Leaderboard

The conservative trope that higher education is somehow more liberal is one that strikes me as incredibly tone-deaf. If the most educated people in our society are more liberal than conservative, then shouldn't conservatives start questioning their own ideology? I've found most conservatives instead choose to attack higher education.

From what I can tell on facebook both sides are more or less equally condescending towards each other. I'm both liberal and conservative in a lot of ways, so I just try to be condescending to everybody.

Looking back at Nebraska defenses the better part of this century is why I'm willing to give Chinander a chance. Regardless of form or nomenclature, two words I'd use to describe Nebraska defenses over this span is Rigid and Passive. Neither of those is how I'd describe a Chinander unit. At the end of the day, once a play is identified; the RB breaks the line of scrimmage, the pass is thrown, it's about 11 guys chasing down and tackling one guy. It's really that simple. So much of the various past schemes have been about area control, that we've kinda forgot this part. What Chinander and crew are doing is not eschewing control, but rather being more aggressive through the proper use of leverage. It's about attacking through the ball carrier/blocker with risk mitigation because you've taken the angle that reduces their threat. It's more fair to call it a philosophy than a scheme. He can and will use a lot of schemes, but they're all taught through this conceptual framework. What I love isn't so much where they put the players but that they explain the why to the players. That allows players to break the rules, ultimately allowing 11 to tackle 1. I think we will have a pretty good defensive unit this year. Obviously thin in the secondary, and it may take some time to find the right mix at LB, but the defensive line should be solid out of the gate. At some point, this defense will understand the freedom they have and it'll click. Should be a lot of fun when that happens.

FWIW, I don't think it's a bad idea. I just think it would run into resistance. Politicians that want stricter immigration policies love to talk about E-verify. I know I heard Ted Cruz mention it quite a bit. But pushing to run everyone through that would run into resistance from employers that benefit from cheap labor. Ag workers, construction, day laborers... anybody employing large numbers of illegal workers isn't going to want to go along with it.

This reminds me of the Merry Christmas - Happy Holidays topic. The Right is good at conjuring up attacks from nothing, then fighting against them. i.e. they're good at rallying the troops even when there isn't a fight. The transgender bathroom topic is another example. That started with North Carolina inventing a problem and then creating a bill to solve the problem - then a bunch of people complained about transgender people when they didn't start it at all.

My sister teaches at a state university in Minnesota, a swing state (a lot would actually call it liberal). She has to be careful about what she says because of the extreme conservatism of her male colleagues. She's actually been told how impressed they are that she can do her job and raise a family, especially as a woman. Higher education promotes thought and our place in a general society, maybe it isn't a coincidence that people leave there with a better understanding of the world outside our borders.

I did not know things like that were happening , I deal with factory workers mostly, not professionals . The system is definitely broken . Between the drug cartels, government corruption , and general lawlessness in Mexico , Central and South America I’m hearing its very unsafe many places there . I don’t blame them for fleeing as I would do the same in their situation . We just need to do a better job handling the influx of people on our end .

Absolutely. The defensive side of the ball is where recruiting really shows. No matter how proactive or aggressive a defensive scheme is, it is still the reactive side of the ball. Any offense can attempt to scheme around their weaknesses by virtue of having the ball and making the defense adjust to what they are doing. The defense, any defense, is prone to getting attacked where it is weak. To that point, two of UCF's best defensive players, Hughes and Griffin, were gambles in their own way. Griffin's story is known at this point, Hughes was a P5 talent that got into some legal trouble. UCF and it's kind has to find defensive talent where it can. Meanwhile, the offensive side of the ball can plug in an undersized, but speedy running back, even as a freshman because he only needs to do what he's capable of doing. You can so much more easily accommodate a range of players on offense for this reason. IMO, there is no excuse for ever having a bad offense. Small schools, service academies, P5 bottom dwellers...all have shown time and again that you can have a good offense without needing to recruit elite talent.

