zeWilbur

NCAA just needs to grant a waiver. Happens a surprising amount of the time.

I get the husker/huskie misspelling but he spelled it wrong and has the wrong emoji. Did our mascot change to a corndog and nobody told me?!?

They are raw from a technique standpoint and not great at identifying what the defender is trying to do until it is too late. Hopefully they guess correctly. Here is a something that might help. 13 minutes total but minutes 1-4 do a nice job demonstrating high level concepts for off/def lineman techniques and how it is a chess game. Whole thing is pretty good though. Watch this, then your clips again, and it will be pretty apparent what is going on.

Look into the Brave browser. I haven't seen an ad in years.

I learned that 'Big Mick Energy' lasts about 10 minutes

The tagging off was the result of getting a lot of injuries early in Frost's tenure. Apparently that change never went away.

I'd be concerned about him growing too tall for football. But you are right, both parents are shot putting royalty with multiple world championships and Olympic medals/appearances between them.

1996 draft pick "wide receiver" ?!? That o-line really was ridiculously talented

Good news everybody. With the realignment it's just a matter of time until Ohio State is announced as back on the Nebraska schedule for 2024/2025! And here I was worried they wouldn't find a way to screw us for a few years...

My guess is that the Houston facilities are just not good enough compared to the rest of the Big 12. When your coach donates $1M he clearly wants something to move in that direction.

So did Louise Pound grow corn, eat it in record breaking fashion, or what?

Maybe. They have 15 3 stars. No 4 or 5 stars. They just tend to sign a bunch of kids early.

I think we've always done that. Just seems more prevalent lately as we are been hitting up loaded high schools. Just my take

How the alternate color turf runs North/South in the stadium but the backdrop is West Stadium?

"Jones' father Dave Jones played at Nebraska and he has grown up in the state and following the Husker program."

You are right if you only go off what you mentioned, but there is more information available. He was featured on a Netflix series called QB1: Beyond the lights. That show follows around 3 high school QBs their senior year documentary style. That showed Rattler as a VERY talented prima donna with significant character issues that divided locker rooms. Numerous stories over his duration at OU indicate his character has not changed. Combine that with only seeing him play terribly in the NU game while surrounded with an extremely talented supporting cast would point to him being overrated. It seems like you don't agree but it isn't obvious that the juice is worth the squeeze.

Wrong Wildcats

Dang. You might be onto something. I figured they would just try to bury TO alive, also at the 50 yard line, to absorb his power and help get Frost over the hump.

Agreed. We went from a nice rhythm based offense all second half to playing as slow as possible in that drive and failing immediately, then switching into an air-raid hurry-up and took that mindset into overtime. No idea why we never made it back to what was generally successful all game.

I did use historical vaccine as an ambiguous term, sorry. I meant that since we aren't rolling out shiny new vaccines for new illnesses ever year, modern society only has the concept of what it looks like at the end when have things essentially figured out with all the data we are going to get. Potential implementations for the sake of getting to the end as fast as we can often ignore what happen along the way. It appears to me that is the lynch pin to this whole scenario. People with concerns that can only be assuaged with enough data can't be convinced until long-term data is available. People who don't need that much data/convincing are able to reap the benefits sooner but take that trade with the potential costs. I see the disconnect now. I am not in any way saying to not have a strategy unless it is perfect. I am pointing out that the more aggressive/extreme the strategy the more it needs to be justified. Let's use your example. Having free testing/vaccines, education, and quarantining are akin to your speed limits. Low ask and not hard to get people to go along. But when someone in the school decides that isn't enough so they are going to ban traffic with 1/4 mile of the school. Including staff and student drop-off. Much bigger ask but maybe you could implement that as a strategy with a good enough argument. People just want to 'feel' safe more than anything. Regardless, it would certainly require a greater argument than getting the initial speed limit restrictions. That effort would be hard enough but when someone advocates for that policy to be mandated by a person without a background in civil engineering, logistics, child health, etc., it is even harder. Let's say it is the school janitor is this mystery hero. He truly believes he is doing the right thing. All he needs to do is stop being a coward and attack any car he sees near the school. Any who disagree should just shut up and do what they are told. If they don't like it they can go to another school. That is an extreme/ridiculous example but people are advocating for a football coach, or athletic director, mandating an invasive medical procedure for participation. This could be a college coach but it could just as easily be at the pop warner level. It isn't anywhere near his scope of responsibilities but that shouldn't stop him. He just needs to stop being a coward. If you don't get how saying that out loud might sound crazy to someone then you I don't think you understand the other side of the argument. I don't expect anyone to agree with any side. Everyone has a different world view and everyone is wrong. Forcing people to live according to your world view is just as wrong as you being forced to live by someone else's.

