Leaderboard

Seems like he missed the most obvious one. Nebraska is 23-29 since Mike Nobler was let go.

What is really stupid is that this discussion is in this thread. How in the hell is this a "left or right" issue? Why is discussing it and making sure the women are appropriately compensated some how some extreme liberal view point. When the hell did it become some noble conservative view that women wanting to make sure they are appropriately paid are way out of line and destroying the essence of everything that is good about America? That is what is mind blowing.

I think we still leave the Big 12 even if we win in 2009. The writing was on the wall with how Texas and OU were scheming behind the scenes. That would not have been any different had we won. For me, it's clearly the firing of Frank. If that doesn't happen, we don't hire Callahan. If we don't hire Callahan, the crappy, lazy, pro mentality isn't instilled into the program that has taken a very long time to get out.

And that’s where it totally baffles my mind as a historically conservative person. Why is your opinion considered the “conservative” opinion? you admit they should be paid equally. Just because they agreed to the bargaining, doesn’t mean that the issue still isn’t a valid issue, like you admit to....yet claim it’s a faux issue. (Which you actually contradict yourself) Why do conservative talking heads proclaim immediately that these women are destroying everything that is good in America just because they are claiming they should be paid more. Is it because they’re women? A gay woman? Why do conservatives jump immediately to that opinion instead of saying.....let’s look at it and see if something needs changed? Or, is it because they criticized the dear leader?

You honestly think you can compare the integrity of Bernie & Trump? I get that the taglines are essentially the same. But I trust Sanders a hell of a lot more than Trump to actually go about it in an honest manner. It was clear to anyone with a functioning brain who Trump was going in 2016: He was a con man selling empty words.

Maybe the real question should be, What if Pederson had never been hired. He's really one the one that screwed the pooch. He came in with one goal, get rid of Frank. It didn't matter what Frank did that final year, he was going to be fired. He comes out cleans house with his staff and his team wins 10 games (9 before firing) and idiot Pederson still fires him. The guy was simply an idiot and couldn't handle the position....ps.....this firing wasn't the only really bad thing he did in the AD department.

If he plays in every game, he’ll be considered the best QB in the country this time next year.

I agree. The Callahan era were lost years that we'll never get back. I'd take 3-4 more mediocre years with Frank if it would guarantee that neither Callahan or Riley coached here.

They have him as 3rd in the Big 10. I'm know I'm biased. But, I wouldn't take the other two above him. Two guys who couldn't win the starting job at their previous schools (until injuries to the starter in Patterson's case). Have yet to show dominance in their current programs. Don't get me wrong. I think both Patterson and Fields are good QBs. I just don't think they have shown enough to definitely put them above 2AM.

And...there's always a tweet

I don't know one iota about this guy... But does it bother anyone else that EVERY ONE of these people look like comic book villains?

Because Conservatives are playing a political game where, in order to win, someone has to lose. In this case (and many others on this board), white evangelical males would win, while everyone else loses and suffers as a result. Conversely, Liberals are trying to play a win/win game, where even if someone succeeds, the society in which they are a part of succeeds as well, and standards are raised (a rising tide floats all boats, and such). That includes fair pay for same work, regardless of differences, and a safety net that provides someone the opportunity to bounce back after a fall so they have another chance at 'winning', but they don't fall so far down that they're a political 'loser' in the process. That's why Conservatives get so butthurt when it comes to treating women, minorities, immigrants, asylum seekers, homosexuals, and other persecuted groups as equals--without a political loser, how can they declare themselves a winner and feel good about themselves? Plus, respect and integrity are limitless--conservatives act as though letting these marginalized groups to the table is going to reduce the respect and integrity they have, when adding them to the table would do no such thing.

There's upsides and downsides to him just like any other candidate. But one of the distinct upsides would be disrupting the ruling caste of people which seem to perpetually run Washington. In a way that is far less toxic and damaging than Trump has done. Perhaps we'd fill important positions with - gasp - good, qualified people.

Stuff like this makes me wish someone like Bernie would win. I'm tired of the same small circles of people rubbing elbows and primarily concerned with having each other's backs while the rest of us get f#cking breadcrumbs. You know, busting up the same old Washington cliques, like Trump claimed he was going to do, before he just decided to mostly leave things the same and pump in his own corrupt cronies.

The biggest reason for the move to the Big Ten was the fear of Nebraska being left out of the rapidly moving conference realignment movement at the time. OU and Texas were pining for the Pac 12, and Nebraska was potentially going to be left holding the bag in a dead conference. Osborne and (whether you like it or not) Perlman did the right thing by proactively seeking an alternate home, and it wasn't based on the ending of a single football game.

I'm a little flabbergasted that this isn't a clear runaway consensus for #3. Every other option requires what ifs and buts. Bubba Starling, Carl Crawford and Taylor Martinez are individual players that could have made some level of impact.....or may not have. #4 could have had interesting repercussions but still it's only one game and a lot of assumptions have to be made for the longer term affect. But Frank getting canned when and how he did, the results of that are verifiable facts that take no imagination to determine. Just think where this program would be without ever knowing the names Callahan, Pelini or Riley.

This way he can just have yes men and bypass a vote.

#4 by a landslide If we won the title in 2009, Nebraska never leaves the Big 12. Nebraska never leaving the Big 12 means Bo's defense still looks solid against pass happy spread teams in 2010 and on. Bo Pelini could still be our coach in 2019, maybe even with a conference title win or two more.

