both Missouri and Nebraska, though quietly, seek an invite from the BigTen – BigTen accepts NU and politely declines to offer an invite to MU – Nebraska = Bad. Missouri = Victim
Gotcha.
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Not that you're paying attention...
…but pursuit wasn’t the issue. (And for that matter, there is actually no evidence of “pursuit” from Missouri officials — only the fans.) Using others’ accused actions as an excuse for your own is bush league, the end. It was a cheap move on the way out the door, no matter how much you want to twist the subject around.
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
You’re right, Bill. And if the roles were reversed, Missouri would have no excuses. Missouri is the poster institution of class.
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 10:48 PM CDT up reply actions
"And if the roles were reversed, Missouri would have no excuses. "
Had Mizzou been offered/accepted an invitation, it would have been just as ridiculous for Missouri to say “We had to do this because Nebraska was looking elsewhere.” This however did not happen, and trying to speak to what Missouri would have done is a negative proof fallacy at best.
RockMNation.com (@rockmnation on Twitter)
The 2010 Missouri Football Preview - Available Now!
I think we all know that
had Nebraska lost to Mizzou, we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now.
Look, I didn’t join this blog to argue with you guys, but it’s a complete load of BS to sit over here on your high-horse with sour grapes about Nebraska leaving.
The frustration should lay on Pinkle’s shoulders and his questionable first quarter play calling.
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 11:08 PM CDT up reply actions
I appreciate your concern for how we manage our conversation.
We can obviously agree to disagree.
As for whether or not we’d be having this conversation had Missouri won, I beg to differ simply because these are concerns that were voiced 140 days prior to the teams ever setting foot on the Memorial Stadium field:
(By the way, I don’t at all blame Nebraska for leaving for the Big Ten. They agreed to make the jump for all the reasons that Mizzou would have almost certainly accepted an offer. But using Mizzou as part of an excuse, for both leaving and ludicrously attempting to avoid paying the early-departure fee because they were “forced out” is absolutely bush league, and I expected much better than that from Tom Osborne and company.)
Would Missouri fans have enjoyed Nebraska’s spot in the Big Ten? Absolutely. But I’m hoping you can understand why the projection of any real or perceived jealousy as a defense mechanism for the actions that took place in June might not be welcomed with open arms.
RockMNation.com (@rockmnation on Twitter)
The 2010 Missouri Football Preview - Available Now!
Please pay attention
As RPT pointed out, those posting here do not have sour grapes about Nebraska leaving. It was a no-brainer for any school to pursue and get an invitaiton to the Big XII.
People are put off by Perlman claiming the only reason Nebraska left was because Missouri was pursuing the Big Ten. Man up and take some responsibility for your own decisions. Don’t just point your fingers at a school that was doing the exact same thing you were (although perhaps more publicly and clearly without as much success).
No, we wouldn't be having this conversation had Penny Ritz Smith not brought the subject up
Said poster is a Nebraska fan.
Because you know what happened?
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Nov 1, 2010 10:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Now you're catching on....
The answer is absolutely NO, and thank you. That was the point I was trying to make.
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
No it's not
You said Nebraska has done nothing wrong, which implies that you know what was going on. But that was one sentence after you said “…let’s not pretend we, as bloggers (and I even use that term loosely for some of us), have the inside transcripts of the communication between UNL and Delany.”
Yep, looks like that was the exact point you were trying to make.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Nov 1, 2010 10:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Maybe you should wonder on back to Bring on the Cats and arbitrarily devise a gameplan on how to start winning some games.
Why is this of any concern to you?
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 10:40 PM CDT up reply actions
Nope.
I’m simply saying that Nebraska has accepted and invite to join the BigTen and regardless of what Missouri or anyone else thinks, they had every right to do so, and are paying back the appropriate league revenues because of the decision.
In addition, my point was that none of us know the conversations that took place behind closed doors, so we shouldn’t pretrend that we do.