Agreed. For some people, abandoning your principles isn't a choice.

I never said that vaccines don't work. I pointed out that the current 'vaccine' does not work as we are used to with historical vaccines so we can't treat the expectations the same. If you get a polio vaccine then you 100% don't get polio and are incapable of passing on polio. Not so with covid. If you get a covid vax (picked pfizer for timely relevance but others are in alignment) you are looking at a ~90% resistance for catching and ~85% less likely to have it be a serious case if you do catch it. Both of those are great things and warrant recommending getting the vax. However, the viral shedding (contagiousness) is the same amongst vaxxed and un-vaxxed. So, my point was that mandating something to get a result MIGHT be warranted if you could guarantee the outcome. At this point you can't guarantee that a fully-vaxxed team couldn't have an outbreak or that any outbreak can only be caused by an un-vaxxed player. Having Frost "stop being a coward" and enforce a mandate with just that information is a tough sell on its own. Combining that with the variety of reasons someone won't/can't get the vax and the case isn't clear. Link where I pulled the vax numbers from: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/Pfizer-BioNTech.html

That level of authoritarianism might be justified if it completely kept you from catching it or spreading it, but it doesn't. Until that silver bullet exists you won't be able to know who on the team was/wasn't actually spreading anything. I struggle to find the rationality and common sense in forcing something to happen wouldn't guarantee a result while increasing risk in other areas. But maybe we just differ on that.

Does anyone else think this whole thing is just a conspiracy to redo the scheduling so we have to play Ohio State for another 6 consecutive years?

Playing Power 5 teams will always look better than the lower conference teams in terms of strength of schedule. - Sure, if you have the same record. But an 11-1 team with a win over podunk state has ALWAYS gotten the nod over a 10-2 team that didn't play podunk state. It all evens out - Nope. If the Pac 12 and B1G schools are both based on 7 home games, which they are, then it can't 'even out'. Every school has to take a hit. The only way to 'offset' having 6 home games one year is to have 8 the next. That isn't going to happen in this kind of a deal. We have already seen that going to a 9 game conference schedule in the B1G led to teams schedules two podunk games a year on the schedule to try and make up for it. In 2018 (don't have 2019 data) NU made about $5 million per home game. If they paid $1mil to the 'sacrificial' school then they are netting $4mil in that game. Technically, anything less than $5Mil is going to be profitable. Doing that twice a year would net an extra $8Mil for NU. Going to a home/home series to replace those two games would cost NU about 3.3Mil/year. Current - 4+4=8M Projected - (0 -.3(travel costs) )+5(not paying non P5 school)=4.7M Unless the media rights deal changes then this is a negative for most schools. Even then it may still be a net negative as all games are already baked into the cake and the new slice to offset this change has to come from somewhere. Maybe it can come from some synergy with the PAC and B1G but I doubt it. If the replacement non-P5 game every year is worth an extra $6/7mil, split amongst both teams playing, then it is certainly feasible to do that and break even. That would require the Pac12 having a media contract similar to the B1G. Not impossible but history has shown that isn't realistic to expect. You are correct, in the current model hundreds of millions would be saved over a long enough timeline. But, at the same time, billions would be lost. All for the privilege of not playing non-P5 schools. I just see it as stepping over dollars so you can pick up dimes.