Who's acting like Ohio State? I haven't seen one Mizzou fan in this thread act like our program is ultra elite; all anyone is saying is that the program has more history than kansas, which it does.

Feel free to try to dispute it with facts, but also don't make up lies like skip did if you don't want to get called on it.

This!

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
wow...with all the KU crap that gets posted here and the smugness that goes with that? Hi Pot, I'm Kettle.

Your post is stupid

Sorry but MU has a better football history than KU. One undeserved Orange Bowl you got because you didn't play well enough to go to the Big 12 Championship does not make KU's football program historically better than MU's.

You spelled it wrong.

It's the Iowa State University Cyclowns.

Or Sucklones if you prefer.

Oh God, you should see the Beakubation in non-conflicting threads where no fans of other schools show up.
They've got the "idiot Homer ego-pump" elevated to it's own ****ing science.

This is KU's year. NU will be in contention and I think it will come down to the KU/NU game in Lawrence.

Two Orange Bowls. Neither school is very historical as far as College Football is concerned.

KU, MU and NU in alphabetical order and my order of preference. In reality it could and should be those 3 but they may end up arranged any which way. KU will probably have its best shot next year with MU having a drop off from the last two years but Nebraska may well be on its way back up. They were very much improved last year and still get better rated recruits than Either KU or MU. While I'm a KU fan we have to face facts that neither KU or MU should really be mentioned in the same breath as Nebraska from a historical sense. We are the Johnny come latelys but I have to admit that a rivalry is a lot more fun when both teams are at least pretty good instead of awful.

What's this I see? A Big 12 north thread with this many responses, and I've missed it all?

Time to weigh in and fix that.

Quick breakdown: kansas, based on returning the best QB in the division and having its four best offensive skill players back, has to be the preseason pick. Nebraska, Missouri and Colorado all have the potential to challenge for the North title. kSU and ISU? Try to survive the season.

LOOOOOOOOOOONG breakdown start here:

I'll start with the preseason favorite, ku.

The jayhawks skill play is going to be very good. Well, as long as Dez Briscoe is welcomed back into the fold. He and Meier are probably the top 1-2 punch in the league. Sharp is serviceable, though he's better as a pass receiver than a pure rusher. Stuckey is also probably the best safety in the league.

But the hawks have some chinks in the armor, too. The pass rush has remained a problem the past few years, and though Jake Laptad was an improvement from John Larson, he was hardly a stud pass rusher at DE. The JUCO transfer is going to have to make an instant impact for ku to see a big improvement at DE. There are also big questions on the OL - where one starting tackle from 08 is now playing center, the best left tackle is a 265-pound converted TE/DT, and the best right tackle is recovering from a pretty severe head injury (and possibly will miss the season). Add in that the Hawks lost three interior starters, and Reesing might spend a lot of time running for his life this season (something he's quite good at doing). The linebacking corps will also be all new, and the secondary regressed greatly in 08 with a Talib-level talent at CB. The Hawks also look dangerously thin at RB if Jacques Crawford isn't back.

ku's O should hum right along, as long as the OL holds up somewhat. The D wasn't great in 08 and will need Stuckey to continue his excellent level of play, have a pass rusher and a corner (Justin Thornton?) become a true star, and get strong performances from the new starting LB corps.

Nebraska is next.

The Huskers are getting a lot of hype. Let's start with that. Ndamuhkong Suh had a great second half for the Huskers, and along with Zach Potter and Ty Steinkuhler formed an excellent defensive front four that covered for severe deficiencies at LB and in the secondary. Roy Helu and Quentin Castille formed a nice running combo, though Castille didn't do a ton outside of the bowl game. The offensive line returns three starters and 7/10 from the two-deep.

But what seems to glossed over is how much the Huskers lost. Both starting WRs. Starting QB. Two three-year starters on the OL. Two of the three stud DL. Their best cover corner. Pretty significant losses. Let's look again at what's back...

Helu has the potential to make the offense go, but the question I keep coming back to is how Nebraska's running game will do when it doesn't have an experienced passing QB to allow it to throw to set up the run? Nebraska changed its offense to a more open, throwing attack at midseason, and suddenly, the running game blossomed. Will new starter Zac Lee be able to mirror Ganz's production? The offensive line is going to have to take a big step otherwise, and with a big group of upper classmen who have lots of playing experience, projecting a sudden spike in their play doesn't make a lot of sense.

The other questions is at WR: Menelik Holt was semi-productive last year. No other receivers contributed, really. Lot of production and experience to make up for there.

And now for my Tigers.

The lost stars obviously are the first thing you look at. Daniel, Coffman, Maclin, Hood and Moore were about as good a top five list a team could throw out coming into 2008. Moore disappointed, as did Daniel, but that's still a ton of ability, experience and production lost.

Not all is lost, though. The Tigers return an outstanding running back in Derrick Washington (and a budding backup in Devion moore), three very good starters on the OL (two of whom are second-year starters who took a big step in spring practice), two senior WRs with tons of experience and ability (Jared Perry), the best linebacker in the Big 12 (Sean Weatherspoon) and their best corner (Carl Gettis, who sophomore slumped in 08).

Key factors for the Tigers:
The new starters on the OL have looked good (Austin Wuebbels looks like an upgrade at LG, Dan Hoch about the same at RT), but will that translate to the field.

How well will Gabbert play as a first-year starter? If his play is around the level of Chase Daniel in 2006, the Tigers should be right in the thick of things - and Washington and Moore should have plenty of room to run.

What about the D? It was horrendous in 2008 and might benefit just from having new blood. The top three DE all had huge springs and could be poised to be better than Missouri's best 2008 end (stryker Sulak). But what about the second and third DTs? Not a ton of experience there. LB should be a strength.

- SUb question: The secondary was horrific in 2008 and lost three starters. Will it be better or worse? There will be a lot more competition, which is a positive. And there are a lot of players who weren't available in 2008 (redshirts Rob Steeples and Kip Edwards both needed to add strength; Munir Prince was a transfer from Notre Dame; jarrell Harrison and Jasper Simmons are juco transfers; redshirt safety Zaviar Gooden needed time to grasp the system). So there is reason for optimisim - but that's hardly a guarantee.

As for Colorado... they're a dark horse team. Should have a pretty good OL. Have two RBs with big potential. Lots of young guys on D. But no QB as of yet, which is why they're the dark horse.

And another side note:

If ku doesn't win the north this year, when is it EVER going to win it?

Orange Bowl>>>No Orange Bowl

Four Orange Bowls >>> three Orange Bowls.

Two Sugar Bowls >>> 0 Sugar Bowls

Umm, DCS?

Um, up yours shithead. I've never implied that we were OSU, I've only implied that your school is not as great as you ego-inflated, beaker shitheads THINK it is.

And I stand by it 100%.