Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by JimmyBuff, Oct 9, 2011.
I thought 'braska blamed Texas.
Of course he's going to say this. He ****ing hates us and that's all there is to it. **** Beebe.....
We all hate you. :thumbsup:
I thought this was the fake Beebe twitter account. I wouldn't believe Beebe if he told me that the Sun rose in the East.
I guarantee you he isn't lying. Nebraska was always in favor of unequal revenue sharing because they were on TV a lot. The Fuskers left because you were butthurt that Texas and their big swinging dick was bigger than Nebraska and their swinging dick. Texas owned the nubs on and off the field. I won't argue that Texas deserved the hate, but to whine about Beebe calling a spade a spade is pure delusion.
Believe whatever you want to believe, I could give a ****, but that's not why we left. You know more about the situation then me though. Oh, and NU wasn't on TV as much as you think. At least not on a non-PPV basis. I almost always had to buy 5 or 6 games per year to watch them. That's a bunch of B.S. No matter the argument if it pertains to NU, we will be the bad guys in your eyes and that's fine. Your argument is based on hearsay in reference to NU leaving because they were, "afraid of Texass." Enjoy your season and commence with the "your on a buff board typical B.S."
Please refer to post #4.:thumbsup:
Start actually playing people in the non conference and then youd get more air time. Chattanooga doesnt count and that was on tv for some reason. You have penis envy of Texas all the way back to 96, remember? Spouted all that **** about being cheated in the championship game and got beat in your own yard the next year. Nebraska is the hardest soft university I know.
Just goes to show that there's a sucker born every minute :rofl:
Nebraska hasnt won a title since they started steroid testing, even if they did back then, sure Dr. Tom would have found a way around it since he's all class lol.
you know how you tell Beebe is lying.....
his lips are moving....
Sure he is going to blame any and everyone except himself and UT. Its a blatant and weak, very weak attempt to misdirect attention from him and his relationship with the powers in Austin and how he wanted Texas to control the whole conference....
And before Nebraska left they were a big supporter of Tier 1 & 2 equal revenuw sharing....
it blew up in his face and he got called on it....
I do admit though, if Nebraska could ever beat Texas on the field I think their leaving the conference would be different.... that 1 second really messed things up big time.....
I liked the 80s version of Beebe.....the NCAA investigator. Pure comedy. The current version is a pathetic waste of space.
They blame everyone, not just UT. I always hear about the 11-1 vote against softening the rule against non-qualifiers. They would love to dumb down...
Nebraska was never in favor of revenue sharing. Neither was OU, A&M, or UT. This is well documented by previous votes on the issue and from the previous commish to Beebe, Kevin Weiberg. OU and UT only supported it as a "saving grace" to save the conference. That desperation didn't exist when Nebraska was in the conference and therefore would not have passed the vote.
The Cornhuskers did not want to share equally with Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor and Texas Tech. They clearly were willing to share equally with Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern, etc in the Big Ten, especially when it was more money to be shared.
Nebraska's issues with the Big 12 weren't about equal revenue sharing, it was about "Texas-centric" politics that brought Tech and Baylor into the league to begin with as well as the move of the conference offices and CCG permanently to Texas.
Everyone clearly recognizes that CU just made a necessary move to connect with their alumni and student base better. We didn't like the Texas-centric league either, but we just had a much better option to pursue anyway.
A&M clearly is being "reactive" and bitter about switching conferences. They think that the SEC is a "grass is greener" situation for them, and now Mizzou is exploring that also. This isn't the case for Missouri, as Beebe and others have pointed out, and he is right in this instance.
The problem with Beebe's statements is that it is obvious that no matter WHO rallied the support to gain equal revenue sharing or WHEN it occured, it wasn't a foregone conclusion. He is crying over spilt milk here. I don't believe for a second that Nebraska would have agreed to equal revenue sharing in the Big 12 if they had remained in the league to this point. The only option that the Fuskers would have remained is if CU and A&M had left and they were guaranteed an annual game against the Sooners once again without having to play a CCG to reach the BCS games (just like the Sooners want now).
Sorry I support my team and want to watch them play? *rolls eyes*
I have a feeling you're missing Binary's point.
Separate names with a comma.