Rochelobe

1 minute ago, Redux said:

I feel like I'm watching the Inmates playing in the first half of the Longest Yard

Truly a performance worthy of their special "Blackshirts" uniform.

Just now, huskerfaninbuckeyehell said:

This team is just dumb 

No discipline.  Each week it is like they are a newborn football baby that has to relearn everything about football. No ability to build on what they do in previous weeks.  Sandlot football at its finest.  Unfortunately, sandlot football will not give you consistent success in a physical and disciplined conference like the Big Ten.

CDC Report released today on effects of mandated mask ordinances vs non-mandated counties.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6947e2.htm?s_cid=mm6947e2_w

This data is for Kansas from the time period June 1 to August 23.  It looks at the rates of cases across counties in Kansas before/after adoption of a mask mandate (in 24 counties) vs those that did not adopt a mask mandate (81 counties).

Quote

As of August 11, 24 (23%) Kansas counties had a mask mandate in place, and 81 did not. Mandated counties accounted for two thirds of the Kansas population (1,960,703 persons; 67.3%)*** and were spread throughout the state, although they tended to cluster together. Six (25%) mandated and 13 (16%) nonmandated counties were metropolitan areas.^††† Thirteen (54%) mandated counties and seven (9%) nonmandated counties had implemented at least one other public health mitigation strategy not related to the use of masks (e.g., limits on size of gatherings and occupancy for restaurants). During June 1–7, 2020, the 7-day rolling average of daily COVID-19 incidence among counties that ultimately had a mask mandate was three cases per 100,000, and among counties that did not, was four per 100,000 

So, before the mask mandates were adopted (during July), the bolded text shows what the rate in the 24 counties that ultimately adopted a mask mandate in July (3 cases/100,000) vs the rate in the 81 counties that never adopted a mask mandate (4 cases/100,000).  Thus the rate was similar, despite the 24 counties having a much higher share of the population of Kansas (67.3%).

Then the CDC looked at the data ~1 month later, as the pandemic took off in Kansas, to when the governor stated a mask mandate:

Quote

By the week of the governor’s executive order requiring masks (July 3–9), COVID-19 incidence had increased 467% to 17 per 100,000 in mandated counties and 50% to six per 100,000 among nonmandated counties.

So the effects of the higher population density were much more devastating on the 24 counties that adopted a mask mandate - during the one month prior to the mandate, they went from 3 to 17 cases/100,000 (~6x increase) while the non-mandated counties increased from 4 to 6 cases/100,000 (1.5x increase).

On July 3, the mask mandates started in the 24 counties, while the other 81 counties continued as before:

Quote

By August 17–23, 2020, the 7-day rolling average COVID-19 incidence had decreased by 6% to 16 cases per 100,000 among mandated counties and increased by 100% to 12 per 100,000 among nonmandated counties.

So one month later, the mandated mask counties had started to slowly decline, while the non-mandated mask counties increased by a factor of 2x from early July.  The nonmandated counties were "catching up", as the ratio went from 17/6 = 2.83x higher in the in the 24 counties vs 81 counties on July 3 to 1.33x on Aug 23.

This is the reason that medical officials have said and continue to say: "WEAR A MASK".

Yet, all we hear from a certain population "Ain't no cloth gonna protect you none, nohow."

Medical professionals never promised that masks would eliminate the virus, remove all risk, etc.  The goal all along has been to slow the spread as much as possible until the vaccine became available.  It is really concerning that a segment of the population cannot see this.  It is either gross stupidity or willful disregard for others.

Oh, and Sweden, the darling of the anti-maskers?  Well they aren't doing so good right now.  Guess that "herd mentality" decided to run over a cliff.

Summary:

39 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Yes, but with that short of a FG another 5 yards back wasn't going to really matter.  If anything it gives the kicker a better angle.  NU only had 5 penalties for 39 yards, and one of those 5-yarders was a voluntary delay of game before a punt.

True, but Frost just seems to still struggle regularly with the fundamentals in his 5th year as a head coach, 3rd at Nebraska.  Nebraska is still rebuilding and will struggle to win a lot of games, but that is compounded by the number of times they just make unforced errors.  If they could clean that up they can focus on getting harder to defend, etc.

And after the creative ways Nebraska has managed to lose these past few years, I take nothing for granted - certainly not even a short field goal. 

