Nebraska is the best team in the North

[DocNice]

Missouri will be suprised early on how physical and talented the Huskers are this year, nothing close to what they've seen so far.

Umm, you act like we've never played a team that knows how to hit. And furthermore, you seem to forget that Mizzou defenses, for while now, but especially this year, have a reputation for laying the lumber.

I find it interesting that so many NU fans seem to think NU is going to be 100% better just because they hit harder and want it more than last year. Perhaps I'm missing something, and if so, I'll be eating crow in a couple of weeks, but I still think NU has a talent gap to make up.

Sadly for you, that lumber has been doled out in toothpicks this year against a weaker non-con schedule than the Huskers have faced (Sagarin), and yet the Huskers have allowed 28 points non-con. Missouri allowed twice that. More than twice that. You guys "laid the wood" to Nevada so fiercely that the offensive juggernaut that is the Wolfpack nearly equaled Nebraska's opponents' output all by their lonesome.

Further, against a woeful set of defenses (Furman? Really? Give me the Sunbelt title any day over Furman), you've managed... what? 147 points? Epic. Meanwhile, the Huskers have played an actual factual defense and scored on them. Moved the ball really well, in fact.

And by the by - when Missouri plays a team that knows how to hit.... yeah. Let's just say, it doesn't work out well for you. Texas - lost by 25. Oklahoma - lost by 41.

Do you really want to hang your hat on a Week 4 Sagarin ranking giving you 10 spots higher? See my post above. You haven't played a team ranked higher than 85 per CFN outside of VT. And almost all of your stats came against those teams.

 

[knapplc]

Do you really want to hang your hat on a Week 4 Sagarin ranking giving you 10 spots higher? See my post above. You haven't played a team ranked higher than 85 per CFN outside of VT. And almost all of your stats came against those teams.

Tell you what. I'll hang my hat on VT. Who you got?

Wait, wait. That's not fair. I'll hang my hat on one of the three Sunbelt teams winning their conference and beating any of your opponents in a bowl game. Fair?

And laughable with this "outside of VT" comment. Equivocating already? Come now. We are men of honor. Lies do not become us.

And CFN? So? Sagarin is the most respected independent ranking out there, and either you know it or you should know it.

And check your "almost all of your stats came against those [sunbelt] teams" comment. Go see how we ran against Virginia Tech, a team with a front line you would sell Weatherspoon to get. Yes, absolutely all of our passing stats did. Lee had a terrible game in Blacksburg statistically. But we're not one-dimensional, unlike the Tigers. We can run the ball, and run it well. 3.79 yards per carry by the Tiggers against that level of competition is embarrassing.

Bottom line is this - those stats I can spout off mean nada. You guys could still whip our butts. What I'm getting at is, you have nothing to base such an assumption on other than hope and the ghosts of Tiger Teams Past.

 

[cscott2win]

Argue all you want Doc. Maybe you'll be able to convince yourself sooner or later. But deep down you know what's comin. When you're sitting there with your 4-3 record and with the Tigers on their way to Boulder on Halloween maybe you can wear your Jayhawk cap and go trick or treating as a winner!!! :rollin

 

[DocNice]

Do you really want to hang your hat on a Week 4 Sagarin ranking giving you 10 spots higher? See my post above. You haven't played a team ranked higher than 85 per CFN outside of VT. And almost all of your stats came against those teams.

Tell you what. I'll hang my hat on VT. Who you got?

Wait, wait. That's not fair. I'll hang my hat on one of the three Sunbelt teams winning their conference and beating any of your opponents in a bowl game. Fair?

And laughable with this "outside of VT" comment. Equivocating already? Come now. We are men of honor. Lies do not become us.

And CFN? So? Sagarin is the most respected independent ranking out there, and either you know it or you should know it.

And check your "almost all of your stats came against those [sunbelt] teams" comment. Go see how we ran against Virginia Tech, a team with a front line you would sell Weatherspoon to get. Yes, absolutely all of our passing stats did. Lee had a terrible game in Blacksburg statistically. But we're not one-dimensional, unlike the Tigers. We can run the ball, and run it well. 3.79 yards per carry by the Tiggers against that level of competition is embarrassing.

Bottom line is this - those stats I can spout off mean nada. You guys could still whip our butts. What I'm getting at is, you have nothing to base such an assumption on other than hope and the ghosts of Tiger Teams Past.