I went through a period when I left the Republican party and wondered...."what the hell am I"? I spent some time thinking I was a Libertarian. Then, when I started following some politicians who claimed to be Libertarians.....Nope. The idea sounds good and I think it's good to look at issues form a Libertarian view from time to time. But, in practice, a pure Libertarian way of governing just doesn't work in my mind.

The equal pay issue for soccer is not as cut and dried as a lot of people want to make it out to be. There is nothing wrong with the discussion and I have no problem with the team lobbying for their side. People who don't think it's an issue and don't want it discussed are just looking like idiots. I've tried to read up on the issue and, quite frankly, it's very difficult to get good info all in one spot that's well organized. It's like reporters who are reporting on it failed the class on data organization or something. Anyway, the way I see it, there are two parts to this: A) What the team gets paid from FIFA when they advance through the tournament and ultimately win. Right now, the revenue that FIFA makes off of women's soccer is much less than the men's WC. So, in my mind, it's not out of line that the payouts from FIFA through the tourney would be less for women. FIFA revenue from Women's WC 2015 = $73 million = players got 13% FIFA revenue from Men's WC 2010 = $4 billion = players got 9% LINK and.... B) What the team earns from US Soccer. The US women's team brings in slightly more money than the men's team. This is where they should be getting equal or better pay than the men. 2016 - 2018 US Soccer revenue from women = 50.8 million US Soccer revenue from men = 49.9 million But, it's still more complicated than it seems. LINK

another one to add is if Taylor Martinez was born a year earlier or possibly if Pelini had burned his redshirt.

2 and 5 CC would have dominated in CFB TM not hurt...was unstoppable. He will eventually get the praise he has rightfully earned because the dork crowd that loved to make fun of his arm motion (even though he completed like 64% of his passes) and the super dorks that made fun of his interviews (from the basement of their grandmas house) will find someone new to pick on.

Of those 5 choices, #3 Pederson doesn't fire Solich definitely has the biggest affect. Everything else is only dealing with one player or one game whereas that one caused huge program upheaval.

But who will the parents yell at when timmy gets called out on strikes? Also...I am pretty sure this is going to be the script for Short Circuit 3. "Johnny 5...call Ball 4" "You suck Johnny 5!" "Johnny 5...alive!"

The incredible thing about that team, and this was highlighted in the megathread at the time, was how well that team stayed on message all year. Their player interviews sounded like the coaches interviews. That happens because they’re getting a clear, consistent message every day. That’s something the players love about Coach Frost is they know what they’re getting. I really thought last year, despite the losses, we saw some of that. I thought the team weathered the storm of expectations well last year, even if the results took longer than anyone wanted. That team was still trying to have fun, coaches were still being creative. That got them through it until the dam broke and the wins came. I dont worry about the team handling external expectations or hype because no matter how big it gets, their internal standards are higher. Where the expectations can become a problem is when they’re judged by expectations that grow faster than they do. Some of these predictions are in that territory. Certainly a 10-2 season or a top ten season is possible, but it’s quite speculative based on the experience level of a roster that has turned over this quickly.

I don't think they have the talent to finish in the top 10. At least not this year. Unless Adrian Martinez has a Cam Newton at Auburn type year. I think this year is the stepping stone to a loaded team in 2020.

By that logic shouldn't the male reporters also require a female escort so that there's no opportunity of false accusations of having a homosexual affair?

I don’t care about your rationalizations. It’s not okay and it’s downright sexist and disgusting for him to require a female reporter to be accompanied by a male in order for her to be allowed. If you disagree with that there’s nothing for us to discuss. False accusations are so rare it’s f#&%ing stupid to do it for that purpose and it’s not a good enough reason to be a sexist asshat. The keeping honest people honest argument is bulls#!t. You do that by not being alone with someone you’re attracted to. What this a$$h@!e is doing is far different from that.

Nobody reads your posts because they are too long.

Sam Ehlinger as a top 3 QB is laughable.

It's possible by the end of this season there will only be 4 SR starters total...so yeah, 2020 could be okay.

Technically I do have 20-20 vision. Or at least I did the last time I got my driver's license renewed.

Welcome to the dark side

Oh for f#&%s sake. Trump wouldn't know how to treat someone with respect if he was forced to.

Well, they gotta repeat what their talking heads have told them to say.

So, one more day for suggestions, and so far, we have 7 consensus teams picked (teams in seed order): #1: 1983 #2: 1993 #3: 1982 #4: 1999 #5: 1996 #6: 2009 #7: 1984 After those 7, there is an 9 way tie between 2010, 2000, 1913, 1915, 1980, 1981, 1965 and 1978. If no consensus is reached between these last 9, I'll pick the last team based on end-of-season poll rankings.

If Crawford picks football I still think Solich gets fired but it wouldn't have been for at least another few years as you would've had 2 years of Crawford at QB in '02 and '03. Would've been interesting to see how a Solich/Pelini mix would've worked out. NU definitely avoids the entire Callahan era...

Committed to Stanford.

Just to repeat, this is because Obama has more followers than he has. Our snowflake in chief is f#&%ing whining about his # of social media followers. It’s hilarious to picture how his sheep would have reacted to any Democrat acting this way.

Well that's just not at all true, but I realize at times progressives cannot resist hyperbole and cutting down anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with them.

Thats not Phil Steeles win projections, he is just tweeting the betting lines Caesars Palace has put out for teams he likes this year. He predicted us at 10 regular season wins.

All you have to do is look at the tie-knots to know Scott Frost runs a tighter ship than Riley.

Well that’s kinda sad! I found it was kind of a shortcut emoji for identifying the pompous douchebags on the board.

The 1983 team was probably better than three of our national championship teams, and would still be in the GOAT discussion for all of college football if not for a single play.