Excel

We don't want him. Hopefully he takes his butt home to Iowa and stays there.

His antics have turned him in to Bert.

A buddy of mine is a Missouri Highway Patrolman and he told me that multiple patrolmen have been noting the progress of a large luxury RV making its way up I49/I29 from the Arkansas border driving toward SW Iowa/Lincoln. It has stopped multiple times for fast-food. Obviously can't be certain but I think you guys may have a new HC.

Bama just turned the ball over.

Agreed, with Chavis or Pelini as DC he'd do quite well.

Lane wouldn't be a bad choice. It would piss off half of the SEC and be super entertaining.

Y'all gon die

His buyout will be the city of Lincoln. Like...if you want to fire him he gets Lincoln or a city of equal value.

Ladies and gentlemen, we present to you a Nebraska native, a former Husker under Tom Osborne, a man who has proven he can win a conference championship and even has an undefeated season in his record....put your hands together for your next Nebraska Head Football coach, signed on a $7 million 10 year contract...CRAAAAAAAAAAAIG BOHL!

I guess it all comes down to opinion then. I think that Fitz is much like Snyder...he's a great coach who is reaching the limits of what his program can achieve, you disagree and that's fine. Reasonable people can hold differing opinions on something like that. "We're just making it significantly hard on ourselves." From the outside looking in it's pretty clear what's going on...the fans', and by extension probably the movers and shakers in the program, expectations don't match reality. I see it every time I venture in to the Husker Football forum. Fans seem to get hung up way too much on recruiting the best guys and stacking up your class rankings vs. opponents. Many fans seem to feel entitled to wins just because the Huskers are taking the field, I really don't understand it. It annoyed me when UNL first entered the conference and it's only diminished slightly in the last six years. Some fans think Nebraska is still just "one good coach" away from being Miami or Alabama but Nebraska will never have the advantages Texas, USC, LSU, or the Florida and Alabama teams have in weather, fertile recruiting grounds, attractive locations, etc. UNL don't even have the population advantages PSU, OSU, and UM have. The Texas pipeline is dead. The future of the program, if you want to win, is the Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan State model. It shouldn't be that foreign as you helped build parts of it, as did Hayden Fry, as did Barry Alvarez. Fans need to quit thinking they're entitled to anything because of something their parent's generation did, it clearly permeates to the team. I don't know enough about Frost's philosophy to tell if he'll make that happen but from a cursory glance at his record he does scare me so maybe that's a good thing for you all.

Fitz is easily NU's best coach in the modern era and the most consistent. Modern era coaches are below in blue. Winning three OT games in a row is not just a "coin flip", there's something there. You implied that they were garbage or somehow unworthy with the all caps. "Just that it's NORTHWESTERN." How else can that be taken? In the past few years this Northwestern team has beaten Nebraska twice and Penn State once (albeit in down years), and beaten ranked Wisconsin, Stanford, Michigan State, and Pittsburgh teams. They also held top 10 Wisconsin and Ohio State teams to single digit leads in losses in that period. Northwestern is real. They will win the West eventually if Fitz stays there and continue to knock someone off every year. If Nebraska continues to think it's "Just" NU you'll continue to struggle with them no matter who your coach is. I remain comfortable calling them extremely well-coached. The way they recruit, develop players, scheme, and practice is all better than most, if not the vast majority of programs. They're not the best with managing time outs, and important play-calls but that'll only improve with time. Overall they're extremely well coached. You take what Fitz is doing and plug him in to Nebraska and you'll win the West half the time.

If it makes you all feel any better Iowa is losing by two scores to Purdue at Kinnick.

Compared to the rest of the division, the conference, and Northwestern teams of the past I would say they are extremely well coached, I'd put them as tied with Iowa and Michigan State as far as best coaching of players and just one step below Wisconsin...and that's in a conference with four programs that are noted for that. Across the country I'm not sure of too many schools that can do that; K-State, pre-Big XII TCU, Mississippi St before maybe 5 years ago, and the service academies. That's all that comes to mind. I'm not talking gameday coaching, in that arena they're average. You're right that they don't have the talent but that is only a fraction of the game. Nebraska has the talent advantage in the West but look what a difference coaching makes. Both Michigan and Ohio State had huge talent advantages on Michigan State and Iowa but it's a similar story. Raw talent only gets you so far. The all caps thing did kind of come off as an unfair dig to me because, while Northwestern may never be a powerhouse, they routinely play West teams hard and close and are good for at least one upset a year. We (fans of other decent B1G programs) need to stop perpetuating the idea that they're some kind of garbage team, if only so it hurts less when they play us close or beat us.

Northwestern is a smart, scrappy, extremely well coached team. Give credit where it’s due.