I don't disagree with you Big Red, I guess I just think we make it too tough (and yes, I know there has to be vetting and we need to be careful). For instance, this last week I was speaking to a woman, a MD & PHD from Venezuela who is trying to gain citizenship here. She and her husband (also an MD) came here to claim asylum. She has to turn in a 600 page application once a year to keep her app in process, and currently she's spent over 50k on lawyers and etc. She is unable to come here and work as an MD, so she's doing bench work for a hospital because she would have to go back to medical school and etc to be able to practice here, and med school is not cheap (especially not to go a second time, plus fellowship which puts an additional 3-5 years on). At any time they can tell her that she is not approved, and she then has 2 days to go home. 2 days to close up shop at work, sell her home, sell her belongings or pack them up and get on a plane home. Period - or she's at risk for arrest. She then would qualify as an illegal that ICE could come after (depending on city & state of course). That's ridiculous. The process is broken. If she hadn't had money in the bank before coming here she'd never be able to do it according to the requirements we have. She's earning a pittance now compared to what she is trained to do and was doing in Venezuela. Cost of living is significantly higher here, they're having expenses that even wealthy people would find excessive (100K for just application processes?!?!?) so there's no way that people fleeing a country where they're not safe, where there's no work can do this. When I asked her why she wants to be here, especially right now when our nation has made it so difficult to come, and has been unwelcoming. So didn't get into details on what she was escaping from, I expect as I get to know her better I'll learn more, but she would only say that it was better than the alternative.

Also, my completely anecdotal and unscientific opinion is there are a lot more offensive players to go around than there are defensive players. So there are enough skill guys that even the Group of 5 teams can find some pretty good players on offense. But it's a lot harder to find defensive players - especially defensive linemen and cornerbacks - so it's a lot more difficult to get talent at those spots for the smaller schools. So that's another reason that I'm willing to give Chinander a chance to see what he can do with some better athletes. Obviously the competition will get better as well but I think the talent he has to work with on defense will be a much bigger step up than it will be on offense.

Strong batch of teams in the tournament for the B1G this year. Minny has a real shot at Omaha.

I’ll bet Coach Miles is happy! http://www.wowt.com/content/news/Two-key-Husker-seniors-return-to-basketball-team--483822281.html

I would say so. We beat Purdue who I believe beat Iowa and we had Northwestern on the ropes before langsdork and diaco brainfarted their way to an L. We actually looked pretty competitive against the badgers for a half, so yeah, the level of athlete Nebraska recruits and has on the field is definitely a cut above schools like Troy and Akron. The difference, as has been discussed, has been our predictable and largely ineffective scheme, poor preparation, repetition of poor habits, not to mention a lot of asinine play-calls, personnel decisions, and clock-management. Now, do we have the athletes to truly compete with the likes of osu and Penn state? Not yet.

I think those four years were a very good stretch. And I'm not saying that 2001 was a "bad" year. But I think the cracks were starting to show and maybe wasn't quite as good as it seemed. We had a lot of recruits from one of the best stretches of success in college football history and a quarterback who was perfect for our offense. Once those disappeared, so did our success. So I don't think it's a terrible stretch to say that a decent amount of the success in those four years was "in spite of"* Solich as opposed to because of Solich. * - I'm not saying Frank doesn't deserve any credit. I'm saying that the Husker Football Machine was running in such a way that the recruits we were getting and the assistants we had would likely have had similar success for 3-4 years with someone else as the head coach as well. The part where Frank hasn't been able to win a conference championship in 13 years in the MAC would seem to lend credence to the assertion that he's not as good of a coach as some would like to think. Also, an interesting historical footnote is that Crouch nearly quit the team - or did for a day - because he wasn't the starting QB. Crouch definitely deserves blame for a less-than-mature attitude about that but he did turn out to be correct in the end - he should have been the starter but wasn't. So there would also be some level of blame on the coaches for not evaluating properly. Had Crouch not come back, do the next four years turn out differently? And would that have changed the perception of Solich?

