'SkersRule

We lost on the road by 6...a loss sure but not bad.

Do a search through your guide...

And I don't see how someone who thinks they know college football, or football in general, can be so wrong about everything. Southern Miss had 71 yards of offense in the 1st Q. 76 yards in the 2nd Q. 79 yards in the 3rd Q. 36 yards in the 4th Q. So 71 + 76 +79 + 36 = 262 yards (so obviously I inadvertently added two more yards than I should have.) I'm not sure how you can consider yourself (or igetdouched) a knowledgeable football fan when our defense only surrendered 260 total yards of offense and less than 80 yards in any of the 4 quarters. If our DL played so poorly as you erroneously think then we would have given up far more yards and points. It would have been ala the Washington game in Lincoln last year. 'SkersRule 56 true and bored 0. Edit: Our DL and defensive play wasn't perfect but it was hardly the poor showing you two claim.

Yeah and getting waxed in bowl games by teams from the SEC doesn't help either. (Congrats to the Spartans by the way for beating Georgia in the bowl game last season and Boise State in the opener this season.) That's one thing I don't think that teams from the Big 10 collectively understand. When teams from the SEC play teams from other conferences it's almost as if they take their game to a whole new level. For them, it's about conference pride and national bragging rights. The Big 10 will never be mentioned on par with the SEC until we start winning bowl games andnational championship games-especially when an SEC team is the opponent.

I think he'll match and then exceed 13 TD passes during the Wisconsin game. And I voted Yes on the other two questions.

If you were being SERIOUS.............5:30 pm.

And to put what Cunningham said into an actual real world application: 2011 Auburn signee, and current transfer to Nebraska, Jonathan Rose. Jonathan was, according to rivals.com, the 7th best CB nationally coming out of high school. This is a kid who had practically every SEC and ACC school clamouring for his services. Nebraska was one of the few northern schools who actually recruited Rose and while he expressed some mild interest in the Huskers we were never really in his top five let alone top 10. That's what Cunningham was driving at. When it comes to the truly elite southern, California, and Texas talent, Nebraska, despite our rich history and tradition, is at best an after thought. Most highly touted kids want to play close to home where mom, dad, relatives, and friends can come and see them play with relative ease. And to that end, Nebraska simply doesn't fit. So as Ed said, given Nebraska's location and our proximity to the best talent it's a wonder we've been as successful as we have been. Shame that nearly everyone on the "outside" of Nebraska football can see that but some of our own fans can not.

Why risk it? Because if NU seriously wants Rex to have a legitimate shot the Heisman then he'll need to be a dominant force in every single big game moment. The 50+ yard TD run against Southern Miss was a good start. But he needs consistent, big time performances against marquee teams to have a real shot at winning the Heisman.

LOL...what games involving B1G teams leads you to this half-baked assertion? 1. Wisconsin's narrow escape from Northern Iowa? 2. Iowa's one point win over Northern Illinois? 3. Michigan getting hammered by Alabama? 4. Or maybe it was Michigan State's almost losing to Boise State (at home) that has you tossing and turning? I know that as a Nebraska fan joining in the "we suck" chorus is the new black but get real. Southern Miss ran for nearly 200 yards against Nebraska. Are you assuming the offensive lines, running backs, and quarterbacks in the Big 10 - specifically on Wisconsin, Ohio St, Michigan, and Michigan St - are worse than what Southern Miss has? Bell, Ball, Robinson, and Miller come to mind. Not to mention that Wisconsin has a proven track record of developing quality college o-linemen. It was just something I noticed. Nebraska's d-line did not play good. They looked slow and and were getting pushed around.......by Southern Miss. I'm not sure if it's talent or scheme - I tend to lean towards a mixture of the two - but hopefully something changes and d-line play improves or our defense will struggle the rest of the year. If you believe the DL didn't play well then nothing I say will cause you to change your mind.

I think there is a 100% chance Rex plays-how much is anyone's guess.

The disclaimer, or rather qualifier, to that statement is the mobile QB actually needs to be a threat to throw the ball. A mobile QB who isn't a threat to throw is nothing more than Taylor in his freshman season. (Success early but once teams realized he wasn't a threat through the air they loaded the box and sold out to stop the run.)

Why is there a condom wrapper next to the dead bird? Or am I going to regret even asking...

