The Huskers were not even bowl eligible, lost 7 games for only the 3rd time since 1959, and they still beat the "Bruin Revolution."

From 1962 to 1997, the Huskers had 2 head coaches, Bob Devaney and Tom Osborne, and together they combined for all 5 of the school's national champions, 21 of the 46 conference titles, and a 356-69-5 record. They cemented Nebraska's position as a national powerhouse.

The Huskers last won a conference title in 1999. Their last major bowl appearance was the 2002 BCS National Championship Game, where they didn't deserve to play in the first place (Oregon should have played there instead). The Huskers got blown out to the U, 37-14.

Since then, Nebraska lost 7 games in the regular season three times: in 2004, 2007, and now this year. And before that? 1958. Nebraska was not even bowl eligible because they had a losing record. They only got to play in a bowl game because there weren't enough 6-6 teams to fill up all of the bowl slots.

And yet, a historically bad 5-7 team Nebraska (who lost 7 games for only the 3rd time since 1959) still beat the "savior, Heisman trophy favorite" Josh Rosen in the lower-tiered Foster Farms Bowl. We beat this same Huskers team last year with the drunkard Sark as our head coach.

Didn't Josh Rosen say he chose to play in Westwood because he wants to win for a school who isn't used to winning? He definitely would do more winning if he stopped spending too much time fucking around in his hoverboard and getting wasted in the hot tubs and frat parties, and more time practicing.

Mike Riley may be a decent coach, but nobody in Lincoln, saw him as "their savior." Riley will never be what Devaney or Osborne were. In fact, he was even on the hot seat when his team lost to doormat Purdue, who have gone 6-30 overall (2-22 Big Ten) in the last 3 years.

Meanwhile, the Baby Bears are in the middle of their "Bruin Revolution," and obsessively proclaiming, "we own the city" and "3 in a row over SC." Let's take a look at the Baby Bears' footballing history compared to Nebraska (mainly including games before the "Bruin Revolution"):

  • 1 national championship (shared with THE Ohio State in 1954), and that's it!
  • last major bowl appearance was in 1999, which they lost to Wisconsin (last Rose bowl win? in the 1980s, ouch!)
  • Nebraska and SC have each won over 800 all-time games, while the Bruins still only have 500 (the 'Noles have already won 500 games despite only being around since the 50's)
  • from 1999 to 2011, overall 82-81 record and 1-12 vs. the Trojans
  • 2008 game vs. BYU: worst loss by Power 5 team to non-Power 5 team (59-0)
  • 2007 game vs. Utah: worst loss by a ranked Power 5 team to an unranked non-Power 5 team (the Bruins were ranked #11 when they lost to unranked Mountain West team 44-6)
  • 2005 game vs. Arizona: undefeated and ranked #7 when they played 3-8 Arizona, and lost 52-14
  • 2011 game vs. Arizona: bitching and starting a brawl against 4-8 Arizona, and lost 48-12
  • SC games in the 2000's: lost 52-21, lost 47-22, lost 66-19, lost 50-0, among others
  • in 2011, the Baby Bears became the first bowl-eligible team to lose 8 games (lost embarrassing bowl game to 6-6 Illinois)
  • last win against the Furd? 2008 (sanctioned SC beat them twice in 2013, when they were ranked #4 and just beaten #3 Oregon, and in 2014 at the Farm), last win against Oregon? 2007 (sanctioned SC beat them when they were undefeated in Eugene in 2011)

Here's my previous post about the Baby Bears, after they lost to us back in November:

When we think of the Bruins, we think of a Ferrari, with all of their recruiting hotbed around southern California high schools. We think of a Ferrari barely beating a Toyota and getting blown out to a Lamborghini in an automobile race.

Now, let's take a look at the Baby Bears and their "Bruin Revolution" under Coach Mora and look at their accomplishments.

  • when ranked, they have 8 losses to unranked teams (more than any other college football team during the same 4-year span)
  • became the first team ever to lose to a 5-7 team in a college football bowl game
  • blew away the Pac-12 South for 3 years in a row (2 of those losses were at HOME)
  • lost 8 games at home in the Rose Bowl
  • when ranked, they have 5 losses to unranked teams at home
  • lost 8 games in November or later
  • of the 8 home losses, 4 were in November games (twice to UNRANKED opponents)
  • already lost 2 meaningless bowl games (one to 5-7 bowl-ineligible rarely-mediocre Nebraska); remember, the Trojans played in 7 straight major bowl games from 2002-08 and had a 6-1 record in those games
  • they have a 23-13 record in conference play; this is the same 23-13 record as the Trojans during that same span, except the Trojans had NCAA sanctions and 4 different coaches and these were our "down years"

Meanwhile, the Baby Bears expect us to think that there are leading a "Bruin Revolution," when really their "best" is worse than our "worst," or even the Huskers' worst for that matter.

