Mavric

Today is 6 weeks... OWH

Yes and no. One is a fullback. Going forward that may be a scholarship position more often but it's been a walk-on position for most of what anyone can remember. One is due to injury and (possibly) not wanting to burn a redshirt for a game or two. And one is one of the best WRs in the B1G.

Maybe because we have been? 5-3 7-1 5-3 5-3 3-5 Do you think that we haven't been? 2011 we were third out of six in the Legends division (Michigan, Michigan State) 2012 we won the Legends division 2013 we were third in the Legends division (Michigan State, Iowa) 2014 we were third of seven in the West division (Wisconsin, Minnesota) 2015 we were fourth of seven in the West division (Iowa, Northwestern, Wisconsin) That's pretty middle-of-the-road. 2013 and 2014 we were tied for second, though we did lose the tie-breaker. But even that is a first and three thirds from 11-14. Wisconsin is better at 1-1-2-3. Iowa is 2-4-4-5. Northwestern is 3-5-5-6. Minnesota is 2-4-6-6. So we've easily been the second best team in the division over the first four years of that time-frame, which is definitely not middle-of-the-road. From 2011-2014, we were 13-7 which is winning 65% of the games. That's not great but that's not middle of the road. It's only when you add in last year's 1-5 (16%) in there that it drags the overall average down to 53.8%. From 11-14, Wisconsin was the class of the division at 18-2. Iowa was 9-9. Minnesota was 10-12. Northwestern was 8-11. So, again, we were easily the second best team in the West. In fact, only two schools were over .500 in the conference. Not great, but definitely not middle-of-the-road. So the only reason to include last year's dismal results into the mix is to try to make people think we've been worse than we have by the way he presents the numbers. If you are going to exclude 15 (3-5) because it was an outlier, then you probably should exclude 12 (7-1) as well. I'm not excluding 2015 because it's an outlier. I'm saying Sam is lumping it in with the other years to make the whole group look worse because he hates Bo and loves Riley.

Yes, when you move the goalposts from comparing the division to comparing the country, it changes the answer.I thought we were comparing the B1G and not just our division. Well if we ignore the better division in our conference and pretend there aren't 110+ other FBS teams....yeah, Nebraska is doing pretty awesome! Glad you agree with me that Sam is trying to down-play it.

Yes, when you move the goalposts from comparing the division to comparing the country, it changes the answer. I thought we were comparing the B1G and not just our division. The number Sam noted was only for division games.

His thoughts on the depth chart are fine, all he is trying to do with tweeting out that pictures of the depth chart is stir a pot. I think his points on the number of walk-ons are valid. I think there are some depth issues on the roster, which is shown in the number of walk-ons and the large number of redshirt and true freshman on the depth chart. Eh ... I think the issue is mostly with how they did the depth chart. When you list six tight ends and three fullbacks, a good chunk of those are going to be walk-ons. Your backup PK, P and Snapper are often going to be walk-ons. Other than that, there are 11 walk-ons. I don't think that's too big of a number. With about 12 true freshman who are expected to redshirt (and thus not on the depth chart) plus two ineligible transfers (Lee and Williams), there are only about 70 scholarship players available. To be three deep at each position plus specialists would be 69 players. Adam Taylor, Lavon Alston, Dwayne Johnson and Charles Jackson are the only scholarship players (non-true-freshmen) I see not on the depth chart. Two of those have battled injuries their entire career. On is a RS Frosh who missed all of last year.

Welp....

Yes, when you move the goalposts from comparing the division to comparing the country, it changes the answer.

Disagree here. He is about the best athlete (though Banderas is much better than many give him credit for) but I don't think he's close to the best LB, definitely not "by far." MRI and Young are definitely better.

Sam is trying to find any way he can to push the "not enough talent" narrative. Considering there's only 8-9 true freshmen on the chart, there are 15-20 more names than scholarship players. So there's going to be quite a few walk-ons.

Hey, at least he's in good company....

Maybe because we have been? 5-3 7-1 5-3 5-3 3-5 Do you think that we haven't been? 2011 we were third out of six in the Legends division (Michigan, Michigan State) 2012 we won the Legends division 2013 we were third in the Legends division (Michigan State, Iowa) 2014 we were third of seven in the West division (Wisconsin, Minnesota) 2015 we were fourth of seven in the West division (Iowa, Northwestern, Wisconsin) That's pretty middle-of-the-road. 2013 and 2014 we were tied for second, though we did lose the tie-breaker. But even that is a first and three thirds from 11-14. Wisconsin is better at 1-1-2-3. Iowa is 2-4-4-5. Northwestern is 3-5-5-6. Minnesota is 2-4-6-6. So we've easily been the second best team in the division over the first four years of that time-frame, which is definitely not middle-of-the-road. From 2011-2014, we were 13-7 which is winning 65% of the games. That's not great but that's not middle of the road. It's only when you add in last year's 1-5 (16%) in there that it drags the overall average down to 53.8%. From 11-14, Wisconsin was the class of the division at 18-2. Iowa was 9-9. Minnesota was 10-12. Northwestern was 8-11. So, again, we were easily the second best team in the West. In fact, only two schools were over .500 in the conference. Not great, but definitely not middle-of-the-road. So the only reason to include last year's dismal results into the mix is to try to make people think we've been worse than we have by the way he presents the numbers.