Mavric

I assume you meant Minny predictions. I agree that he might not be the next OT on our board. I'm sure Ivey is #1 but that would be a huge steal to get him. There are probably a couple others higher but this would be a nice one. Might be hurting him that we've taken two OTs in each of the last two classes (counting Stoltenberg) so we can probably afford to be choosy. Maybe waiting to see a little more of him and others and possibly also waiting to see how the current class shakes out at DE. If Stoltenberg moves to DE, we might have a little more room. Just guessing.

Robin Washut ‏@RobinWashut 47m Miles saw @J_ham_32 on Thursday. Liked physicality/rebounding, but “we’ve got to get him making his foul shots...That’ll be a piece of cake”

Two star by Rivals and 247

Chris Jones ‏@Chrisselfmade2 5h Time to go put in work in the weight room then homework after, Nebraska picked up a determined athlete Chris Jones ‏@Chrisselfmade2 5h To be the best you have to train like the best

Would definitely try Downhill. Get good at it or die in the attempt.

Couldn't find if this was posted anywhere else: Full Article

Several more on the Husker Facebook page. A couple more:

Agree that it's pretty weak. I need to go back and just answer randomly (as if it's not basically that already). I think there were more questions on down the list but it stopped once it had a "match."

If we wouldn't have let UAB and Penn St. get away from us - let alone Michigan - we'd really be in nice shape. Ifs and buts......

Because that doesn't fall in the last 1.5 years? Perhaps it's better to address why you chose 1.5 seasons instead of 2. Doing that allowed you to ignore the Ohio State loss. And while the victory against Wisconsin is great, they have pounded us twice and were a better team last season. They have been better than us each season since we joined the B1G. Pretty steady pattern of emphasizing the losses and ignoring or discounting the wins. I think we're good here. Aren't you doing the exact opposite? I'm as happy about beating Wisconsin as the next guy, but using that victory in an argument that suggests we were as good as them that year doesn't hold water. Wins can tell you things, losses can tell you things. But in this instance, our losses against Wisconsin tells me more than our win. No. I've always listed both wins and losses. You keep only pointing out the losses. Or trying to say we aren't as good as teams we beat. Or that teams we beat really aren't that good.

They claim some "vent" that was supposed to reduce drag may be adding it. I have not idea if that's true or not but that's the story.

really? i'm not sure you could come up with a schedule that is easier. maybe flip the home/away games I guess - but the teams on this schedule are as weak as any schedule we will ever get in the B1G. Why? Because we don't play Ohio State? We have last year's Rose Bowl champion on the road, plus last year's #3 team (away), #4 team (away) and #6 team (home). Considering we were #5, we play four of the top five teams we could have played and three of them are on the road. And there were three really bad teams in the conference last year plus two newbies that aren't exepected to be at the top so we were bound to get several of the jumbled mess at the bottom. We're going to play most of those regardless...they're in our division. Sure, we could have switched out MSU with Indiana or something...but come on, this is about as easy as it will ever get for us. We play last years #12 team, last years #11 team, last years #10 team, last years #8 team, plus Rutgers. So based on last year, we got the 3 worst, plus 1 of the new comers and Minnesota (home). That should be the equivalent of handing us a 5-0 record. That leaves 3 others, 2 of which are in our division so we're playing them every year anyways, and 1 is after a bye. And I like the idea of opening up conference play with a solid team like MSU. Should set the tone for the season. Like I said, the home/away could have been switched up and made it a little easier - but it would have almost been doing us a disservice. Look what handing Ohio State an 8-0 record last year did for them. There are eight conference games - six in your own division, two from the other. In the supposedly easily superior East division are the two best teams from last year (MSU, tOSU), two mid level teams that we beat last year (Mich, PSU) and a jumbled mess at the bottom (IU, Mary, RU). I doubt we would have ever had MSU/OSU in the same year on an eight game schedule (we do in 2018 on a nine game schedule when we have MSU-OSU-Mich). So they gave us the conference champ from last year and one from the bottom tier. It could have been tougher if we had either Mich or PSU instead of Rutgers but it could have been quite a bit easier if we traded MSU for anyone but tOSU, especially if it would have been IU or RU. So it's basically middle-of-the road if not slightly above.

Because that doesn't fall in the last 1.5 years? Perhaps it's better to address why you chose 1.5 seasons instead of 2. Doing that allowed you to ignore the Ohio State loss. And while the victory against Wisconsin is great, they have pounded us twice and were a better team last season. They have been better than us each season since we joined the B1G. Pretty steady pattern of emphasizing the losses and ignoring or discounting the wins. I think we're good here.

Interesting that Wyoming is showing up so much but only one Nebraska.....

That's pretty impressive!

Nate Clouse ‏@NateClouse 14m #Huskers RT @Bran_donkadonk: Ryan Boldt with the first RBI's of the season!! @husker_baseball #GBR #Nebraseball https://vine.co/v/M7r3Fvz6meF Vine Play Edit: If you click the line in the Tweet, it's a video.

Was thinking the same thing. These aren't that bad, but they're not that good either.

So we've been in the CCG three of the last five years. And since we've joined the B1G, we have the third best record in conference play, barely behind two teams that were in the Top 5 last year and we only have a losing record against one team in conference (iirc), a team coming off a 20+ game winning streak. But we're not a contender. Got it. upper middle is good. I never said it was not. Now... NU has been, as you say, #3. That is what I say too. And numerically the # 3 is close to the #1 and implies perhaps being a contender. But NU, upon closer inspection, has not been actually competitive with any of the conference champions these past 4 years. MSU this year, OSU teams since Meyer, or the Wisconsin teams... each were handily beyond NU in those respective seasons. I seem to recall beating conference champ Wisconsin two years ago.....

Lane Grindle ‏@lanegrindle 15m Michael Pritchard modeling today's uniform. pic.twitter.com/j9L3l0KYxT

Courtesy Husker Twitter feed: