KJ.

You got one correct and probably missed the one that has the most potential.

Way to kill attendance, Bo. The evidence is right there people, time to wake up and see it.

Kinda like how we trotted Martinez out there against Minnesota after he was a month into an 8 month injury? Not even close to a good comparison. We are talking about Zach's brain, not his 2nd and 3rd toes. What about playing Cody Green through a concussion? Of course he's not going to play a guy who is ~0% like Darlington is now. But what about when he recovers to the point that he's 40% and doctors are saying "Yeah, probably should wait a little longer on this one" but Bo looks past that because it benefits him? What empirical evidence do you have suggesting Bo wouldn't play him then?

Kinda like how we trotted Martinez out there against Minnesota after he was a month into an 8 month injury?

Are you hinting at an upcoming nerdgasm math thread I see some ANOVAs and sum of non-squared errors in HuskerBoard's future.

Because Osborne didn't want to be the AD anymore Wrong. Dont you know Osborne was secretly fired so that Eichorst can be brought in as a temp for the sole purpose of firing Bo, and run off in a few years back to Wiscy when Alvarez retires? God, you need to check your sources better, man. I realize the purpose of your post. However the simple fact that Ozzy called his retirement announcement on practically the most important religious holiday for a person of Jewish beliefs (Perlman is Jewish) and the fact that Ozzy had zero input on his replacement. We both can agree that Perlman wants Bo gone. Perlman brought in a guy to get the job done. It really is not that big of a stretch. Nailed it.

If you're asking if there are other coaches that will eventually win a national title within a few years at their school, then yes. Yes there are. Not sure where you're going with that though, as I was just pointing out that your criticism of the type of statistic used in the list is stupid.

Not so sure about that, big cat. There's something to be said for Urban's ability to inherit a shitshow 6-6 team and start out 43-0 or whatever it is. Of course the time it takes coaches to "learn on the job" is important so looking at the list with respect to total years as a HC is important. But it's still a damn important perspective to look at how long it takes at a specific school.

At least we have a whale trophy.

If you look at the field you'll see far less Caucasian people.

Game theory says go for it. How far can a high school kid punt anyway? By punting you're probably giving up a ~50% chance of ending the game for a net gain of 30 yards? Not worth it. Especially since you averaged more than 2 yards per play on your first 3 plays.

We already do that when you look at recruiting from February - The day before BRW and The day after BRW - November.

Texas A&M 2006? Colorado 2005?

Yikes. For a guy that says "mathematically" about 43 times and claims insurance pricing to be on the level of an 8th grade math class, he's completely clueless. It's sad that this buffoon spouts out oversimplified and inaccurate details on insurance/social security and some people run with it thinking "the math doesn't work!".

Serious question: Do you know that you just blatantly make sh#t up that you have absolutely no idea about? Or do you really think that you know these details? I honestly want to know. I don't want to make fun of someone with a mental disorder.

What the f#*k.

I wasn't aware that we altered face value based on the quality of the seat. Is that really face or is that what you want for it? That's really face value, here's a picture of the ticket http://imgur.com/scQz5kE Totally forgot this was a road game. Thanks for the clarification. Too much for me, though.

I wasn't aware that we altered face value based on the quality of the seat. Is that really face or is that what you want for it?

Does Minnesota's offense have any talent?

Thomas Bayes disagrees with just about everything you have said.

Here's some approximate figures on how we did defending different Minnesota personnel. For convienience, they are organized in descending order of how frequently it was actually used by Minnesota. 11 personnel: 18 plays, 135 yards 22: 14 plays, 77 yards 12: 9 plays, 69 yards 21: 9 plays, 29 yards 10: 8 plays, 41 yards 20: 5 plays, 48 yards 32: 5 plays, 11 yards 31: 1 play, 2 yards wtf: 1 play, 20 yards Total: 70 plays, 432 yards While it might be easy to say 11 personnel was our weakness, I don't think that's what killed us today. 20 had a much higher YPP average, and 10 kept us surprised and off balance nicely. I'm guessing since the staff was primarily concerned about 11, so the surprise of 10 or 20 worked to their advantage.

I don't know if these are the stats you were thinking of. But these are the stats I gathered and compiled. The first thing I looked at is the overall win loss records for each conference combined. 1. SEC 64 - 36 2. ACC 58 - 34 3. BIG 53 - 28 4. Pac12 53 - 29 5. MAC 42 - 54 6. Big 12 39 - 25 7. MWC 38 - 43 8. Con. USA 38 - 54 9. AAC 31 - 32 10. Sunbelt 26 - 29 I then calculated the win percentage. 1. Big 10 65.43% 2. Pac 12 64.53% 3. SEC 64% 4. ACC 63.04% 5. Big 12 60.94% 6. AAC 49% 7. Sunbelt 47.27% 8. MWC 46.91% 9. MAC 43.75% 10. Independent 42.86% 11. Conf. USA 41.30% I then went and calculated the ooc opponents win loss records. Also the percentage of those ooc games were FCS opponents. 1. MAC 176 - 135 2. Independent 173 - 145 3. Conf. USA 165 - 136 4. AAC 148 - 118 5. ACC 133 - 145 6. SEC 130 - 124 7. Pac 12 127 - 110 8. MWC 122 - 111 9. BIG 118 - 149 10. Sunbelt 117 - 115 11. Big 12 99 - 124 Also the percentages of those ooc games that were FCS opponents 1. Sunbelt 47.62% with 10 games FCS 2. Pac 12 27.03% with 10 games FCS 3. Big 12 26.67% with 8 games FCS 4. ACC 25.58% with 11 games FCS 5. MWC 24.39% with 10 games FCS 6. MAC 23.08% with 12 games FCS 7. BIG 21.74% with 10 games FCS 8. AAC 20.51% with 8 games FCS 9. SEC 19.51% with 8 games FCS 10. Independent 12.24% with 6 FCS 11. Conf. USA 11.32% with 6 FCS I noticed 3 things out of this doing this. 1. SEC doesn't have the best win loss percentage despite playing more games so far. With each loss not affecting the stats as much. 2. SEC is thought of playing a lot of FCS schools. Even though these stats shows results through games 10/24 SEC is near the bottom of FCS games played. They do still have some left but shouldn't move them much further up the chart than maybe midway. 3. I have way to much time on my hands. All of the information I used to gather this info. Came from ESPN. Out of curiosity I have started on 2012's results but havn't completed them as of yet. That wasn't exactly what I was looking for, but good work! There seems to be a lot of talk that the SEC moves down less when they lose and moves up more when they win than teams from other conferences. So the variables that I would need would be: 1) Any matchup involving a team who was either ranked or receiving votes for each the AP and Coaches Poll 2) The conference of the team 3) The conference of the opponent 4) Whether the team won or lost 5) Whether the team they played was ranked above or below them 6) The change in rank From there, because all but the 6th variable is qualitative, ANOVAs can be ran to determine if the SEC does benefit in the polls from their perceived strength. I'd love to see the output of those ANOVAs and get the definitive answer, if you wouldn't mind sparing 6-7 hours to get that tedious and mind-draining work done, Nate.

Or, TA or RK will start, in which the quartermagic will be black.

There's a slight disconnect between what she's saying in that video and what she's said on twitter the last few months.