I'm glad they won - at least now they won't go 0-fer this season, which would have been disastrous for the program. Hopefully they can build upon it, but the one thing we've seen these past few years - just when it seems they get it going, they find a way to destroy their momentum.  It would be nice to see them beat Illinois and one or two out of Minnesota/Purdue/crossover game.   If they can get 4 wins and go 4-5 that would be something to build on for next year, with the defense looking like they are slowly improving.  But, I think Frost needs to seriously look at how he is selecting plays during the game and getting that play into the team.

16 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Other than the timeouts on first downs, where did Frost manage the clock poorly today?  The first timeout was caused when a captain (Warner) didn't go on the field as part of the formation.

Delay of game on the last field goal.  Seemed that the offense was slow getting off the field like Frost was trying to decide to maybe go for it.

Interesting article showing the current status of COVID cases in counties that host a Power 5 Conference team.

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/sports/ncaaf/2020/11/13/college-football-covid-19-cases-jump-big-ten-big-12-counties/6270975002/

Quote

In fact, data analysis conducted by Emory's Rollins School of Public Health for USA TODAY found that the counties in which Power Five schools are located have seen an even larger spike in COVID-19 cases than the nationwide average, with communities in the Big Ten and Big 12 experiencing the most dramatic increases in their seven-day averages of daily new cases per 100,000 residents. 

Interesting that currently the new case per day rate/100K residents in Lancaster County is 3x higher than Los Angeles County. The bolded number is the new cases/day/100K residents over the last 7 days.

Quote

Univ  County Cases Change*
Illinois	Champaign	80	65%
Indiana	Monroe	38	60%
Iowa	Johnson	107	144%
Maryland	Prince George's	21	36%
Michigan	Washtenaw	31	49%
Michigan State	Ingham	35	58%
Minnesota	Hennepin	71	74%
Nebraska	Lancaster	65	47%
Northwestern	Cook	81	55%
Ohio State	Franklin	43	56%
Penn State	Centre	31	38%
Purdue	Tippecanoe	78	59%
Rutgers	Middlesex	24	30%
Wisconsin	Dane	72	21%

Quote

Univ County Cases Change*
Arizona	Pima	26	30%
Arizona State	Maricopa	26	43%
California-Berkeley	Alameda	8	37%
Colorado	Boulder	48	60%
Oregon	Lane	12	44%
Oregon State	Benton	10	117%
Stanford	Santa Clara	11	56%
UCLA	Los Angeles	20	47%
USC	Los Angeles	20	47%
Utah	Salt Lake	91	43%
Washington	King	20	80%
Washington State	Whitman	24	35%

44 minutes ago, DrinkinwitTerrellFarley said:

Yep, exactly.  Two friends of mine, their fathers have passed away from the virus recently.   Less than two weeks ago, a friend from college in her 40's lost her life to Covid-19 and leaves behind a young daughter.  Everyone has pandemic fatigue at this point but we need to keep following science and caring about other people.  

This pandemic has really exposed how anti-science and selfish a significant portion of our citizens are.   

I just don't get it.   Most of the anti-maskers are the loudest "open up our city" complainers.   Yet they defy the 2nd best way (after a vaccine) to actually open things up.

*sigh* 

43 minutes ago, drfish said:

I guess i will weigh in on this with my random thoughts. 

1.  Treatments have improved as you would expect it would as we gain more experience.  

2.  Covid deaths are under-reported.  The CDC information that is bolded in Hilltops post is not saying that cases are being misclassified as COVID 19.  It is saying that deaths that are likely directly or indirectly caused by covid are being classified as something else.

3.  Masks are the single most effective source control (something designed to prevent an infected person from spreading the infection to others) measure available to decrease the spread from asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic persons.  Self-isolation being the most effective for symptomatic individuals.  Anecdotally (which is clearly not scientific) in the case of our facility, we have had a few cases amongst the staff, but almost all could be traced back to a family contact and were not acquired through contact with patients (all staff and all patients are required to wear a mask with rare exceptions).  If masks were not very effective, I would have expected more cases of spread to staff from patients.  Most of the community acquired cases that I have seen have been related to mask-less exposures at family or similar events.

