Started By
Message
re: What meets the qualifications of a rivarly game to be considered legitimate?
Posted on 4/16/14 at 5:15 pm to Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
Posted on 4/16/14 at 5:15 pm to Mizzou Fan in Da ATX
I get the history but when they decided not to play us I was over them quickly.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 5:19 pm to wstorie44
quote:
I get the history but when they decided not to play us I was over them quickly.
I'm over them in the sense I haven't missed the game the past few years, and the run through the SEC last year was thrilling. Living down in Austin, the A&M game is very meaningful to me personally and is more fun socially due to where I live than ku ever was.
But in a discussion of what rivalry games are like and should be like, and the sheer unadulterated passion and hatred I can feel toward pure scum on the other end of the field or court, ku is the only discussion I could ever have. And being as this thread was about rivalries, I have to go with Nick in saying we have one, ku, and that's all we'll ever had. I'm not into manufactured rivalries and when you've got one that's 150 years old and that ties directly to my bloodlines, I'll never need one. I don't care how good or bad ku's football program is in terms of us having a pathetic rival. I WANT them to suck. I WANT them to go 0-11 every year for eternity. Because they're our rival and I hate them.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 5:22 pm to wstorie44
At a point in time in the not too distant future when the Big 12 jimmies become less rustled, kU will realize they need this game to remain a relevant football program because Charlie Weis is not going to make them relevant again. Their football program is nearly dead right now, and needs something to jumpstart it into the future, and a game at Arrowhead to begin the season will be better than playing an FCS opponent to open the season (really the same, but the prestige of playing a Big 12 opponent is better)
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/SR_Icon.jpg)