It was a business decision and no amount of hurt feelings can change that.
by HerpieHusker on Nov 1, 2010 10:45 PM CDT up reply actions
And, no one here is trying to say that Nebraska SHOULDN'T have taken that invite
in fact, we’re all saying that they were right to do so.
What we’re saying we have a problem with is the needless shot at Missouri as they walked out the door.
you should be asking yourself that since you are over on a Missouri blog jumping in on the discussion.
Seriously, what concern is it to you?
HerpieHusker . . .
I’m a Husker fan and I agree with most of what you are trying to say.
But even I can’t read your posts without getting my defenses up.
by Chris Wilson on Nov 2, 2010 8:55 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
That's a bunch of crap
The rest of the Big 8 abandoned Nebraska because of those 11-1 votes? Let’s take a quick look at those 11-1 votes.
One was 11-1 in favor of holding a championship game. Now that Nebraska is leaving the Big 12, they’re going to the Big 10, which will now have 12 teams, and (wait for it)…a conference championship game.
Another vote 11-1 in favor of limiting the number of partial qualifiers each school could take. Now, Nebraska is leaving for the Big 10, at least in part because of the academics. Good luck getting a bunch of qualifiers admitted under Big 10 rules.
The last was 11-1 in favor of moving the conference championship game to Dallas. Now Nebraska is moving to the Big 10, where the nearest viable championship site is, what, Minnesota? I believe the first one will be played in Indianapolis, which is not closer to Lincoln than is Dallas.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Nov 1, 2010 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions
That should be "partial" qualifiers, of course
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Nov 1, 2010 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions
let's not
continue this…. I could argue about this, but it’s over and done with, and this is a Missouri site, not a KSU or Nebraska site.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
by Jon Johnston on Nov 1, 2010 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions
OK, I lied
I just checked Google Maps, and Indianapolis is three miles closer to Lincoln than is Dallas.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Nov 1, 2010 10:53 PM CDT up reply actions
6 miles round trip!
That would save me about 60 cents on gas if I were to drive to that game (I get 25 mpg). I know that about 40,000 other husker fans will be going to the game…so in all Husker nation is saving around $24,000 dollars in gas money. Totally worth it to go to Indianapolis instead of Dallas!!!
Wanted to catch you while you're on her Sleeply
I’m just to the start of the game on the diary and I can’t figure out what the bid deal is with the “no cheering in the pressbox” comments.
Why doesn’t someone grow a pair of balls and tell the cheering idiots to knock it off when it happens?
It really wasn't awful...
…it was just a series of reflexive bursts after big plays. They did better than I expected, honestly.
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
There are places (like Nebraska)
where certain boosters and friends of the program are invited to sit in the pressbox. The in-box PA announcer reminds everyone (many times throughout the game) to remain quiet, and that it is a working pressbox. But when Roy Helu breaks free, those guys forget that their mouths actually release the voices in their heads and hearts. They weren’t going nuts in there, just losing control a little.
To be honest, I can’t say with any reliability that I remained Silent when Ghan McGaffe took that kick back last week (Or when J-Mac broke loose in 2008 in that same pressbox, for that matter).
There are reasons I enjoy watching the game from up there: free soda (and Food at places like Nebraska), running commentary from some people I respect to help contextualize the game as it unfolds, climate control, did I mention soda?
I never went to a J-School, I am barely trained in my chosen profession, and it took some getting used to to watch sporting events without cheering. I can imagine that it would be annoying typing a mile a minute on a deadline while someone is yelling “GBR!!!” over your shoulder – this was nothing like that, by the way. I just didn’t see it as anything other than a little comedy on a not-so-funny afternoon.
The sleeper has awoken. . .awakened. . .he woke up.
have any of the writers moved to voice recognition on their laptops?
or do they all still type really, really fast?
Finds MvP RoC to be a stellar individual
no need to post
why are nubs still posting? Why don’t they do the classy thing and just ride off into the sunset…instead they come with their pinched face tongue protruding indigant posts railing against all who would not bow down….your past is gone, your present no longer required and your future is in our reaview mirror…we are moving on I suggest you all do as well….after all you are no longer relevant.