You're hanging your hat on VT? A loss? Really?

Every FBS team on our schedule is ranked higher by CFN than the highest ranked Sun Belt team you've played, so I'll take those odds. And Sagarin is not the most respected ranking service. In fact, Sagarin is notoriouis for inaccuracies, especially early in the year. And of course, if you like him so much, why'd you neglect to mention he has us ranked higher?

If 3.8 yards per carry is bad, what's 11 for 30? My point stands. Your stats have come against significantly inferior competition.

 

[DocNice]

Argue all you want Doc. Maybe you'll be able to convince yourself sooner or later. But deep down you know what's comin. When you're sitting there with your 4-3 record and with the Tigers on their way to Boulder on Halloween maybe you can wear your Jayhawk cap and go trick or treating as a winner!!! :rollin

Yes I do. Deep down I have absolutely no reason to think the Huskers will win.

 

[cscott2win]

Argue all you want Doc. Maybe you'll be able to convince yourself sooner or later. But deep down you know what's comin. When you're sitting there with your 4-3 record and with the Tigers on their way to Boulder on Halloween maybe you can wear your Jayhawk cap and go trick or treating as a winner!!! :rollin

Yes I do. Deep down I have absolutely no reason to think the Huskers will win.

That's not much of an answer. You know as well as everyone else on this board that there are reasons why the Huskers will win as well as there are reasons that Mizzou could also win. You gotta do better than that to impress anyone on this board with your brilliance and knowledge. What? You got a ouija board?

 

[knapplc]

You're hanging your hat on VT? A loss? Really?
Every FBS team on our schedule is ranked higher by CFN than the highest ranked Sun Belt team you've played, so I'll take those odds. And Sagarin is not the most respected ranking service. In fact, Sagarin is notoriouis for inaccuracies, especially early in the year. And of course, if you like him so much, why'd you neglect to mention he has us ranked higher?

If 3.8 yards per carry is bad, what's 11 for 30? My point stands. Your stats have come against significantly inferior competition.

Yes, I am hanging my stats on that game. Because that defense was more stringent than any two defenses the Tigers have faced, combined. And yeah, Lee had a bad game. 11 completions. But you're ignoring Helu running wild all over VT, and if I were you I would, too.

I don't give a whoop if you're ranked higher now. We're not talking about where Nebraska or Missouri is ranked, because our respective rankings are irrelevant right now. Sure, you're ranked higher, because you're undefeated. If Nebraska had played your schedule they'd be undefeated, too. Iowa State may be undefeated with that schedule.

And who, praytell, is CFN? You just arbitrarily picked CFN because... why? Because they bolster your weak schedule? Weak.

But here - let's use your ranking guys, outrageous as they are. They've got VTech ranked 4th. Fourth in the nation, and we went down to their house and were one blown coverage away from beating them.

You've played, let me see if I've got this straight... you've played 82nd ranked Bowling Green, 63rd ranked Illinois, 76th ranked Nevada and... and... hey - where is Furman ranked? Can you help me find Furman on CFN's ranking page? Your opponents' average ranking is somewhere between nowhere and I don't give a hoot. Because not one of your four opponents is going to finish anywhere near the top 25, and probably not anywhere near the top 50, and yet here you are, flapping your yap about how good they are. You must be fooling you because you sure ain't fooling me.

And yes, Sagarin is the most respected ranking service out there, cited by newswriters galore and featured in USAToday. His bona fides are far, far better than CFN's. By a long shot.

 

[DocNice]

Yes, I am hanging my stats on that game. Because that defense was more stringent than any two defenses the Tigers have faced, combined. And yeah, Lee had a bad game. 11 completions. But you're ignoring Helu running wild all over VT, and if I were you I would, too.

I don't give a whoop if you're ranked higher now. We're not talking about where Nebraska or Missouri is ranked, because our respective rankings are irrelevant right now. Sure, you're ranked higher, because you're undefeated. If Nebraska had played your schedule they'd be undefeated, too. Iowa State may be undefeated with that schedule.

And who, praytell, is CFN? You just arbitrarily picked CFN because... why? Because they bolster your weak schedule? Weak.

