bolshoifish

Do you know what your talking about at all? Ganz IS Taylor's mentor and coach. Similar? Ganz is probably the best passing QB we have had play for us. Great player, great GA, and has been doing a great job so far. Hmm.. I'll be sure to put in the sarcasm symbol next time (on the last part). Ganz did have a lot of passing yards, but his passes were generally much more high risk then the average passing qb. I don't think I'm alone when in holding my breath everytime Ganz would throw due to him trying to make a play on every play, even when it wasn't there. He is doing a good job, it can't be a bad thing that he is in constant communication with Taylor, but for example, on the approach to the line of scrimmage side line passes when the coverage is soft, they seem to have a very similar risk prone attitude.

No one else finds Ganz's high risk passing and Taylor's high risk passing eerily similar? I'm sure it's just a coincidence, it's not like he's his coach or anything...

It's one of many. That's the problem. Just to get this straight, if we win out and prior to bowl are 11-2 (which is a very real possibility at this point), this year was a failure because we didn't dominate in every win and Bo didn't satisfy an unreal expectation on sideline demeanor? I don't think that is what any of us are saying. I'd love an 11-2 season. However I am not going to let that mask what we know is a problem, and that is discipline. Continuing with the status quo will not get us to the next level, luck will run out. I don't see the connection between Bo's behavior and the teams undisciplined nature. It is bizarre to say the least.. clearly this team holds itself accountable for the mistakes: just look at Eric Martin's reaction after getting that boneheaded facemask penalty. They are all trying to play well for each other, but I do agree that week after week shows it is a problem. I really don't now how you fix something like putting Marlowe in because he has always been your sure hand at fielding punts and watch him drop one (I find it hard to believe that the shoulder issues caused the drop).

It's one of many. That's the problem. Just to get this straight, if we win out and prior to bowl are 11-2 (which is a very real possibility at this point), this year was a failure because we didn't dominate in every win and Bo didn't satisfy an unreal expectation on sideline demeanor?

These things happen EVERY SATURDAY on MANY MANY teams. Tuberville hit the headphones off an assistant today.. i don't even want to think what these boards would degenerate to if Bo did that. So, last week we complain about the OC that has us in the top 10 on most offensive stats, this week a sideline skirmish ruins this win for many fans. Maybe we should just fire Bo and bring Tom back? Is that the only way to make you happy? (There are issues to discuss about this game, but the sideline skirmish is the most ridiculous one).

Haven't seen this posted elsewhere, but I thought some of you might find this interesting. An offensive lineman from Oregon takes a look at the Penn St. matchup and the state of our lines. http://www.sbnation....-ol-carson-york

I do think that most of the "bone-headed" playcalling Beck does is a direct result the players not showing they can consistently run certain packages. For instance, I've seen a lot of stops on third and short when Beck calls runs up the middle. I do think he has just decided that he won't let Martinez's limitations as a thrower influence how he wants to call a game (I'm not bagging on Martinez, just pointing out that he still has a lot to learn regarding the pass game). As far as Tyler Moore.. it probably would help to have him around. It's not a given that he would be starting, but he is talented and it never hurts to have more tackles in the rotation.

Funny you should mention that... I was going to mention in my original post that I'd hate to see what MSU fans would do if presented with an Neb-A&M-esque performance by the refs. Were Nebraska fans whining in 09-10.. yes... but we were whining about 1) subjects that nearly destroyed B12 (and certainly reshaped the landscape of college football) 2) being subjected to an unprofessional incompetent buffoon of a commissioner. If Beebe had a shred of integrity, the whining would of been reduced. As it stood, it was unclear if Beebe would take time to arrange the reffing of the A&M game. I like to think no.. but that guy did some strange stuff that year. We? Probably you. I wasn't whining. Any good team will overcome penalties, we simply beat our self in the TAMU game. We had opportunities to put points on the field, we didn't. Let go of the past, it is almost 2013. Officiating didn't almost cost us the game against MSU. If you want to look at it that way, it also helped us win. The HUSKERS left a lot of points on the field, and the defense was non existent in the rush attack. We are to blame it was so close. They played dirty, but its not like we didn't have a player out there making us look like buffoons (Stafford). Flipping off the MSU sideline and grabbing his crotch towards the fans is not any better than their dirty tactics. My mistake, Nebraska collective - HuskerNationNick.. oh wait, apparently you don't understand all the uses of we... as in "We voted in the president".. not meaning that you actually voted for the president.