And in parting may the road rise up to trip you one more time before season’s end. Amen.
by Earl Billings on Nov 1, 2010 10:36 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Great point
You kicked our ass. Congrats. Now please go annoy Iowa State.
Was once caught putting at night ... with the 15-year old daughter of the dean
by mitch cumstein on Nov 1, 2010 11:35 PM CDT up reply actions
I know this isn't germane to the current comments...
But seeing as Nebraska specifically developed this defense for our offense and kept it under wraps up until this game, I’d say this game was very important to them.
When Nebraska said “we didn’t show them anything new”, I guess they are forgetting about the Moore TD run out of the wierd OL formation. The formation – not new, the pitch to Moore was.
Back to the Nebraska defensive scheme… 3 DT, a LB and DE standing up as a LB, and 6 DB’s… well, our 5 OL couldn’t stop 3 DT’s… does that trouble anyone else? Surely our future opponents plan to mirror some of this scheme, and although they don’t have the DB’s that Nebraska does, our bowl opponent might…
"When among evil companions, try to fit in." - Wild Bill Donovan
That play would have burned Nebraska twice...
…had Josey not jumped early. Bad freshman. I wish Mizzou had used a few more plays of that nature that took advantage of Nebraska’s aggressiveness.
"Smell the perfume but don't drink it because it might kill you." Erin Andrews recounting advise from Gary Pinkel
maybe our future opponents will only be concerned with what they do and not worry about what we do?
That stratagy seems to have produced a solid year for us so far. Then, when what they do doesn’t work as drawn up on the white board, it will be because of failed execution because on the white board, it went for a TD everytime. (sarcasm)
Damn
Bill,
if I had known you guys were going to the game, I’d have tried to find you somehow….. I always wanted to make it to a Missouri game at Columbia, and never did. Maybe against Oklahoma in the future, I’ll just go down there anyway.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
Yeah, it was a pretty late decision. Otherwise I'd have shot you an e-mail...
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
We'll miss you, too.
As a Husker fan, I mean that most sincerely. When I first heard that the Big Ten was considering Nebraska, I scoffed at the idea. I’m accustomed to the old Big Eight foes, and I’m not gonna lie when I say that it’s sad to see these traditions end. But as we’ve discussed before, Nebraska was backed into a corner, and they had to do what they felt was in the best interest of their university. Period. The lack of solidarity in the Big 12 didn’t help the situation, but the move certainly wasn’t out of a sense of entitlement.
Also, the whole “blaming Missouri” thing wasn’t representative of Nebraska as a whole— that’s just Harvey Perlman. Though he acted competently and certainly did what was best for his university, his way with words sometimes leaves something to be desired. Believe me, he’s pissed off many Lincolnites with some insensitive/arrogant remarks, before.
Anyways, I too think this rivalry was gonna be a good one, had things worked out— and it still might. When conference realignment heats up again (and it will) Missouri’s chances to end up in the Big Ten are as good as any (because really, who else would they take? Syracuse? Rutgers?) And then, we’ll be right back where we began.
Good point...
We could also have done without our helpful governor shoving his foot in his mouth.
Your snark is funny
“But, to illustrate a point – I SWEAR I heard an older Husker fan thanking the door of the elevator for opening as I was getting ready to leave the hotel on Sunday morning*. Kinda makes you wonder about the arrogance of a person who thinks an elevator opens for him… is it along the same lines of someone who thanks me for coming to his favorite team’s stadium? Uh, I didn’t come for you, but you’re welcome.”
So now if we’re polite we’re arrogant? Wow, you probably prefer those fans that throw stuff at you, question your mother’s moral character, and slash your car tires if you have the wrong license plate. I get it, you like Boulder better than Lincoln.