4.  Most business (with the exception of bars and restaurants where mask wearing is not possible) can be conducted in reasonable safety If staff and customers wear masks and try to keep their distance from each other.  We have to be mindfull that excessive restriction of trade will results in significant hardship as well due to loss of livelihood which can certainly have a negative impact on health.  Plus, we can't continuously depend upon the Federal Santa to keep printing money to give out without expecting to pay the price later. 

5.  The failure to issue a mask mandate by many Governors around the country is a lack of responsible leadership.  It would be like saying, "I think nobody should drink and drive, everyone should use good sense, but we cannot mandate not driving while intoxicated. "  

6.  I would have no problem with people refusing to wear masks if the mask protected them and not the others around them.  If you want to take a health risk, fine.  You are an adult and you can make your own decisions.  However, the decision not to wear a mask is a decision to put the people around you at risk and you don't have a valid right to do that.

7.  Taking reasonable precautions in not "living in fear."  

8.  Refusing to wear a mask in a business that asks you to do so is being a selfish a$$hole.

 

I know your response will have to be anecdotal,  but in regards to number 3 on your list:

I would assume your staff is generally wearing medical grade masks - please correct if my assumption is wrong.   

However,  do you have a significant number of patients wearing cloth masks, or are they also wearing masks that are the same as the staff?

I ask because we hear one of the "finesse" arguments against masks is that only "N95 masks are effective,  cloth masks are worthless" .

I somehow doubt it is that binary, and the purveyors of that approach are just trying to excuse their resistance to wearing masks.

If the bulk of your patients wear cloth masks, yet you don't seem to have any traced transmissions to staff, that would indicate cloth masks are useful.  Or no patients have covid at the time they visit, which seems unlikely the longer the pandemic runs. 

I'm just tired of the anti mask whiners complaining about everything.   Debunking them is a full time job at times.  

1 hour ago, HANC said:

Is anyone else concerned that the NCAA will step in and/or conference presidents will pull the plug. 

The number of games being cancelled due to covid is growing exponentially each week. Although these kids are recovering to my knowledge,  the thought of having someone not recovering may be enough to take action. The cancellations are bringing to the forefront what many presidents were worried about. I personally feel as if we get another 2 weeks of the cancellations doubling, the season will be in major jeopardy. 

 

Would love to get a win prior to then. 

The scene at Notre Dame with all the fans storming the field doesn't help.  Not when the campus had a outbreak in progress.  The national optics of that look really bad.  And it actually makes the Big Ten look smart for not allowing any attendance at their games.

Although part of me would appreciate the irony if Notre Dame's fans cause their team to have to cancel games/have key players missing (just like Clemson did against them), resulting in a loss which eliminates them from the playoff.

6 minutes ago, krc1995 said:

So you’re saying someone is going to get their first win next week? 

I guess we are fortunate it can't be like the epic battle between K-State and Kansas back in the (pre-OT) 1980s when they both came into the game winless.  It ended in a tie.  I think one of them later managed to win a game, but bleah.

Maybe we can have an echo from the Akron game and have weather end the game while it is tied.

7 minutes ago, hskrfan4life said:

I know but it's fun to mess with. We are all upset and it stinks, but it feels horrible because you feel like you have answers from a 5,000ft view at home but these are 18-22 year old kids who are playing a game they love and we personally can't do much to fix it.

 

What it boils down to is, I'm extremely worried that this becomes a Harbaugh situation, because at this point I don't know who we can have to come in here and be competitive. Yes, it's year 3 and I don't think he's on the hot seat yet. We have at least 6 games left so still can be a winning season I guess.

Agree - I no longer think Frost will get it done.  I don't see any improvement in fundamentals - getting beat by better athletes is one thing.  Continuously making self-inflicted errors (how many motion penalties today?) shows a lack of organization on the part of the coaches.

If they were very disciplined and just getting beat down because they tire out or the other guy just makes a spectacular play, well that is much easier to fix - recruiting.  I don't see that.  I think the players are playing hard (particularly on defense today), but at times on offense the term "chickens with their heads cut off" comes to mind.  I would think it has to be very frustrating for them.

As I write this, PSU is about to lose to Maryland by 20+ points and drop to 0-3.  I hope Nebraska can build off of today's good defensive play and reasonable consistency moving the ball and come out ready to go next week.

If they lose (and if it is ugly), then I fear Frost will have lost the team for this season.