Honestly I’m kind of tired of people saying things like “it’s troy” when teams like that have been competitive with P5 teams for at least the past decade. How long is it going to take some of us to realize that there aren’t necessarily gimmes just bc it’s some school that is directional or small or something that isn’t steeped in tradition?

compare to johnMcCains tweet to the vets

I mean, come on. It doesn't take a genius to connect the dots here. There's only two dots. 1. Ivanka gets trademarks approved by Chinese government. 2. Trump suddenly shifts from combative towards China to helping a Chinese telecom designated as a U.S. NatSec risk. This is why you don't let a wealthy family clearly not divested from their business interests run your government.

How do you figure? He has a purple heart.

in other words.....why didn't obama protect you from me

Seriously. Rivalries, and trophies, should just happen. Paul bunyans axe, Floyd of rosedale. Bits of broken chair. Not some stupid grocery store promotion masquerading as a salute to heroism. I hate when things are forced. Which is why I dont see why we have to have Iowa be the rival. We shouldn't have a trophy game already. If it happens, great, but it does not have to be the closest team. Kansas State was not our rival just because they were the closest. OU was because of history. So give it 10 more years and see what happens.

One thing to consider is what conservatives are we talking about here? If we are talking about supporters of the current GOP, maybe there is a reason for the bias and feeling attacked. If you believe in Fox and our lyin' POTUS, then I really don't have sympathy for you feeling attacked. I have more sympathy for you being duped. To expound, reasonable conservatives on this board such as TG and BRB don't seem to feel under attack or feeling forgotten. Just in disgust of this terrible administation and its hurtful self-serving policies. Im surprised more conservatives out there aren't fed up with their party at this point. I would be embarrased to say these people represent my political views.

I don't think anyone is done a disservice by the news media. At the same time, I think "news" has changed. The media briefly reports "news", but then spends a majority of the time on commentary and opinion. In my social circles, I've heard less political discussion in the past year or two than anytime in recent memory.

Their problem is this victim mentality you detailed throughout your post. Its not about them, but they make it about then

2001 was pretty much The Eric Crouch Show. As much fun as he was to watch, it was hard not to notice that some things had slipped. I've often said that Jamal Lord's biggest 'flaw' was that he couldn't be a one-man offense like Crouch was. Of course, he shouldn't have needed to be a one-man offense, but once he took over, it became painfully clear just how far things had fallen. Honestly, Solich's biggest failing may have been the same as Riley's: both of them failed to take control. It's no secret that some of Osborne's assistants who stayed on never entirely treated Solich like The Man in Charge. And when he'd made his decision about Newcombe vs. Crouch, he ended up having to beg Crouch to come back instead of putting his foot down and saying his decision was final (or, you know, making the right call in the first place) (though there's still some who insist that Solich just drove up to Omaha for afternoon tea with the Crouch family). A good question is just how much had changed in 2003. He made some necessary changes to his staff, and they were probably more loyal to him than some of their predecessors. I'm curious as to how things were with the players, though - was Solich really the boss of the team at that point?

Another good one is the so-called attack on Christians' religious freedom. It's just another completely made up thing. What they want the freedom to do, when they are complaining about this, is to discriminate against others. And yet another is the attack on the constitution.

Those aren’t Sandals those a shower shoes or slides as my son calls them. Whoever said Van Halen only had 2 good albums is crazy. VH, VH2, Woman and Chidren First, and 1984 are good with DLR. 5150 and OU812 are good with Sammy.

If we had played them last year we would have gotten drubbed. We’re we signicantly more talented?

Good endurance, too.

Fun fact: the Obama administration did begin to investigate the Trump campaign, because who the f#&% wouldn't? Obama had extraordinarily convincing evidence that our #1 global adversary was secretly intervening in the American electoral process on behalf of a candidate beholden to a skeevy collection of Russian players. What's not to investigate? Is it any surprise that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies weighed in with the same conclusion? Well it turns out President Barack Obama DIDN"T promote further investigation of collusion because he thought THAT would unduly influence the election. I don't expect Trump to thank him for his restraint. But Obama was probably correct: it would have been perceived as a ploy to help Hillary, who he presumed would win regardless of Russian bots.

