BigRedBuster

So....we might be left with both Trump and Sanders who are disasters in foreign affairs....or Clinton...... Gee.....why am I not more excited about this?

Not to mention house wives still exist and so do house husbands. And, once that alarmist myth is debunked, it's pretty easy to dismiss the rest of what someone says as inaccurate stats used to get people all worked up and get their vote.

I like this guy.

It's not a big deal. I just thought you were referring to a different conversation. No reason to waste any more time on it. As to your proposal, I think it would be a nightmare to manage and would be rampant with corruption. I have no problem with the dead period over the holidays so the coaches and the recruits can take a breath and relax. The major changes that need to be made in the entire schedule is OVs over the summer and paying for parents to travel. That would take care of a lot of the problems.

You do realize we were talking about the no contact period right around signing day....correct? These are totally different than the winter dead period over the holidays. I'm pretty sure I mentioned this before and you chose to completely ignore it. The person I was speaking to in that thread was taking about bowl season being the reason for the dead period. To prevent unfair advantage to non-bowl teams (a silly reason to begin with, even if true). I don't recall you ever mentioning a dead period near signing day issue to me. Nor do I find those anything other than purely protectionary. Designed mainly to prevent coaches from flipping other coaches' recruits. It was during the discussion of an early signing date.

Here's a closer look at that 35-40% unemployment mark. One of the articles I listed above said this came from simply taking the entire population over 16 years of age and subtracting out the number working. Well.....some simple googling on the internet brought up some interesting facts about that. So...let's look at everyone over 16. Your figure was 35-40% were unemployed. I'll give you the 40%. Then, I found these facts. 13% of the population is above 65 years old. Many of these are going to be unable to work 1% is in prisons 6% of the population is attending some type of college 3% is in HS (between the ages of 16 -18) I've just lowered your number down to 17%. I wasn't able to find what percentage was disabled and not able to work or what percentage is in some type of long term care (under 65) Do you start to see where this figure starts losing it's credibility?

Hmmm.....I'm not so sure about that with a position coach. I read somewhere where Riley was waiting for UCLAs HC to give permission to talk to Angus. That would be really tricky to go through that process and not have something leak at least throughout the coaching ranks and have your current coach find out. Also, it's not like a HC where having someone step in ASAP is a major benefit for the program. You have time to go get a position coach.

I will not argue against the fact that the national debt is a major issue that I want to see taken care of. Funny thing is, the last President that was actually doing something about it was Clinton and I couldn't stand him and don't like his wife. 35-40% unemployment??? Hmmm...a little bit of an exaggeration. The U-6 is basically what you are talking about. LINK Or....you're talking about the number the Trumpster throws out there. Here's a nice discussion about his numbers. Not necessarily as alarming as you make it sound. LINK Here's another interesting article on the differences of the numbers. LINK Basically, this is similar to the Republicans coming out and being ssooooooo alarmed not too long ago that "45% of the population doesn't pay taxes". That statement was proven shortly after to be total BS unless you expect people in nursing homes....etc. to be paying taxes. And...as I said in my post, I am not talking about actions that can be taken to help lower income segments of our population.

You do realize we were talking about the no contact period right around signing day....correct? These are totally different than the winter dead period over the holidays. I'm pretty sure I mentioned this before and you chose to completely ignore it.

you do realize the contact rules are put in place to protect the athlete????I thought you were all for protecting the athlete. In theory they are. In practice, they are awful for an athelete because they deny him information. I have my doubts that such restrictions were really for the athelete and not really a form of protectionism (kind of like how the sec is claiming spring break needs to be preserved for the athelete, when in reality it's all about protecting the SEC). A far better approach would be an enforceable "no call list." Players and parents could put anyone on the list they want (including recruiting services) and could report (anonymously if desired) violations. This would much better than (1) a blanket band that may not be in an individual athletes interest, and (2) allowing coaches who are willing to cheat to have an advantage. It would also be much easier to enforce than the current system that apparently requires coaches to inform on other coaches (see fulmer, Kiffen and other examples from the SEC). That's your opinion that a lot of people disagree with.

The Ol Miss AD came out and said that there were no major infractions and the investigation is over. Seems like nothing will come out of it. If that is the case then every team should just cheat there tails off. If they can not find any wrongdoing with the Ol Miss program then the NCAA is a bigger joke than I originally thought it was. I don't think we can over estimate what a joke the NCAA is.

I have to admit, my father has been passing along emails for the last 5-7 years about the catastrophic doom and gloom economic crash that is just around the corner. It has made me numb to this stuff. It's always going to happen "THIS YEAR". But......... However, I AM concerned if either Bernie or Trump get elected. Both seem to not give a sh#t about keeping things stable and think massive changes need to happen "RIGHT NOW." Part of the reason why our economy has been so good for so long is the stability of the system. Yes, there are tweaks that need to be made and those can always be discussed. But, I believe massive changes in our economy structure can have devastating affects and not just on the upper class like what Bernie wants. And...before certain posters go over board here, I'm not saying raising taxes on the rich or doing things to help lower income families will crash the economy.