Today, in the Foster Farms Bowl, 5-7 Nebraska was still able to beat the Baby Bruins, who were "Pac-12 and national title favorites" and had "so much NFL talent, with their recruiting hotbeds."

And they wonder why nobody "gives them respect." The Baby Bears still don't remember that respect has to be EARNED and not given. What makes them think their entitled to respect? We, the Trojans, have EARNED our respect, with our 11 national champions, 800+ wins, 38 conference championships, 7 Heisman Trophy winners, and 80 All-Americans.

Let me ask this: Who has ever said, "Fuck, we're playing the Bruins?" Nobody is scared of them. Nobody is afraid to play them. Under Pete Carroll, people were scared to play us because we know success. We made people afraid to play us.

Bob Devaney and Tom Osborne made other teams scared to play the Huskers. People are afraid to play Bama, they're afraid to play the Ohio State, they're afraid to play SC and the Huskers, and now even the Furd. But who the fuck says, "Fuck, we're playing the Bruins?"

This is again showing us that SC and Nebraska are one thing in common: we have standards. It is good to have high standards in life. We know what success on the football field is, and what isn't. We know that success is when we win championships, and teams are afraid to play us.

Look at Nebraska. Bo Pelini won 9 games each season he was at Lincoln, and he got SACKED. Because his teams got BLOWN OUT in big games. In the meantime, the Huskers always folded in November, and never won a conference championship game. Look at the Huskers' record in big games under Pelini:

2011: Michigan 45, Nebraska 17

2011: Wisconsin 48, Nebraska 17

2012: The Ohio State 63, Nebraska 38

2012: Wisconsin 70, Nebraska 31

2013: Georgia 45, Nebraska 31

2014: Wisconsin 59, Nebraska 24

Here is one of my main points: Jim Mora did the same thing Bo Pelini did at Lincoln, and he got REWARDED for it. Jim Mora is seen as a fucking hero, when he's really an arrogant prick. Look at his record: 0-5 against the Furd, 0-2 against Oregon, 0 conference championships, and 0 major bowl games.

The Baby Bears don't know what success is. Remember, they're obsessed with beating SC, and saying "we own the city," and "3 in a row." This is why their program SHOULD have been a powerhouse, but instead, they're barely at Iowa and Purdue's level.

Now, we're probably going to see the Baby Bears getting all the hype (Heisman Trophy, win the Pac-12, win the Rose Bowl, etc.), but everybody knows to not give them shit. Whenever they're favored against an unranked opponent, write them off. They are basically fool's gold.

That's what the Bruins for the entire existence of their football program: fool's gold. Even with their brand name and global recognition, their football team is fool's gold. Don't take them seriously.

They claim that SC is arrogant and stuck up. Their fault for giving SC an ego. As what Gretchen Wieners said in Mean Girls, "It isn't our fault that they're totally obsessed with us." I mean, the words SC appear on their fight song: Sons of Westwood. I mean, come on. They're obsessed with us, like a little brother jealous of their big brother's success.

By the way, our real rival is Notre Dame, and not the Baby Bears. They are our equal.

We are FC Barcelona, Notre Dame is Real Madrid, and the Bruins are Espanyol.

All right, guys, here's to going off on a HIGH note. Beat the Badgers, and re-establish ourselves as a national powerhouse again in the future. Make teams scared of us again.

And remember, Los Angeles has ALWAYS been a Trojan town. Anybody who thinks this town ever was a Bruin town is delusional and doesn't know what success is. They have never owned the city. They have owned shit.

Los Angeles WAS a Trojan town. Los Angeles IS a Trojan town. Los Angeles WILL ALWAYS BE a Trojan town.

Remember to always have high standards in life. Never settle. As Trojans, we never settle. Why settle for Bridget Monahan, when we can have Giselle Bundchen? Why settle for Salisbury when we can have Kobe steak? Why should we be Ashton Kutcher's twin and live in his shadow? Be Ashton Kutcher for crying out loud. That's why we're successful. Like the Huskers, we Trojans never settle. We know what success is. Therefore, rooting for the Bruins sends a bad message in life because it means to settle.

My co-worker is a huge Husker fan, and he lived through the glory days of Devaney and Osborne. So we both know success.

Finally, don't buy fool's gold. This fool's gold is going back to the 1999-2011 days, when they were ass-whooped by the Trojans 12 out of 13 times (50-0 ring a bell? Or how about 66-19, 52-21, 47-22)? The Baby Bears went 82-81 during those 13 years, and were largely inconsistent but still obsessed with SC.

SC = indifferent about the Baby Bears, but obsessed with winning

The Baby Bears = indifferent about winning, but obsessed with SC

We shall rise again, mighty Trojans. Fight on! Beat the Cheeseheads!

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Conquest Chronicles' writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Conquest Chronicles' writers or editors.