But here - let's use your ranking guys, outrageous as they are. They've got VTech ranked 4th. Fourth in the nation, and we went down to their house and were one blown coverage away from beating them.

You've played, let me see if I've got this straight... you've played 82nd ranked Bowling Green, 63rd ranked Illinois, 76th ranked Nevada and... and... hey - where is Furman ranked? Can you help me find Furman on CFN's ranking page? Your opponents' average ranking is somewhere between nowhere and I don't give a hoot. Because not one of your four opponents is going to finish anywhere near the top 25, and probably not anywhere near the top 50, and yet here you are, flapping your yap about how good they are. You must be fooling you because you sure ain't fooling me.

And yes, Sagarin is the most respected ranking service out there, cited by newswriters galore and featured in USAToday. His bona fides are far, far better than CFN's. By a long shot.

That you don't know who CFN is doesn't lend credibility to your position. CFN stands for CollegeFootballNews.com, and is easily the best college football coverage available. Take all the writers for ESPN combined and you'll get a fraction of the quality and depth of CFN. For starters, ESPN spends 90% of their coverage on 10 teams. CFN covers everyone and actually watches the games. Check it out, you'll like it.

As for the rankings, no point in rehashing. I stick with my opinion that they'll all finish higher than they are now, due to playing their toughest stretches of their schedule early. But regardless of whether they're any good, surely we can agree that Nebraska's have been truly awful. Nobody higher than 85th? I'm not trying to knock you, but it's worth noting that we don't know how good you'll play against a team like Mizzou. Essentially what that means is that you've got a one game record right now, and with mixed results in that one game.

Whether Mizzou has one or more such games is up for debate. I think we've seen enough quality to know somewhat what we can expect. You apparently disagree.

As for Sagarin, you can call him respected if you want. It's a computer ranking. It's not all that accurate in Week 12 and it sure as heck isn't accurate in Week 4, and he'll be the first to tell you that.

 

[BlackShirt1340]

Yes, I am hanging my stats on that game. Because that defense was more stringent than any two defenses the Tigers have faced, combined. And yeah, Lee had a bad game. 11 completions. But you're ignoring Helu running wild all over VT, and if I were you I would, too.

I don't give a whoop if you're ranked higher now. We're not talking about where Nebraska or Missouri is ranked, because our respective rankings are irrelevant right now. Sure, you're ranked higher, because you're undefeated. If Nebraska had played your schedule they'd be undefeated, too. Iowa State may be undefeated with that schedule.

And who, praytell, is CFN? You just arbitrarily picked CFN because... why? Because they bolster your weak schedule? Weak.

But here - let's use your ranking guys, outrageous as they are. They've got VTech ranked 4th. Fourth in the nation, and we went down to their house and were one blown coverage away from beating them.

You've played, let me see if I've got this straight... you've played 82nd ranked Bowling Green, 63rd ranked Illinois, 76th ranked Nevada and... and... hey - where is Furman ranked? Can you help me find Furman on CFN's ranking page? Your opponents' average ranking is somewhere between nowhere and I don't give a hoot. Because not one of your four opponents is going to finish anywhere near the top 25, and probably not anywhere near the top 50, and yet here you are, flapping your yap about how good they are. You must be fooling you because you sure ain't fooling me.

And yes, Sagarin is the most respected ranking service out there, cited by newswriters galore and featured in USAToday. His bona fides are far, far better than CFN's. By a long shot.

That you don't know who CFN is doesn't lend credibility to your position. CFN stands for CollegeFootballNews.com, and is easily the best college football coverage available. Take all the writers for ESPN combined and you'll get a fraction of the quality and depth of CFN. For starters, ESPN spends 90% of their coverage on 10 teams. CFN covers everyone and actually watches the games. Check it out, you'll like it.

As for the rankings, no point in rehashing. I stick with my opinion that they'll all finish higher than they are now, due to playing their toughest stretches of their schedule early. But regardless of whether they're any good, surely we can agree that Nebraska's have been truly awful. Nobody higher than 85th? I'm not trying to knock you, but it's worth noting that we don't know how good you'll play against a team like Mizzou. Essentially what that means is that you've got a one game record right now, and with mixed results in that one game.

Whether Mizzou has one or more such games is up for debate. I think we've seen enough quality to know somewhat what we can expect. You apparently disagree.