Newsflash Crowds at at sporting event cheer, they boo, they groan at stuff in real time. This is how it works. Was this the first football game you’ve ever attended? Because reading your diary, it seems like it is. “OMG, they booed a call? The travesty”.
BTW and FWIW, Gabby turned into the Osborne hit, it was a face-mask to face-mask hit, Osborne did not lead with the crown of his helmet, he made a legal hit, that resulted in a fumble everybody in the country (well, besides you and the inept referees at the game) saw. Just because Eddie Cunningham cried about it again, doesn’t make it an illegal hit.
Sorry you didn’t enjoy your trip more, see you guys around.
Oh wait, no we won’t.
Peace.
by LouisvilleHusker on Nov 2, 2010 9:38 AM CDT reply actions
Thanks
Have fun in the new Big 12. NGTFOOH
Was once caught putting at night ... with the 15-year old daughter of the dean
by mitch cumstein on Nov 2, 2010 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
I find your views intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
"I'm a genius, but I'm a misunderstood genius."
"What's misunderstood about you?"
"Nobody thinks I'm a genius."
by Transmogrified Tiger on Nov 2, 2010 10:06 AM CDT up reply actions
Just for the record
A facemask-to-facemask hit can be illegal. It isn’t always, but if the referees deem it intentional it can be.
I think any unbiased observer would be surprised that a hit like that...
violent, blindside, clearly intentionally helmet to helmet (QB didn’t duck or anything).. wasn’t flagged.
"I have CDO. It's like OCD, but the letters are in alphabetical order. Like they should be."
I don't necessarily agree with the "clearly intentional" part...
…but it doesn’t even really have to be intentional to get called…it just has to even remotely look intentional. Not that it matters, obviously.
Have you bought your 2010 Missouri Football Preview yet??
Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1
I also don't agree with blindside...
…as it wasn’t Gabbert’s blindside (which would be the left in a right-handed thrower). Also, football is a violent sport and always has been. If it stops being so, it won’t be football anymore. So, not very “unbiased” in the assessment.
by HoustonHusker98 on Nov 2, 2010 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
So, do you think those chop blocks shouldn't be called either?
Seriously though, the big gripe coming out of Red Land is that football is being pussified and that they shouldn’t make dangerous plays illegal. Some people who watch this sport just won’t be happy until their players show up at least once week on the highlight films, killing or permanently maiming an opposing team’s player.
Where one side might think a fasemask is for protective purposes, the other thinks it should be a tackling handle and to disagree with that in any way means you are as soft as a box of tissues and are trying to ruin the sport.
There are hard hits, legal hits and then there are incredibily dangerous life altering hits. As long as football is going to be played, its a good thing to see leagues trying to find ways to lessen the amount of catastrophic injuries occuring to those that play the game. They cannot listen to the average fan of his favorite team because if they do, there will eventually be spikes protruding out of shoulder pads, hungry lions let loose on the field and calls to the crowd as to whether a downed player should be spared or finished.
If trying to lessen the chances of college players becoming brain dead or losing their ability to walk and use their arms is being a pussy, than ya, I am huge pussy.
blow to the head
is a blow to the head. Not sure how anybody thinks there is an exemption to that rule if it is a facemask instead of an arm/hand doing the whacking.
But it seems clear that our nubbie friends (well, a sizable percentage) definately have their red colored glasses on for this one.
And I think the ‘is NU a dirty team?’ question is becoming more and more valid. But better off not discussed, as it will only cause more trolling, poo throwing, etc.
If they keep getting hits sent into the conference, though, it is going to come up, and absolutely should.
And NU fans will vilify me, but I think there is a trend there with this team under the Pelini’s. They don’t exactly seem to have much interest in avoiding personal fouls.
The thing with Osborne's hit was he had every opportunity to put his shoulder down
drive right through Gabbert’s midsection. This is a move he should have made as he would not have broken stride, could have kept his head up to see a late move by Gabbert and (this is key) put his pads right on the ball.