Here's just a side note that I have been thinking about for while. Top rated recruits 2017 Outside linebacker, 8 out of top 10 players defensive or OTs 2016 Defensive tackle, 8 out of top ten defensive players except two QBs 2015 Defensive Tackle, top 10 either defensive player or OT 2014 RB, 6 out of top 10 players defensive or OT Yet....when the Heisman comes around, almost all of these players won't have any chance to even sniff the trophy. It just points out even more what a joke the Heisman is.

you do realize the contact rules are put in place to protect the athlete???? I thought you were all for protecting the athlete.

Like I said, I'm sure coaches use them to some extent. My contention is that they don't take their evaluation as gospel and they actually do their own evaluations. I believe this because I hear coaches talking about watching film and evaluating recruits all the time. I'm sure the use of these services varies widely from program to program. My guess is that a program with less funds available are going to use them more than a program with huge funds to have a staff sorting through this stuff. When I'm talking about recruiting services, I'm not thinking about Hudl. I'm specifically talking about Rivals, Scout and 247. Honestly, it would be interesting to hear an interview with a coach or ex coach at the Div 1 power program level discuss how they go about finding and evaluating players and to what extent they use these services. Completely agree with bolded. That's a fantastic story out there waiting to happen, particularly if you can find one willing to go in detail about their relationship with recruiting services. Chizik of course was quoted in the article I shared with you, and the article also suggested strong ties between LSU/Oregon to one recruiting service. My gut tells me coaches are using recruiting services like Hudl but don't rely too much on the more fan-oriented ones like Rivals. And then, once coaches get an idea about a player, they then do their own deep evaluations with their own people. That's my gut feeling also.

Like I said, I'm sure coaches use them to some extent. My contention is that they don't take their evaluation as gospel and they actually do their own evaluations. I believe this because I hear coaches talking about watching film and evaluating recruits all the time. I'm sure the use of these services varies widely from program to program. My guess is that a program with less funds available are going to use them more than a program with huge funds to have a staff sorting through this stuff. When I'm talking about recruiting services, I'm not thinking about Hudl. I'm specifically talking about Rivals, Scout and 247. Honestly, it would be interesting to hear an interview with a coach or ex coach at the Div 1 power program level discuss how they go about finding and evaluating players and to what extent they use these services.

It lost its effectiveness when Watson was fired and Tim Beck came in and tried to make the offense 50/50 on the run pass play calling. When Watson was fired, Tim Beck came in and ran a very similar offense with the same quarterback. Tim Beck never tried to make the offense 50/50, and far more often ran 60/40 or even 65/35 run/pass splits. Zone reads were a big part of Beck's gameplan, and Martinez's rushing numbers confirm it. The Nebraska offense was actually pretty effective under Tim Beck, and just a little less so when Martinez lost a bit of speed and confidence. Tim Beck's offensive playcalling is very similar to all the teams Nebraska aspires to be. true.

The opportunities or chances for players to slip through the cracks in this day and age are significantly smaller than they used to be, though it can happen and there's no denying that. It is also completely possible a potentially great player can be graded out low (J.J. Watt was a two-star). I think Psycho's statement about players going to camps came off a little bit like that's the only way they're being evaluated. That's not true. It's just another tool in the recruiting service arsenal. Also, you made a statement about how you hope programs aren't using these services and you believe they're wholly for fan use. That may apply to places like Rivals (I honestly don't know). But, coaches have come out publicly endorsing the value recruiting services offer, particularly for getting access to film and getting a general idea about the quality of player. There is also proof out there of the money universities spent on those services. Now, the recruiting services the coaches are usually talking about are the companies that do the full on evaluations and video gathering, not necessarily 24/7 Sports or Rivals. But, like I said, a lot of times those coaches don't specify who they're working with. Here is an interesting article on the subject. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/sec/2011-07-22-coaches-scouting-recruiting-services_n.htm I specifically used the word "mostly" in my post. Yes, I expect a program to maybe to on a service and search to see if they possibly are missing out on someone. They might be able to find XYZ player in San Fransisco that they normally would not have known about. However, I would expect our coaches to evaluate that player themselves to see if that player really has what it takes to succeed here. I would hope they are doing that instead of saying...."Hey...Rivals rates this kid a 4 star...we need to go after him". A good example of this is a recent WR offer we made. Jeremiah Holloman is a 3 star recruit with a .8333 rating on 247 composite. (which is a fairly low 3* rating) Now, if this kid is offered this early in the process, I would expect that our staff looked at him and believes he's better than that rating instead of using that rating as a deciding factor in their offer.

Interesting The documentary Trump doesn't want you to see.