As for Sagarin, you can call him respected if you want. It's a computer ranking. It's not all that accurate in Week 12 and it sure as heck isn't accurate in Week 4, and he'll be the first to tell you that.

I love how you come on this board and try to throw all these stats in our face like it means jack shitt... I don't care if the three Sun Belt teams we played are ranked lower than Illinois (no matter what you say, you know they are terrible, they finished 5-7 last year and are set up for more failure this year), Nevada (who got destroyed by Notre Dame and beat by Colorado St... Colorado STATE!..) and Bowling Green (Who lost to Marshall and got absolutely steam rolled by BSU). First of all, the win against Nevada is less than convincing, and I watched EVERY snap of that game. Sure, the offense could move the ball between the twenties, but you know as well as I do that Mizzou struggled in the red zone against the Wolfpack defense and that touchdown to put you up 31-13 was ILLEGAL. That was an obvious pick play and a TERRIBLE call by the officials.

You had to make a fourth quarter comeback against a team that got beat by Marshall (Marshall, by the way, lost by 42 points to Va Tech). And the win against Illinois doesn't mean a damn thing because the only people who find that game to be a "Big time game" are Mizzou fans.

You can say that Nebraska hasn't played any big time teams except one, and lost. But if you watched that game AT ALL, you know that what is coming to Columbia next Thursday is a SIGNIFICANTLY stronger opponent than what the Tigers have played the past two years.

If you deny the fact that Nebraska (especially the defense) is drastically improved, you are either accidentally or deliberately being very ignorant. I'd lean with the latter, that you are being ignorant on purpose, because you don't want to believe that the defense your beloved Tigers will be facing in a week and a half is the strongest you will face all year and possibly the strongest in the big 12 (unless OU keeps up their pace).

I don't care about CFN or Sagarin... if you watched ABC when Nebraska played Virginia Tech, you know that that is a MUCH improved football team that is guaranteed to give your offense fits. I'm not saying Nebraska will win... but they stand just as good of a chance of winning as Mizzou does and this game will be a battle.

:restore

 

[Enhance]

One thing I'm excited to see is something that the guys on Husker Sports Nightly brought up tonight, and it's something I never really thought of.

Gabbert has been making a lot of throws while running towards the hash marks, towards the sidelines, and then throwing across his body and hitting receivers, practically just lobbing the ball up there. While that worked against Furman and Nevada, Nebraska's defense is going to make the pick in those situations. Gabbert can't extend plays by running to the outside and then lobbing it up for receivers. Even if he has the arm strength to make those throws, floating the ball up against an athletic Nebraska backfield is not something he is going to want to do. Amukamara, Asante, and hell even West will make that pick.

He's going to need to play smarter ball come the 8th.

 

[kansas husker]

Yes, I am hanging my stats on that game. Because that defense was more stringent than any two defenses the Tigers have faced, combined. And yeah, Lee had a bad game. 11 completions. But you're ignoring Helu running wild all over VT, and if I were you I would, too.

I don't give a whoop if you're ranked higher now. We're not talking about where Nebraska or Missouri is ranked, because our respective rankings are irrelevant right now. Sure, you're ranked higher, because you're undefeated. If Nebraska had played your schedule they'd be undefeated, too. Iowa State may be undefeated with that schedule.

And who, praytell, is CFN? You just arbitrarily picked CFN because... why? Because they bolster your weak schedule? Weak.

But here - let's use your ranking guys, outrageous as they are. They've got VTech ranked 4th. Fourth in the nation, and we went down to their house and were one blown coverage away from beating them.

You've played, let me see if I've got this straight... you've played 82nd ranked Bowling Green, 63rd ranked Illinois, 76th ranked Nevada and... and... hey - where is Furman ranked? Can you help me find Furman on CFN's ranking page? Your opponents' average ranking is somewhere between nowhere and I don't give a hoot. Because not one of your four opponents is going to finish anywhere near the top 25, and probably not anywhere near the top 50, and yet here you are, flapping your yap about how good they are. You must be fooling you because you sure ain't fooling me.

And yes, Sagarin is the most respected ranking service out there, cited by newswriters galore and featured in USAToday. His bona fides are far, far better than CFN's. By a long shot.