Funny you should mention that... I was going to mention in my original post that I'd hate to see what MSU fans would do if presented with an Neb-A&M-esque performance by the refs. Were Nebraska fans whining in 09-10.. yes... but we were whining about 1) subjects that nearly destroyed B12 (and certainly reshaped the landscape of college football) 2) being subjected to an unprofessional incompetent buffoon of a commissioner. If Beebe had a shred of integrity, the whining would of been reduced. As it stood, it was unclear if Beebe would take time to arrange the reffing of the A&M game. I like to think no.. but that guy did some strange stuff that year.

I have to say, all the whining going on up in Michigan these days is really disappointing. Michigan's argument about how they would of won if Dennard wasn't injured is akin to a junk bond investor bragging about beating the average if his chips all fall right. Guess what, you had four years to build up a team around Dennard, but you didn't.. the only one to blame is themselves. With Michigan State.. wow.. cherry picking bad penalties as a justification for why you should of won is just ridiculous. Guess what, hitting a defenseless offensive player on an interception is against the rules.. in fact, the rule is called the Sapp rule in the NFL. Even if we getting rid of penalties in the game and giving them points, by my estimates, we still win by a point (or if we go to overtime, by more). For example, taking 4 off of MSU's score to counter the late hit penalty, but adding the 7 for the pick 6 still leaves them in the hole by a point. GET OVER IT.. babies. While I'm at it.. Nebraska would of crushed Michigan in 97. That is all.

I love how we are hearing quotes of "this is what happens when you hire a high school football coach". Yet, 1) some of the most successful football coaches today started in highschool (e.g., Art Briles, Frank Solich), 2) when I think highschool, i think of a coach who finds a successful play and runs it till it doesn't work anymore, i.e., checkers vs. chess, 3) our OC received the praise of Urban Meyer last year (during a game he called).. he referred to the playcalling as "dynamic" and was very flattering. On a different note, on that sweep, to clear the line of scrimmage we had to bring the house. If you want to blame anybody for Beck not calling more run plays on short yardage, blame Cotton and the line since they haven't shown over the last several games that they can handle the responsibility.

And Ball would get more carries if he didn't share carries with White, so the argument goes both ways. I think the biggest problem with Bennett's argument is the split carrying point and the Wilson/Martinez comparison. Both guys have exactly the same amount of carries, and both guys have split the carries with other players. So...well...DUH Bennett. They both split carries so why did you even bring up this point? Second...I think having Wilson as a quarterback does a lot more for your running back than having Martinez. I truthfully don't understand how loading the box to stop Martinez frees up running lanes for Burkhead. I think Ball is better than Martinez, but Rittenberg makes another couple of good points. Wisconsin's o-line is better and they haven't faced as good of defenses as Nebraska has (including Wisconsin's). OP, the blog doesn't suck, and Bennett doesn't either. The only reason Bennett doesn't do as well as Rittenberg in this argument is because he utilizes a pointless split-carry argument and thinks that running quarterbacks make running the football easier. Your right, it doesn't suck as long as they stick to their lunchtime links. I agree that Rittenberg may be ok, but Bennett.. oh yes, he sucks.

And Ball would get more carries if he didn't share carries with White, so the argument goes both ways. Exactly, its a bogus argument. You have two backs that have carried the same amount of times.. how does splitting reps have anything to do with what they accomplished on the given reps, and what they would accomplish if given more?

Yep, I knew we were in trouble with Bennett when he touted the SEC over B1G in his B1G recap on a day that Auburn more or less lost to Utah St. I'm not saying that B1G is comparable, but he used the Alabama-Penn St. victory as it's sole evidence. By his logic, if Wisconsin beats a mid level SEC team: B1G wins the conference battle!

It's not that he chose Ball. It's the logic that he used to do so. It's also a reoccuring theme: they take opposing views on a matter just to have opposing views, not because there is a good argument. I agree, Ball is good.. but a 5th grader can come up with a better argument than that. The only worthwile ESPN blogger I have seen was the guy Ubben replaced (from some San Antonio paper).