I laughed.

Real men don't wear sandals.

No

I keep going back to when he claimed he has sacrificed as much as soldiers killed and POWs have for this country because....you know....he’s a great businessman.

i think this fits this thread best. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/28/world/europe/uk-austerity-poverty.html?action=click&module=Ribbon&pgtype=Article

What is the evidence that the policy is/was lax, or that it's a problem? We're not currently doing nothing, we weren't doing nothing pre-Trump, and it's reduced steadily for years. My philosophy is that something needs to be shown to be a problem before we "fix" it, and we weren't letting immigrants in willy nilly before.

I didn't cherry-pick anything. Cherry-picking would only be considering certain games here and there. I chose a starting point and continued through the end of his career. But since you don't have any actual defense of your "one bad season" mantra you're stuck trying to quibble instead of presenting a defense of your own argument. That is just the point where the wins and losses started reflecting what was going on. We had won a lot of games in 2001 but we weren't exactly impressive doing it a lot of the time. We were only seven points ahead of an eventual 6-6 TCU team near the end of the third quarter (at home). We were seven points ahead of a 7-5 Texas Tech team until late in the fourth quarter (at home). We struggled with a 6-6 Kansas State team (at home). So, yes, we were able to win those games - with the last of the Osborne recruits - but we weren't always looking like a national championship contender. So, even if you continue to only focus on one thing - record - and ignore HOW we were getting to that record, are you are still going to say that 16-10 or 27-12 would be "borderline elite"?

No they didn’t. They were 43rd in the nation with 24.7 oppg. Only 4 teams scored above that mark on them, those being Memphis(2nd ppg), USF(9th), Auburn(18th), and FCS Austin Peay. Keep in mind they held Memphis(1st game) and SMU(14th ppg) well below their season average.

The key is to have a QB who executes his assigned tasks reliably. He needs to throw to the open receivers and read the defenses and get us in the right plays and execute the options within those plays accordingly. It will be great if the QB breaks longs runs etc but if he primarily carries out his part in the plays and lets the other playmakers catch, run and score, we'll be lightyears ahead of the past years. Tommie Armstrong made many individual plays and his running ability was obviously the reason he became a starter. We need a QB who can do the other things a fine QB needs to do if we are going to win the games we need to in order to compete with the top teams in the conference. The most important ingredient that the coach can add is to teach the players well enough that the have confidence in their ability to make more plays and overcome errors. Mistakes happen but if the players come right back out there and have faith they will make good plays then the team will succeed.

UCF was 105th in Time of Possession in 2017. https://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/705/p3 If you don't care for that style, you better find a way to get used to it because it is happening. We are not going to be milking the clock and running into the line for 3 yards over and over anymore. Times change.

If we never hear about Verduzco talking about The Strain, that will be a win. TBH, I'm just glad we finally have an actual quarterbacks coach. That's something that's been sorely lacking over the last decade or more.

Utterly infuriating.

I'd like to add this to the above, also from today. This is another staggeringly obvious example of Trump being completely dishonest. He's just straight lying to people & seeing who is misinformed enough to believe him. We as a nation must do better than someone who lies to us so frequently.

The very next day, you can see Sanchez's argument playing out in real time. And Maggie Haberman, one of the most visible & important media voices in the Trump era, still refuses to call them lies. Trump is just flat lying. There is no other explanation, and he's burned any benefit of the doubt long ago it's an honest mistake. He's lying for political benefit to turn people towards him and against the media, as he's done since day 1.

It's looking distressingly similar to Callahan's obsession with Cosgrove..................

I'd be very pleasantly surprised if Nebraska held Troy to 17 points. I wish Nebraska was catching them as the home opener as they're trying to replace a 4 yr starting QB and Brown is a helluva coach.