All Activity

I've been told I should relax and trust our system of checks and balances, but it feels like the SC just turned up the heat on our Boil the Frog scenario.

I don't. I'm saying that's what I've seen some people predicting.

I love that you can ask Ai to create a commercial for a non-existent 1950s theme park for you, and marvel at the nightmare it comes up with.

I've seen him play, and I too never believe the stuff that they say anymore. No offense to HH at all, but he simply should not be at that position. The fact that we still have him there and at number 2 is not a good sign, but DK gets a pass for being a freshman. He isn't at #2 out of being good, he's simply the second best option right now. If DR gets hurt we are in a world of trouble again, especially when they are wanting to sling the ball all over the place moving forward it seems.

Pretty anecdotal but interesting...

Speculation seems to be they loaded up some extra picks and traded back one pick to buy themselves 20+ hours to try to trade for an established WR. If they get that done, it's a pretty good move.

the fact that they didn't instantly laugh this case out of court and rule against him when the lawyers said trump could kill his political rivals is telling

If Haarberg is that good, then great. I'm not taking Sipp's word for it, though.

They've been trying to placate runthedamnballguy in the press conferences by saying they're just not focused on the running game because they're confident in it from last year, but anyone even remotely paying attention should see right through that. They know they have a kid with a rocket laser arm and a room of potentially very explosive wide receivers and most of those aforementioned pieces are simply young and inexperienced. What we see a lot in teams fitting Nebraska's profile of having to start a young QB after coming off a season where they ran the ball pretty effectively and had a pretty good defense is to protect the young QB and rely on those other elements. Are we seeing that in practice? No, not even close. Two of these guys should be worried who they're taking to the senior prom right now and instead are watching White play dial-a-blitz on them. They're trying to cram as much experience into these young guys as they can. My opinion, and that's all it is worth, is there is a belief in that building that if this offense can even remotely approach its potential that this can be an extremely good team this year. They're not treating this like they just need to win a couple more games and go bowling.

Well, ZIM hit, just took longer than I thought!

I think 18 years max on the SC. 2 full presidential terms plus 2 years. Like any job, it is hard to keep the creative, intellectual juices flowing after a number of years. The challenge to think creativity is often lost and ruts are formed. Culture changes much in 18 years but of course, we want decisions to be tied to the constitutionality of the an issue and not by flippant cultural changes.

Yes, agree on the bold. Of course I use to think the same about Congress - Dem / GOP split. But until the GOP gets rid of its cultish/MAGA ways, I don't want them controlling either the house or the senate.

I agree with you here. Sadly though a stack Supreme Court is often wanted by both parties. To be honest though, if justice truly is blind, it shouldn't matter but we all know how often politics plays a huge part in the outcomes. I am also against lifetime appointments. Seriously, all elected and appointed positions pertaining to government both state and federal should have term limits but especially supreme court justices for just this reason. It would prevent (or at least make it more difficult to) stacking. Also, age restrictions on justices. 75 and the judge is removed mid-term or early term. Also, I'm not against adding by term/age limiting. Meaning if a justice has fulfilled their term or has breached the age limit, they are honored by respecting their accomplishments through advisory positions to the court.

Yeah, I've seen that. The conservative justices want to delay it as long as possible so it further delays some of his trials so they aren't decided before the election. How do you know this?

Yeah, I've seen that. The conservative justices want to delay it as long as possible so it further delays some of his trials so they aren't decided before the election. Yes, this should be the most important decision they are deciding and it should be done immediately. Watching the SCOTUS recently drills home the opinion I've had for a long time. The SC is best when it's a 5-4 split. One side having a large majority on the SC is a really bad thing.

Some have written that the ruling will not come until the end of the court calendar - end of June This should be an emergency decision.

Last year, teams knew we couldn't throw the ball effectively. I think Rhule wants to use the spring game to send a message to early opponents that, that's not the case this year.

Where is the throw up emoji?

He's not leaning Nebraska at all.