That you don't know who CFN is doesn't lend credibility to your position. CFN stands for CollegeFootballNews.com, and is easily the best college football coverage available. Take all the writers for ESPN combined and you'll get a fraction of the quality and depth of CFN. For starters, ESPN spends 90% of their coverage on 10 teams. CFN covers everyone and actually watches the games. Check it out, you'll like it.

As for the rankings, no point in rehashing. I stick with my opinion that they'll all finish higher than they are now, due to playing their toughest stretches of their schedule early. But regardless of whether they're any good, surely we can agree that Nebraska's have been truly awful. Nobody higher than 85th? I'm not trying to knock you, but it's worth noting that we don't know how good you'll play against a team like Mizzou. Essentially what that means is that you've got a one game record right now, and with mixed results in that one game.

Whether Mizzou has one or more such games is up for debate. I think we've seen enough quality to know somewhat what we can expect. You apparently disagree.

As for Sagarin, you can call him respected if you want. It's a computer ranking. It's not all that accurate in Week 12 and it sure as heck isn't accurate in Week 4, and he'll be the first to tell you that.

And you compare your offense that. Is averaging 32 points a game (if you elementate furman as they are not a fbs team). What makes you think that offense will have anywhere close to those results against nebraska. Who has given up an average of 7.

If you want to talk about the quality of. The offenses we've played fine. How about the fact we held va tech to fewer points then alabama did. Va tech may not break in passing records this year but there's something to be said for performing better than one of if not the top defenses in the land against the same offense

 

[Enhance]

I love how you come on this board and try to throw all these stats in our face like it means jack shitt... I don't care if the three Sun Belt teams we played are ranked lower than Illinois (no matter what you say, you know they are terrible, they finished 5-7 last year and are set up for more failure this year), Nevada (who got destroyed by Notre Dame and beat by Colorado St... Colorado STATE!..) and Bowling Green (Who lost to Marshall and got absolutely steam rolled by BSU). First of all, the win against Nevada is less than convincing, and I watched EVERY snap of that game. Sure, the offense could move the ball between the twenties, but you know as well as I do that Mizzou struggled in the red zone against the Wolfpack defense and that touchdown to put you up 31-13 was ILLEGAL. That was an obvious pick play and a TERRIBLE call by the officials.

You had to make a fourth quarter comeback against a team that got beat by Marshall (Marshall, by the way, lost by 42 points to Va Tech). And the win against Illinois doesn't mean a damn thing because the only people who find that game to be a "Big time game" are Mizzou fans.

You can say that Nebraska hasn't played any big time teams except one, and lost. But if you watched that game AT ALL, you know that what is coming to Columbia next Thursday is a SIGNIFICANTLY stronger opponent than what the Tigers have played the past two years.

If you deny the fact that Nebraska (especially the defense) is drastically improved, you are either accidentally or deliberately being very ignorant. I'd lean with the latter, that you are being ignorant on purpose, because you don't want to believe that the defense your beloved Tigers will be facing in a week and a half is the strongest you will face all year and possibly the strongest in the big 12 (unless OU keeps up their pace).

I don't care about CFN or Sagarin... if you watched ABC when Nebraska played Virginia Tech, you know that that is a MUCH improved football team that is guaranteed to give your offense fits. I'm not saying Nebraska will win... but they stand just as good of a chance of winning as Mizzou does and this game will be a battle.

:restore

Nebraska was the better football team through and through that day, they just couldn't hold it together for the last couple minutes. Tech fans realize this and hell even those idiots over at ESPN :box know Nebraska should have won.

But, I digress, because we were not able to notch the W.

 

[WCHusker]

One thing I'm excited to see is something that the guys on Husker Sports Nightly brought up tonight, and it's something I never really thought of.

Gabbert has been making a lot of throws while running towards the hash marks, towards the sidelines, and then throwing across his body and hitting receivers, practically just lobbing the ball up there. While that worked against Furman and Nevada, Nebraska's defense is going to make the pick in those situations. Gabbert can't extend plays by running to the outside and then lobbing it up for receivers. Even if he has the arm strength to make those throws, floating the ball up against an athletic Nebraska backfield is not something he is going to want to do. Amukamara, Asante, and hell even West will make that pick.

He's going to need to play smarter ball come the 8th.