Are you sure? Tom Osborne was one of the most successful college coaches in the history of the game and yet Nebraska rarely had top 10 recruiting classes. Now it's interesting to note, and speculate, how TO would have done in recruiting rankings if he had stayed on as head coach after the '97 season. The point remains, Nebraska is an extremely hard sell to kids in the south, Texas, and California who grew up as fans of the SEC, Texas, USC, Miami, Florida, etc. I think we'd definitely crack the top 10 in recruiting if we established ourselves as the BIG Dog of the Big 10. Right now, Ohio State and Michigan seem to carry that mantle so we need to beat these teams to do that. Osborne's offense was also suited for option football that made a more narrow selection on types of recruits. Yes, it worked very well but we are beyond that era now. And I have always said if we play aggressive attacking Blackshirt defense then we should compete for the very best defensive recruits. Unfortunately we have not had a stellar defense of late. Restore the defense and the playmakers will come. That's interesting and I mean that sincerely. Because what you've said (and I've put into red) equates to a "what came first the chicken or the egg" comment. Playing great defense attracts the top talent but typically you need the top talent to play great defense.

I'm not a gambler. If I want to waste or throw my money away I'll flush it down the toilet-the result is ultimately the same.

Yeah I watched to So Miss game and on one camera shot noticed Westerkamp on the back of a jersey. He wasn't wearing a helmet and didn't even look like he was anticipating being called to go in...so my guess: both he and Armstrong are redshirting.

And the program "Head Games" on the Science Channel shows how easily our sub-conscious brain fools us into readily accepting and believing things we want to be true despite empirical evidence to the contrary. For example, participants underwent an experiment where they were asked what the probability was they would get cancer, suffer a bone fracture, get diabetes, etc. Everyone in the experiment thought their chances for any of those things was 10% or less. When revealed that the statistical probability for something like that happening to them was in the 30-40% range nearly every participant, when asked the same question again, still maintained that their chance of suffering those ailments was 10% or less. Relating this back to Nebraska football: We have a segment of fans (not saying you) that desperately want, need, and/or hope, that Nebraska fails simply so they can revel in being "right" and no amount of success or otherwise empirical data will change their opinion.

Are you sure? Tom Osborne was one of the most successful college coaches in the history of the game and yet Nebraska rarely had top 10 recruiting classes. Now it's interesting to note, and speculate, how TO would have done in recruiting rankings if he had stayed on as head coach after the '97 season. The point remains, Nebraska is an extremely hard sell to kids in the south, Texas, and California who grew up as fans of the SEC, Texas, USC, Miami, Florida, etc.

Well the OL segment of this thread is certainly a separate discussion. But the point is that if someone as obtuse as Ed Cunningham can recognize the obstacles Nebraska faces in recruiting then why can't a segment of our own fans?

LOL...what games involving B1G teams leads you to this half-baked assertion? 1. Wisconsin's narrow escape from Northern Iowa? 2. Iowa's one point win over Northern Illinois? 3. Michigan getting hammered by Alabama? 4. Or maybe it was Michigan State's almost losing to Boise State (at home) that has you tossing and turning? I know that as a Nebraska fan joining in the "we suck" chorus is the new black but get real.

I've been repeatedly accused of being smart-an accusation I still deny.

But back to my OP...Nebraska, for as much as I (and other Husker fans) love the program, it's still an uphill and incredibly difficult climb for Nebraska's coaches to sign truly elite talent. Here's an example: I read a story not too long ago where there is an OG, from Lincoln, who is rated as the 2nd or 3rd best OG for the 2013 or 2014 class. He's a high 4 by most recruiting services. The problem is...he's a huge Alabama fan. His parents moved from Alabama when he was (trying to remember the story) in like the 9th grade and he grew up as a huge Alabama fan. So Nebraska is certainly recruiting him because he's in Lincoln, but all it will take is one phone call from Nick Saban and this kid will commit and sign with the Tide. That's the way it goes.

I'm strangely in the opposite view; I thought it was absolutely refreshing that during, and after the game, just about every commentator was raving about Taylor and his improved mechanics.

Alabama blitzed Michigan almost relentlessly. Curiously, so did Michigan State last season. Both teams beat the Wolverines. Must be a coincidence.

Actually the Vegas lines moves up or down to ensure relatively equal betting on both sides so that no matter which team loses the "house" always wins. Which means that if a bunch of Husker fans are placing bets on a 4.5 spread it goes up to get people to place bets on UCLA. Well duh. What I was referring to is the source of the money. The bulk of money going into these sportsbooks is not from casual fans. It comes from pro betting sharps. Obviously the line moves when money starts going towards one side and the books need to get action on the other side. But you always hear, "Oh, Nebraska fans (for example) must be betting this one hard for the line to be like that!" ...which is almost never the reason for a line moving. It's the betting sharps who are looking for any edge that they think a line gives them. They find an edge, exploit it, then the line has to move. I'd be shocked if the majority of source money you're talking about really comes from the "sharps." I can see the initial line being set by the "sharps" as a baseline. But I think the line, and majority of money involved, comes from the average fan. Just my opinion though...no idear if I'm right, wrong, or somewhere in-between.