Just now, hskrfan4life said:

Im just wanting to know why you think the culture is cancer? All you have mentioned is the W-L record. Tbf if we are going to do things like this at least back yourself up with some evidence.

 

I get it we are upset we lost, but sometimes the best thing to do is to stay away from the keyboard.

Look at the guy's posting "history" (all 11 posts so far).  Pretty much has "troll" written all over it.  I doubt you can expect much in the way of reasonable discourse with this one.

2 hours ago, FrantzHardySwag said:

I over estimated what Frost was, based on one season where he had a Heisman caliber QB. It looks like he is destined for his 4th losing season in 5 years as a head coach. I truly have no idea if he will figure it out. My motto the last 2 years was "Frost will get this turned around". I have my doubts. 

Heisman caliber QB playing in a conference whose idea of defense is prevent all day, all the time.

Basically UCF just outscored people that year and it just lined up well, due to a great QB.

I don't think Frost is going to succeed.  How many coaches with losing seasons their first 3 years at a school ever come back to win a conference championship at the same school?

Right now they are 0-2 and the chances they go 4-4 or better are probably about 1%.  I think they will be fortunate to go 2-6.  And that might only because they will play a really bad team in the 7th place crossover game.

I hope they can prove me wrong.  The defense is showing some actual signs of improvement.  They played well enough for Nebraska to win today, had the offense not just pissed down their leg when they'd reach the red zone. 

My hope is that this game was sort of like the horrid 9-7 loss to ISU with the 30345487903465 fumbles in the red zone.  Next week, if they come out with confidence that they can move the ball against PSU maybe they will get something going.  PSU has been pretty hideous as well this year, so far, probably far more surprisingly than Nebraska.

But right now it is hard to have any confidence that will happen, until they prove it.

10 minutes ago, PaulCrewe said:

So right now, this team's bowl game will be the cross over game against Maryland or MSU in December

And with the way things are trending, that game could be to avoid an 0-fer season.  Seriously, other than Illinois, I don't see how Nebraska wins any other games on the current schedule (without yet knowing who they will play in the last game).

I hope they figure something out and at least eek out a win at some point.  Maybe they would get some confidence if that happens.

5 minutes ago, huskerfaninbuckeyehell said:

I don't even know what to say about this program anymore.

It is the worst it has been in over 60 years.  With only the smallest whispers of turning it around.

The defense played good enough to win today.  I think there are some indications of improvement there.  The offense pissed away 20+ points today.  Just total chaos on offense.  It looks like they really don't have any idea of what they want to do.

Several people keep saying this year doesn't count.  But if they go 1-7 or 0-8 (assuming no more canceled games), it will just about destroy what remains of this team's cohesion - meaning 2021 basically becomes another "We are going to rebuild and come back strong" season. 

Looks more and more like a 1 year awesome record in a no-defense league does not a coach make.  I hope I'm wrong, but the horrid discipline, particularly on offense, in year 3 does not bode well.

I have an endoscopy scheduled for Monday.  This game has made me look forward to that.

Nice article on Lavonte and his fellow inside linbacker Devin White:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30222727/buccaneers-devin-white-lavonte-david-emerging-league-top-linebacking-duo

Quote

White and David have put up impressive numbers: The pair's 81 combined solo tackles and 116 combined tackles is the most of any duo this season, and they have missed only two combined snaps. Their 5.5 sacks and 14 combined pressures is also first among inside linebacking duos in the league, according to ESPN Stats & Information research.

Quote

"Lavonte can play in any defense you want to draw up -- he's a great football player. It's not really a scheme fit -- he fits everything," Arians said.

Its good to see him getting some national credit finally - I think if he had played for a team that had been a real contender during the first part of his career, he'd already be talked about as one of the greatest.

Quote

The other [Lavonte David], his teacher, has produced such gaudy stats over the past nine seasons that his résumé could easily be mistaken for a Hall of Famer's if not for all the glaring Pro Bowl omissions.

The lack of Pro Bowls is due to how poor Tampa Bay has been overall, particularly on offense the last 9 years.  Now that they have an offense their defense, and in particular, David, seems to finally be getting justified attention.

4 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

 

Agree. It is unwatchable anymore. So many bad takes and poor personnel. I don't understand how a network that started on and focus's on sports has gotten so piss poor at it. It's incredible.