Or Suh is going to break him into pieces. Their O-line better be crapping their pants, because they are about to get slammed by the wrath of hell. It's going to get hot in Gabby's kitchen-REAL HOT!

 

[BlackShirt1340]

Yes, I am hanging my stats on that game. Because that defense was more stringent than any two defenses the Tigers have faced, combined. And yeah, Lee had a bad game. 11 completions. But you're ignoring Helu running wild all over VT, and if I were you I would, too.

I don't give a whoop if you're ranked higher now. We're not talking about where Nebraska or Missouri is ranked, because our respective rankings are irrelevant right now. Sure, you're ranked higher, because you're undefeated. If Nebraska had played your schedule they'd be undefeated, too. Iowa State may be undefeated with that schedule.

And who, praytell, is CFN? You just arbitrarily picked CFN because... why? Because they bolster your weak schedule? Weak.

But here - let's use your ranking guys, outrageous as they are. They've got VTech ranked 4th. Fourth in the nation, and we went down to their house and were one blown coverage away from beating them.

You've played, let me see if I've got this straight... you've played 82nd ranked Bowling Green, 63rd ranked Illinois, 76th ranked Nevada and... and... hey - where is Furman ranked? Can you help me find Furman on CFN's ranking page? Your opponents' average ranking is somewhere between nowhere and I don't give a hoot. Because not one of your four opponents is going to finish anywhere near the top 25, and probably not anywhere near the top 50, and yet here you are, flapping your yap about how good they are. You must be fooling you because you sure ain't fooling me.

And yes, Sagarin is the most respected ranking service out there, cited by newswriters galore and featured in USAToday. His bona fides are far, far better than CFN's. By a long shot.

That you don't know who CFN is doesn't lend credibility to your position. CFN stands for CollegeFootballNews.com, and is easily the best college football coverage available. Take all the writers for ESPN combined and you'll get a fraction of the quality and depth of CFN. For starters, ESPN spends 90% of their coverage on 10 teams. CFN covers everyone and actually watches the games. Check it out, you'll like it.

As for the rankings, no point in rehashing. I stick with my opinion that they'll all finish higher than they are now, due to playing their toughest stretches of their schedule early. But regardless of whether they're any good, surely we can agree that Nebraska's have been truly awful. Nobody higher than 85th? I'm not trying to knock you, but it's worth noting that we don't know how good you'll play against a team like Mizzou. Essentially what that means is that you've got a one game record right now, and with mixed results in that one game.

Whether Mizzou has one or more such games is up for debate. I think we've seen enough quality to know somewhat what we can expect. You apparently disagree.

As for Sagarin, you can call him respected if you want. It's a computer ranking. It's not all that accurate in Week 12 and it sure as heck isn't accurate in Week 4, and he'll be the first to tell you that.

And you compare your offense that. Is averaging 32 points a game (if you elementate furman as they are not a fbs team). What makes you think that offense will have anywhere close to those results against nebraska. Who has given up an average of 7.

If you want to talk about the quality of. The offenses we've played fine. How about the fact we held va tech to fewer points then alabama did. Va tech may not break in passing records this year but there's something to be said for performing better than one of if not the top defenses in the land against the same offense

:yeah And might I add... AT THEIR HOUSE!

 

[Enhance]

That you don't know who CFN is doesn't lend credibility to your position. CFN stands for CollegeFootballNews.com, and is easily the best college football coverage available. Take all the writers for ESPN combined and you'll get a fraction of the quality and depth of CFN. For starters, ESPN spends 90% of their coverage on 10 teams. CFN covers everyone and actually watches the games.

I've liked your opinions thus far DocNice, but I must disagree with you on this simply because of their rankings after Week 4.

Most notably:

#4 VaTech: Completely disagree with this. Top 10 team maybe, but not top 5.

#6 Nebraska: Not even I think Nebraska is the 6th best team in the nation, and that is saying something. I think Nebraska should probably be in the 15-20 range.

#18 USC: I don't care if they were only able to put up 27 points against Washington State or not. Nobody can sit their and tell me USC is not a Top 10 team. They always find ways to win the biggest games that have the biggest implications, with a few speed bumps here and there. Can anyone honestly say that their are seventeen better teams than USC? Didn't think so.

Don't get me wrong, I like CFN and their coverage a lot, but they are susceptible to the same idiocy as every other sports analyst.