I'd call them clown-houses including AfD. I would say that they're right wing, and if "far-right" didn't imply Fascism I'd probably use that term because they are just that, farther right than the traditional conservative parties in those countries...but I do not consider them fascists. What would you say about them? Alternative right might be a good term for those parties too if it didn't also have all the Richard Spencers, and Channers, and Milos attached to it. You mean kind of a EU-centric Pro-Europeanism. Yea sort of, in the sense that many media outlets in the US take their lead on that issue from their European counterparts who are pretty pro-EU but I don't think there's any kind of conscious or orchestrated Pro-EU campaign by media outlets here. There are discussions related to Europeanization like immigration and some economic aspects but the broader topic doesn't seem to get discussed much...outside of Brexit. Not that it matters because I'm an American...but I'm pro-EU. European integration is good for everyone most people. Common market, Schengen, Common Defense, these are vast improvements over the old system.

I never said "the liberal media." I talked about media and liberals but not "the liberal media". I don't mean to be a nit-picky jerk but the distinction is important. I feel like knapp and you are trying to edge me in to some kind of cuckoo conservative box which I'm not in...I'm not saying that there's some massive liberal media conspiracy. A lot of this is the media being lazy which happens, or just accepting what politicians and authorities are telling them blindly. ....well I don't believe that. They're not trying to dissolve Poland or anything, I'm not saying that. They, mostly the EU but liberals in media as well, are trying to limit Poland's independence and bring them, along with many other newer members, in to lockstep with Brussels on several key issues through censures and inquires and potentially greater steps on a variety of issues including immigration. They're probably within their rights to do so, those countries voluntarily joined the union, but it is against the wishes of at least many of the Poles that were out today and other Eastern Europeans. Those things are fact. My opinion is that some of these same people are vastly overplaying the "Nazi Problem" and labeling many conservatives and euro-skeptics as Nazis and Fascists when they are not. I'm speculating when I try to imagine why they're doing it, I offered up three reasons: 1. Unintentional: They cannot tell the difference between nationalist and patriotic symbols and traditions and fascist ones, and to be fair this can be a hard thing to do, the line is hard to draw because fascists frequently appropriate such symbols. 2. Unintentional and Subconscious: They need their enemy to be big and powerful to motivate themselves and make them feel better about what they're doing. This is a pretty common thing in War Propaganda ("BEAT BACK THE HUN") and even in Sports. 3. Intentional and Malicious: They label conservatives as fascists to sideline them and make them seem less appealing to moderates, much like how all Democrats are communists according to some conservatives. In Germany they did it with AfD who were apparently all Nazis, while the actual Nazi-ish NPD barely got any votes. I think those are all reasonable explanations if you accept my original opinion. They're not some "wacko-hur-de-dur all liberals are evil stupid Commies" explanations. . It doesn't have to. I don't think euro-skeptics and anti-immigration folks in Europe much care about what American liberals think of them so I don't care much about that. ...but for the record I don't support welcoming immigrants and refugees to Europe because there are better options available. I just got back from Kuwait, lots of Pakistanis and Indians there, Filipinos and Egyptians too but I never met a Syrian or Afghan. Most of the Gulf is the same way....but that is a completely different topic and I'm guessing there's a thread for that in this forum and my opinion of European Politics means jack-all as an American.

I wouldn't know as I'm not a liberal and people like Roy Moore are why I no longer feel comfortable identifying as a conservative. If you can find people you feel are more representative of the wider liberal opinion on all of this I would welcome it but it would not dismiss the Kohns and Kings.

She's a liberal media personality and one of the tweets posted above. She said "Tens of thousands of neo Nazis showed up to march in Poland today and chant for an “all white Europe.”" which is casting a pretty wide net...and pretty much what I said liberals were doing with this issue. I speculated on why they're doing it but I'm not an authority and I'm not a mod. Post about Trump if you want, there's nothing I can do about it.

It's not a caricature, look at what Sally Kohn said, It's pretty spot on.... but that actually has nothing to do with why I don't want to talk about Trump. Here are the reasons: 1. I'm afraid the thread will get derailed 2. I don't feel he's super relevant to these events...but I welcome your perspective on that (not being facetious) 3. I'm a Federal Employee so I generally abstain from talking about the President. I've tried my best with this one as I did with his predecessor. 4. Trump fatigue

Wasn't sure who you were talking about until I checked which tweets I linked and saw I'd used one from that Jack guy...which would explain why you brought him up. I wanted to find four tweets that disagreed on the issue or saw the march differently to provide some color to the thread. I searched Poland on twitter and found the first four from largish people. Like I said, I didn't know who that guy was until an hour ago and none of my opinions come from him. I also don't particularly care for Sally Kohn or Shaun King but I wanted to throw out multiple perspectives. Lazy work I know but no, nothing comes from him. I've said before that I don't doubt there were Fascists and Nazis at the march today, or that they organized some of the marches that attracted large amounts of people. But I think it's alarmist to label the tens of thousands that showed up as members or fellow travelers one step away from supporting genocide or call the whole celebration a fascist event like Kohn is. They're building up a Nazi boogeyman for their own political reasons.

I deserve this for the title, I did say all things. It is good sausage.

I meant a Trump invention or whatever. I get that you're saying that there's no such thing but you should know what I mean. I don't want to get in to a conversation about him or make this about him. If this thread goes that direction I will bow out.

No it's not. Trump may have said it but it is not a Trumpism. ...and this is super illustrative of the problem here.