I guess because some bright boy in marketing figures since E comes before S in their station name, that is the route they will go.

They have chosen to emphasize the Entertainment part over the Sports part the last 20 years or so, and thus the slide.  As great as ESPN was from ~1985-~2000 (when their focus was much more on the actual sporting events).

When you compare their current lineup of sports "personalities" (e.g., Stephen A Smith, Finebaum, etc.) to what used to be on the sports reporters, it is really sad.  I remember when Lupica seemed like the whiniest idiot ever on TV.  Now he'd barely even move the needle.

I miss John Saunders, Bob Ley, and Tom Mees.  Those are the guys I remember - when they talked I wanted to hear what they had to say.  I always found Berman tiring, but at least it was sports-centric.  Olberman was also exhausting.

Didn't Disney basically get controlling interest in ESPN in the late 90s, due to the ESPN shares that ABC held?  I struggle to find anything good that Disney has done for Entertainment (there is that word again) during that time. 

I had hopes for the FS1 and FS2 channels, but once they hired Skip Bayless, I figured that tipped their hand of how they wanted to go - an ESPN echo.

9 hours ago, BIGREDIOWAN said:

If we go back to the Big XII......we'll look like fools! No way in hell I can get behind that thinking! We asked to play, the B1G said no, it's what it is, time to move on! 

Agree.

Has the Big Ten botched some of the response to the pandemic? Yes.

Is there some evidence of conflict behind the scenes between Nebraska and the conference?  Based upon what has gone public, I think that would be the case.

Do we have any idea of how severe this conflict is?  Not at this time.  It could be severe.  It could be just minor run-of-the mill disagreements.  The national media can conveniently use Nebraska as a foil for criticism (like they did during the initial cancelled season period).  Somehow the media has not seen fit to criticize Ohio State in the same way, despite it being quite obvious they want to play.  I think it is a big positive that Ohio State has made some public statements that can be clearly read as supporting Nebraska's position.

Just because you have some disagreements does not mean you run away at the first sign of trouble.  Yeah, Nebraska left the Big XII, but in that case, (unless you want to accuse Osborne of lying), it had more to do with instability of the conference - the aborted Pac-12 romance with Texas/A&M/Oklahoma, which Nebraska saw as a real issue undermining not just the athletic programs but the academic future of the school.  In other words, I don't think "Texas is a mean girl" was the reason Nebraska left the Big XII, as much as many people think it was.  Now many just want to say "Big Ten/Michigan/? are mean girls".  It was pathetic when we left the Big XII, and it is pathetic now.

Am I happy with how the Big Ten has done things the last few months - no.  They've made some major faux pas, since they probably didn't expect a team that had losing records the last 3 years to be so anxious to play.  I doubt Nebraska has been different in their messaging within the private conference meetings than they have been in public.  The fact the Big Ten wasn't ready for that is on them - and I think a big part of why their response has been so (outwardly) confusing at times.

However, does that mean we just run away? I think that would be crazy.

Now, if we end up with a rash of every opponent scheduled to play Nebraska suddenly canceling - then an evaluation of staying becomes more serious, since that would probably imply an actual conspiracy.  Particularly if no other games are canceled for the rest of the teams.  We are a long way from that - and at this point the evidence is still that this is a legitimate cancellation by Wisconsin.  We can revisit after this weekend and see if anything funny starts happening around Northwestern.

29 minutes ago, runningblind said:

First of all, the Big Ten didn't cancel the game or shut them down, Wisconsin did. I expect them to start themselves back up and they will indeed play on the 7th, with Chryst on the sidelines as it'll have been 10 days.  I don't think anyone will say much of anything.  Nebraska folks are getting excited about this but no one else will remember come next weekend.

I am aware that Wisconsin chose to cancel.  However, it is (according to the current rules) NOT Wisconsin's choice to allow players that tested positive to play.  My understanding of the procedures laid out by the Big Ten is that players that test positive must sit 21 days.  For their QB from the Illinois game to be allowed to play against Purdue, I think the Big Ten has to approve a waiver of their 21 day sit down.