He used a very poor technique. He may not have wanted to go helmet to helmet but he sure as hell wanted a highlight reel hit. That is the only reason go that high. Had he put the pads on the ball the way the teach you in pee wee football, the helmet to helmet would have been out of play and the fumble (yes, it was a fumble.) would have counted.
/Does anyone else find it funny this guy is named Osborne?
"Anderson won't make substitutions. He'll change lines - Tiller, Taylor and English hit the bench while Denmon, Dixon and Paul hop the boards. Welcome to Hockey Night in Columbia. He won't take time outs. He'll take on fuel and tires. Welcome to the Hardwood 400." - Atch
The hit
So he should have dropped his shoulders and gone for the midsection? I have seen too many times where someone goes low for a sack and the QB has just enough time to throw it away overtop of the guy. Tackling the chest is legal, and he was aiming for Gabbert’s chest as he is 6 inches shorter than Gabbert. Gabbert ducked into it at the last second. I feel this is why there was no flag.
Knowing there is no way you will see it differently that what you just described and neither will I.
I will say this. Gabbert’s height advantage was negated because his feet were apart in preparation to throw. He was bouncing as QBs do as they look for an open receiver. However, he never did get into a throwing motion. Otherwise, the Tom Brady tuck idea would be plausible. It isn’t. It was a fumble. If Gabbert was trying to throw, again go for the ball but the ball was near his midsection.
If you watch closely, Gabbert did not even see Osborne until the last possible moment. He turned his head just in time to take a helmet to the face. He didn’t have time to duck., had he truly ducked he would have been hit closer to the crown of his helmet rather than in the face. All he had time to do was tense up (aka Brace for Impact). He didn’t even have time to get two hands on the ball, hence the fumble.
After the multiple chop blocks that were called and the H2H shot last week with a suspension, I am surprised the refs gave Osborne the benefit of the doubt on this play. What this is is visual proof that no conspiracy exists regarding the Big 12 refs at least and NU.
"Anderson won't make substitutions. He'll change lines - Tiller, Taylor and English hit the bench while Denmon, Dixon and Paul hop the boards. Welcome to Hockey Night in Columbia. He won't take time outs. He'll take on fuel and tires. Welcome to the Hardwood 400." - Atch
It was snark, glad you could recognize
That actually comes from my wife’s father. We’d always go to her sister’s high school events, and her father would say “Your mother and I really appreciate you coming tonight”. We always felt that it was strange of him to say that, because we didn’t come for him. It really is a type of arrogance to assume that someone did something that you need to thank them for, when you had nothing to do with WHY they did it.
It’d be like me thanking you for eating at the same restaurant I am. I don’t own the place, I don’t cook the food. I’m just enjoying it like you. There’s zero reason for me to thank you. I may be doing it because it’s polite, but if I think that I OWE you thanks for doing something, that implies that I believe that you did it to benefit me in some way.
But, to make you feel better, I do not like Boulder better than Lincoln. Lincoln is a fine place to visit, and I enjoyed my trip just fine, aside from the loss. The constant paranoid whining at the game gave me and my brother-in-law (a Husker fan) something to make fun of on the ride home. But…
NEWSFLASH: Husker fans ARE arrogant, and everyone who has ever been in a conference with you will attest to that.
I don't understand
Your father-in-law is showing appreciation that you bothered to attend your sister-in-law’s event(s). He’s not thanking you for being in his presence.
Any reason why?
Sounds like family dynamics at work! Probably why we Mizzou fans see arrogance when the Huskers think they are being polite.
Calls or (no calls) during the game
Just some comments on a few of the larger things that people are questioning about this game.
The intentional grounding to me was called because Gabbert rolled out and saw nothing but a hit coming and spiked the football. He didn’t throw it or anything, he spiked it as it went only a couple yards in front of him. That was classic intentional grounding, he should have just thrown it out of bounds.
