Skeptical about mega-conferences

[Hawk123456]

I understand that point. I have a hard time thinking of too many in-state guys that would have made a big difference for us outside of Bret Meyer, Todd Blythe, and Lane Danielson. And we were set at QB and WR while those guys were in school. We had Drew Tate, Solomon/Hinkel, and Jones/Brown when the ISU guys played. They wouldn't have made THAT big of a difference.

It's little things that make the difference between 10-2 and 8-4 seasons. It's little things that make the difference between good and great. Just the addition of one body at a position were we are lacking depth may be critical if a player or two is injured. For instance, I have to think Todd Blythe would have really helped us a few years ago when we were seriously lacking in receivers.

 

[hawks263344]

It's plenty boring, because it's no different than any other blowout. As a college student who doesn't drink (I'm an alien, I know), there's not much fun in watching a boring football game against ISU. What's everybody going to do before, during, and after a game like that? Just partying it up. That's not fun to me at all. I like to watch good football, and would much rather see a good football game than watch people try to stand up and cheer for a TD that puts us up by 30.

Your definition isn't us playing good football. To me good football equals us playing very well and being able to enforce our will. Just getting by in a close game isn't playing good football (unless both teams are very good). ISU is never that good. We should blow them out all the time if we are playing good football. That is fun! There is nothing better than going into the 4th knowing you've got the win. It's great embarassing an opponent you don't care for. I also enjoy seeing guys at the bottom of the roster actually get to play. They practice just like everybody else and deserve to actually get to play once in a great while.

 

[tm3308]

It's little things that make the difference between 10-2 and 8-4 seasons. It's little things that make the difference between good and great. Just the addition of one body at a position were we are lacking depth may be critical if a player or two is injured. For instance, I have to think Todd Blythe would have really helped us a few years ago when we were seriously lacking in receivers.

In '06, we had 3 pretty good pass catchers in Brodell, Douglas, and Chandler. Before that we had Hinkel/Solomon. '07 is the one year where Blythe would have made a significant impact, when DJK led the team in receiving with just 482 yards. But prior to that, we had some very good receiving groups, at least at the top of the depth chart.

 

[tm3308]

Your definition isn't us playing good football. To me good football equals us playing very well and being able to enforce our will. Just getting by in a close game isn't playing good football (unless both teams are very good). ISU is never that good. We should blow them out all the time if we are playing good football. That is fun! There is nothing better than going into the 4th knowing you've got the win. It's great embarassing an opponent you don't care for. I also enjoy seeing guys at the bottom of the roster actually get to play. They practice just like everybody else and deserve to actually get to play once in a great while.

I wouldn't mind if ISU were good enough to actually challenge us. Maybe not beat us, but challenge us. What fun is it to just beat someone to a pulp without breaking a sweat? I crave a little competition, that's all. I don't want to play an ISU team that's good for no better than 3-9 every year.

I had much more fun at the '08 ISU game than I did watching the '09 game. Much more excitement, drama. Brodell getting rocked WAY early on a punt, then juking the guy that hit him out of his shoes on the way to the endzone on the next punt. THAT'S fun to watch. I'm not saying I only have fun if it's tight. But I definitely have more fun watching a close rivalry game than a blowout.

 

[rodg12]

I guess I'm just a guy that likes competetition more than total dominance. I find the journey to corner the market very exciting and fun. I just feel that it's boring once you succeed at doing it.

Except when it comes to Texas. Then you're quaking in your boots about them joining the Big 10 and want some pushover instead.

 

[tm3308]

Except when it comes to Texas. Then you're quaking in your boots about them joining the Big 10 and want some pushover instead.

I want a competitive game/series. I don't think we get that with Texas. Against them, I think we end up on the short end of quite a few beatings.