Wisconsin is still increasing their number of positive tests.  Does that not mean they can cross over to Red/Red status - which per the Big Ten is a mandatory shutdown, meaning a cancellation of next week's game?  That is my understanding of the rules - and I would think they have to be getting pretty close to the Red/Red situation with the additional 3 tests.  Maybe they are still below it.  I wish I had a better understanding of the convoluted Red/Red criteria.

1. If they do cross it AND the Big Ten says "no problem" that will be when the hypocrisy becomes apparent.

2. If Wisconsin does cross Red/Red and the Big Ten says "you must sit", then all of this goes away. 

3. If the Big Ten chooses to on-the-fly redefine Red/Red (and assuming Wisconsin is over the initially defined limit) then I think any criticism by Nebraska is quite fair. 

Granted we are not at this point yet - but if item 1 or 3 comes true then this will get ugly.

3 hours ago, hskrfan4life said:

Sure looks convenient. 

What will be interesting to watch will be the reaction of the national media if Wisconsin plays on the 7th, after still piling up positive cases today.  And players that tested positive are allowed to play without sitting for 21 days, because the Big Ten changes the rule.

If that happens, I think that ESPN will hammer the Big Ten and Wisconsin pretty good on Gameday.

If the Big Ten states the Wisconsin-Purdue game will be played, then I'd put the chances that Northwestern suddenly has an outbreak announced on Nov 1 requiring cancellation of the game on the 7th at 50-50.  Not because those teams are necessarily scared to play Nebraska, but because of the Big Ten being miffed at Nebraska trying to still schedule an OOC game. And releasing an announcement that had (mild) criticism of the Big Ten.

If that happens, the national media mockery will go up even more.  I would hope the Big Ten will not try to pull something like that, but at this point its hard not to become more concerned about how the Big Ten treats Nebraska.  It all depends on how the Big Ten treats the Wisconsin players that tested positive.  If the Big Ten says they won't play until the 14th or 21st, then this situation cools down.  If on the other hand, they let them play (particularly if the covid+ players play), then it shows they have two sets of rules.

None of this means you immediately run off to another conference, but it does start to add some uncertainty.  The academic side, the additional research money, etc. will still hold a lot of weight.

6 minutes ago, TcFlint said:

Tired of Cornhusker whining. sueing,, threatening the Big Ten!  Get out of our conference and turn all the money you recurved back!  We made a huge, huge, huge mistake by not taking Missouri or high academics Kansas!!!

1 hour ago, OriginalCoach said:

 

From conferences that had/have a plan to play football, unlike the B10.

Okay ITG, what conference and team?

3 hours ago, Mavric said:

So, about that reason for "canceling"...

 

 

Makes you wonder: what are the chances that their new wonderboy QB will suddenly test negative on Monday or so and Alvarez will say - "Cardiologist clearance to play? We don't need no stinking cardiologist clearance! Wonderboy plays against Purdue!"

If they pull that off after canceling against Nebraska, the national media will eat them alive.

At least we won't be the bad guy anymore (at the national level)

2 hours ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Not scared? Already planning for Purdue next week 

While I think it is highly unlikely that Wisconsin "ducked" Nebraska intentionally due to having only a 4th string QB (when has it mattered who the Wisconsin QB is lately against Nebraska?), however, this will have some very ugly optics if they play Purdue. 

What if Wisconsin and Purdue play while simultaneously Northwestern "suddenly" has an outbreak starting this Sunday that results in Nebraska's next game being cancelled.  The complaints out of Nebraska would be at an all time high. At that point, even conspiracy skeptics would have to start wondering what is going on.

I highly doubt that level of conspiracy is in place, but the Big Ten had better hope that Nebraska plays Northwestern next weekend if Wisconsin plays Purdue.  The national media will have a field day if Wis-Pur play and Nebraska-NW don't - they will pick up on the story at that point pretty heavily that Nebraska is being punished.  Doesn't matter if that is really the case, but ESECPN will love to tear down the Big Ten if the Big Ten is dumb enough to give them something that easy to mock.

And at that point, intentional or not, the Big Ten will deserve it.

36 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

The amount of cry-a$$ing in this thread is amazing. Did anyone actually think all the games would be played during a pandemic? Welcome to 2020 folks!

I doubt most people expected all games to be played, but the fact that Nebraska is involved in the first cancellation is just so 2020/Nebraska football for the last 20+ years.

I think for a lot of people its just a venting situation.  It will get really ugly if Wisconsin plays next week.