The Osborne hit was perfectly legit, he came right at him for a sack, at his chest, and as Osborne was 2 steps away Gabbert saw it and cringed for the hit and his shoulders and helmet dipped down causing the helmet contact. Refs made no call as they shouldn’t have. Was is complete lunacy however is how it could not have been called a fumble, even after review. There is no such thing as forward progress on a stand up sack where the guy is taken off his feet. He has no forward momentum in any way, and you to be going forward, then started backwards for it to be called that. He was hit and the ball came out on the contact of the hit. It is a fumble and a TD should have been added to Nebraska’s tally.
If people feel it truly was a penalty, but not called, so they evened it out by not calling it a fumble and a TD in the review, well then this is a conspiracy as the review is to be used to call plays correctly on the review, not to even out a missed call. It was the most obvious no call fumble and TD I have even seen not get reversed. It was pathetic and I hope Bo gets a ruling as he sent it into Big 12 officials to get an explanation as to how it wasn’t a fumble.
Other than that, the rest was typical officiating at its best where someone things a hold should be called and others say it shouldn’t be. That will never go away.
In rebuttal
Regarding the Intentional Grounding: Gased only on what I could see from my seats (as I haven’t watched it), the throw was certainly at the ground, but it was about 3 feet in front of an eligible receiver. The Nebraska fans sitting around me agreed with that assessment (so, maybe it was our angle that made it look that way) and figured the Intentional Grounding was because it hadn’t gone past the LOS (which, to my knowledge, is NOT part of the rule).
As far as the hit goes, I personally find it hard to believe that Gabbert’s “cringe” (which I admit to seeing also) caused a hit that would have been on his chest to land squarely on his facemask. That is one heck of a cringe, to have lowered his head a good foot+. Maybe it’s possible that he ducked his head that much, but it sure doesn’t look like to to me on the videos I’ve seen. That tells me that the target, while not being his face, was certainly not his chest (and, therefore was either his neck or chin). And, if THAT’S the case, you would HAVE to admit that the chances of a severe head or neck injury go up exponentially.
Agreed that there should have been a fumble on the call, and maybe it was because the replay official felt a make-up call was deserved there. The official explanation on the field was that “forward motion” had stopped. And, that certainly is true, but that really shouldn’t be a precedent for keeping teams from recovering fumbles – unless the whistle had blown, which would have been impossible, considering how quickly that all happened.
I agree with the comment about the rest of the officiating. There was really only two other calls that I thought were blatant that should have gone our way that were missed: An offensive pass interference (Bill references it in the post) and the facemask of Gabbert on the one yard line. There’s little reason to think either call would have changed the outcome of the game. All that said, Nebraska outplayed us in every portion of the game, which is why they won.
Not only that but in the last game the Tigers played
the Sooner were allowed that same sort of throw. No wonder Gabbert figured it was a legal play. In fact, pretty much everywhere else I’ve seen football played the last few years, you were allowed to avoid a sack by throwing the ball very close to an eligible receiver.
Nice article
Excellent article. I enjoy the sarcastic, witty humor. And the insight, for the most part (after all, I am a Husker). Just a few things that may have been overlooked or not emphasized enough:
1) Gabbert was a man in the game. He got destroyed, but kept getting up, and kept firing. That attitude will take him a long way at the next level. He misfired a few passes, but who can blame him with the tight coverage? If he doesn’t error on the side of over-throwing, the pass will be broken up if not intercepted. Some of his completions took surgical precision, and Egnew was equally impressive on the receiving end. Enviable combination, those two. The thing that blew me away when watching recruiting videos of Gabbert was how accurate he was at such a young age. Hard worker and very gifted.
2) MU fans keep harping on the 17-7 scoring the last 3 quarters. Only a few have recognized that Nebraska was in major conservative mode, even in the 2nd quarter. Do you think Pelini & Watson wanted to keep piling on during the last meeting b/t these two teams in their last season in the Big XII? Helu’s third quarter run was still a conservative play, just poorly defended. In all honesty, the margin of victory could’ve been much, much worse. It was a conscious decision, folks.