There are camps and competitions all over the country. If a player chooses not to participate in any of those camps then that's their decision... but it should raise red flags about that players willingness to compete and their willingness to be judged against their peers. Thanks for helping point out a flaw in their system. And...BTW....even using your amazingly wonderful Rivals, I still proved the top 10 players at MSU and Nebraska aren't that far off from each other. But....you chose to ignore that point. Elite players (4 and 5 star) are given elite ranking because they have shown elite athletic ability. Average players ( 3 or less star) are given average ranking because that is what they have shown average athletic ability. The Elite Player Ratio has proven correct on the field, where it matters and in the National Championships won by the teams that have achieved it. Period. On your wonderful Rivals, 3 star players are rated from 5.5 - 5.7. 4 star players are from 5.8 - 6.0. Our average for the top 10 players is 5.75. MSUs is 5.85. Not much difference there. They are barely above 4* and we are barely below 4*. There isn't some amazing line where all of a sudden a player gets a 4th star and he all of a sudden is God's gift to football. It is a graduated scale. Now, if our average was 5.55.....I would agree with you. Fact is, our top 10 isn't much different than theirs. Now, you can keep trying to over exaggerate to make a point but people see through that pretty quickly. FYI....a composite type rating is much less flawed. There is a huge difference in the number of elite players. Michigan State landed two and a half times more elite players than we did. Period Ohio State, Michigan along with Alabama, Clemson and a host of other elite teams that cleaned our clock in recruiting this year. You and the Nebraska Football Program are intent on ignoring that fact and unfortunately our football program is hell bent on continuing to ignore that fact. It all started a long time ago with Frank Solich and the unwillingness to accept reality continues today. The long downward spiral of our program continues. Dude...... Exaggerations don't make you right. It simply makes you a fan who exaggerates. I'm not talking about Alabama, OSU or Michigan. They clearly have a much better class than we got. I'm talking about you including MSU in that group that just doesn't fit. Everything you're saying is nonsense. The last 11 National Championships in a row proves you wrong. I didn't say anything about National Championships.

Very good post TGH. That is almost exactly where I'm at and actually, why I left the Republican party. I couldn't support their actions any more with my membership. I know my vote in the primaries doesn't mean jack so that didn't have any draw to me. I completely agree with your #2. We have close to 800 military installations around the world outside the US. That is just absolutely insane. If we could greatly reduce those, and start paying for infrastructure and programs we want here at home. I am sick and tired of being the policeman of the world. The rest of the world begs us to get involved everywhere and then when we do, they use it against us. (France, Germany, Russia). I want THEM to start stepping up and sacrificing their money and youth. The problem is, to do that, I would still want to greatly boost our naval fleet so that IF we do need to get involved, we have mobility in our military and can still touch everywhere in the world. Well, that's for another thread. You touched on my biggest issue with the parties. There are certain issues that neither party wants to resolve. Abortion is one of them. This issue solidifies their bases and so nobody wants to resolve it. That's just one example.

A) So I can vote in the primary. B) I wish the Republican party would be fiscally responsible. I wish the Democratic party would look out for the interests of the common man. Neither party does these things. A) I will give you that as an independent, primaries are pretty much meaningless to go to. However, that pretty much is the case just living in Nebraska. B) I agree with that statement.

There are camps and competitions all over the country. If a player chooses not to participate in any of those camps then that's their decision... but it should raise red flags about that players willingness to compete and their willingness to be judged against their peers. Thanks for helping point out a flaw in their system. And...BTW....even using your amazingly wonderful Rivals, I still proved the top 10 players at MSU and Nebraska aren't that far off from each other. But....you chose to ignore that point. Elite players (4 and 5 star) are given elite ranking because they have shown elite athletic ability. Average players ( 3 or less star) are given average ranking because that is what they have shown average athletic ability. The Elite Player Ratio has proven correct on the field, where it matters and in the National Championships won by the teams that have achieved it. Period. On your wonderful Rivals, 3 star players are rated from 5.5 - 5.7. 4 star players are from 5.8 - 6.0. Our average for the top 10 players is 5.75. MSUs is 5.85. Not much difference there. They are barely above 4* and we are barely below 4*. There isn't some amazing line where all of a sudden a player gets a 4th star and he all of a sudden is God's gift to football. It is a graduated scale. Now, if our average was 5.55.....I would agree with you. Fact is, our top 10 isn't much different than theirs. Now, you can keep trying to over exaggerate to make a point but people see through that pretty quickly. FYI....a composite type rating is much less flawed. There is a huge difference in the number of elite players. Michigan State landed two and a half times more elite players than we did. Period Ohio State, Michigan along with Alabama, Clemson and a host of other elite teams that cleaned our clock in recruiting this year. You and the Nebraska Football Program are intent on ignoring that fact and unfortunately our football program is hell bent on continuing to ignore that fact. It all started a long time ago with Frank Solich and the unwillingness to accept reality continues today. The long downward spiral of our program continues. Dude...... Exaggerations don't make you right. It simply makes you a fan who exaggerates. I'm not talking about Alabama, OSU or Michigan. They clearly have a much better class than we got. I'm talking about you including MSU in that group that just doesn't fit.