3) I admit that some Nebraska fans have been fairly harsh and arrogant to Mizzou fans, and I regret that. In our defense, though, you really don’t see much of this with any other fan base, except maybe UT (recently). It is still an overwhelming minority of Husker fans that act that way, it just doesn’t seem that way on the blogs. It bears pointing out, however, that some Missouri fans have been brutal to the Huskers for a long time. I attended a game in Columbia back in the mid-90’s and was shocked at how unsportsmanlike the fans were. The current blogs are just as viscious. Unfortunately there are a few Husker fans who can’t take it anymore and let it fly right back at ‘em, and it mostly revved up during the Daniels era. Regrettable. This point, however, does add credence to the argument about a rivalry, as it shows a heightened emotional response between the fans that you don’t see with other Husker opponents.
Regarding the second point, I disagree
When Mizzou is firing, 24 points ain’t much. Granted, the Nebraska defense was slowing Missouri down, but Missouri was starting to control the ball in the third quarter while the Missouri defense was doing a good job containing the Nebraska offense. If not for that last big run in the third that killed Mizzou’s chances, the game would have been pretty close going into the 4th and I’m not sure it would have been a safe gamble to try and run out the clock the way that Nebraska did. I think after the third quarter slugfest by Mizzou, the Nebraska defense was in real danger of running out of gas in the fourth. Even just a slight slowdown might have given Mizzou the edge they needed to pull within a score. We’ll never know, obviously, but I’m sure Pelini wouldn’t have minded an extra field goal or two in the second quarter to put things away early.
"Smell the perfume but don't drink it because it might kill you." Erin Andrews recounting advise from Gary Pinkel
Re: #2 You're kinda right
1) Nebraska was certainly playing more conservatively, but there is no way in hell they called off the dogs completely in the 2nd quarter against a top-10 team.
2) Missouri started playing MUCH better defensively, with the exception of one play.
Yes, they could have been taking shots downfield, and they would have played more aggressively if they had needed to. However, it was a 2-score game for much of the 2nd half. Pelini was being successful being conservative, so there was no need to dial it up, but that decision was because of the risk of turnover, IMHO, NOT because Bo wanted to keep from making us look bad.
Go to any regional Missouri paper and look how flooded the comments sections are with Nebraska fans.
I really detest seeing any Mizzou fans treat visiting fans badly. I try my damndest to greet people and let them know they are welcome to help balance out some of the heckling they may or may not have received.
I remember in the 2009 game, two Husker fans sitting several rows in front of me that were standing up and turned towards the stands heckling and acting like complete jackasses to hundreds of people. That is not close to the norm, as the overwhelming amount of Husker visitors I’ve seen and met (in person, not on the internet) are friendly and polite but these two probably ended up getting themselves in a mess before the night was over if they had it in them to act that way. I could only imagine the stories they told later of how badly they were mistreated.
You may disagree, but you miss the point.
1) 24 points IS much when you’re talking about the Husker defense which was designed to stop a spread offense. And you think the big run in the third killed Mizzou’s chances? How about the 24-0 first quarter?
2) The Missouri defense was “doing a good job of containing the Nebraska offense”? What game were you watching? It only appeared that way because of the conservative play calling. Did you see how many minutes our controlled, conservative offense ate off the clock in the last few drives? That was purposeful, and was not due to Missouri “containing” the Husker offense.
Forget it
You have your views, I have mine, and you’ll have to find affirmation from Iowa from now on. As for me, I’m moving on to Texas Tech.
"Smell the perfume but don't drink it because it might kill you." Erin Andrews recounting advise from Gary Pinkel
RE: 1: 24-0 sucked, but by the middle of the 3rd Q, it was a 2-score game
The 3rd TD pushed it back to a 3-score game and forced Mizzou to score quickly – which they could not do.
As far as “containing the Nebraska Offense” goes, after the 1st Quarter, Nebraska had 7 drives that didn’t end the half/game: 4 of those drives were for negative yardage, 1 was 5 plays for a punt, one was the 2-play rushing TD and the other was 37 yards on 10 plays with a blocked (long) FG.
So, of 7 drives in the middle of the game, when Missouri was trying everything they could to get back in the game, Nebraska had 4 horrible failures, 1 failure, one HUGE success and one that will count as a success given the circumstances of the game (eating 6 minutes was just as important as scoring at that point). While that is partially due to Nebraska not being willing to take chances to risk a turnover, it is also due to Missouri’s Defense “doing a good job of stopping the Nebraska Offense”. Would that have been different if Bo had wanted to be more aggressive? Possibly, but that’s not the game we were in.
That's not the game we were in?
Yes, that is my point. Nebraska went into conservative mode, thereby making it “the game we were in.” And that’s just so we don’t turn it over? Seriously? Right.
We threw what, 2 passes in the second half? That means we ran it all the other plays. We have fumbled a lot this season, and we fumble when we run, not pass. We’ve only thrown 3 interceptions in 148 passes this season, so the argument that we didn’t want to turn it over doesn’t hold up.
If you look at most of the stops the missouri defense had on Nebraska, it was during plays that were “bread & butter” plays which missouri had clearly prepared for based on film study, and also based on keying off Martinez. Though that was good defense by Missouri, that is not offensive aggression when you call those plays.
Nice statistical analysis, but you could do the same with Missouri drives, arguing they had no hope of winning the game based on how many of those drives were stopped. Missouri punted 8 times. Your whole argument assumes Nebraska couldn’t have scored again, just because they didn’t.
You purposefully leave out the drive at the end of the game, at which point Nebraska decidedly ran out the clock (kneeling), again giving up a scoring opportunity, even without requiring aggressive play.
Not to mention the missed Missouri fumble for a touchdown.
Which brings me back to my original point, that the margin of victory could have been much, much worse, but the Nebraska coaches intentionally dialed it down.
by HoustonHusker98 on Nov 2, 2010 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions
If you think Nebraska actually stopped scoring with 3 entire quarters left
because they just KNEW 24 points would hold up….well you’re pretty damn stupid then. Sure they called plays a little more conservatively, but they were still trying to put up points on the board.
Hard to call it stupid...
… when 24 points did in fact stand up.
RockMNation.com (@rockmnation on Twitter)
The 2010 Missouri Football Preview - Available Now!
by RPT on Nov 2, 2010 6:56 PM CDT up reply actions
After the fact, sure
but if you’re a coach and you find yourself up 24 with 45 minutes to go and you intentionally stop trying to score – as our Husker friend seems to be insinuating was the only reason Missouri stopped the Big Red Offensive Machine – then you really don’t deserve to be coaching at a Division I school. Even with an out of sync offense all day Mizzou still cut the deficit to two scores and was driving to hopefully go down 7 with about 7 minutes to go. We all know what actually happened, but to believe that Nebraska shut it down with three entire quarters to play is, IMO, asinine.
As uninformed as it may be...
…you are certainly entitiled to your opinion. I never said once that Nebraska stopped trying to score. Look back at all my posts. I said they dialed down the offense. They stopped the aggressive play calling, choosing to try and keep the ball out of the Missouri O’s hands with a ball-control game. We did that in a LOT of games last season (since our O was weak and the D was outstanding) so Watson certainly knows how to call such a game. Scoring more points would be great—even preferable—but the intention of the play calling was not to put up a big score. The 3rd Q scoring by Missouri certainly necessitated another score to keep the cushion comfortable (which Helu nicely took care of for us), but unless Missouri scored again there was no need to keep driving up the score.
by HoustonHusker98 on Nov 3, 2010 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Wow, it's Tuesday and they're still here
I won’t miss the jackasses (not calling anybody specific a jackass), but I will miss the heatedness of the rivalry. Rivalries is what makes sports fun and nowhere are they more intense than the best collegiate ones.

by 



































