BigRedBuster

Oh...only scholarship players are athletes? Learn something new every day.

This RIGHT HERE is why the entire rant of "You mean to tell me we have to be concerned about beating XYZ program now?" as proof we aren't a good program is just plain idiotic. Almost every program out there has major amounts of money to pump into football, along with everything it takes to put a respectable program on the field. That doesn't mean we shouldn't win almost all of those. But, for instance, to claim we suck because we have to be concerned about Northwestern is just not in touch with reality in college football now.

No there aren't. It is the norm. Every team's fanbase has their share of idiots. Hell, you'll piss off a certain percentage of people coaching Pop Warner teams. Society doesn't have to be that way and the Husker fan base doesn't have to be that way. Thats true, they don't have to be, but the facts are that both are. We can wish it weren't so, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation. My point is, we as a fan base should be pointing our condemnation towards fans who do this instead of being upset that a coach didn't talk to us for a while and just wanted to concentrate on coaching while this is going on. Then, all that is said is one little blip about it happening and we have some fans rolling their eyes and saying the coaches just need to man up and deal with it.

So Nebraska has equal talent but something is missing. The difference between Miss St this year and last is that Dak Prescott has turned a corner and become an elite QB. It is that simple. I watched Miss St. Play a little last year, and he was very talented but wildly inconsistent. This year he has been great. A hot QB can make all the difference in the world. Oh and for all the guys calling for a QB coach at NU it doesn't appear that Miss St has a person dedicated to being solely the QB coach. So....let me get this straight. They have a QB who played some as a Freshman, Started his sophomore year and then he took a big jump as a Junior? There are some Husker fans who believe that isn't possible.

While in college, I worked in a hospital intensive care unit. It was amazing how many times I think back to that job as a teenager and realize I really learned something about life while there. One night, we had a guy brought in who had tried to commit suicide. He was around 20 and he had taken an entire bottle of sleeping pills. His mother found him and called 911 just in time to get him to the hospital. Once admitted and given initial treatment, he was still completely out. I happened to be in the room doing something when he woke up the first time, looked around and saw me and said...."Why didn't you just let me die?" Honestly, I still can see the look on his face as though it happened yesterday. As a teenager myself, I was at a total loss for words. I don't remember what I said but I'm sure it wasn't anything meaningful. There is no logic behind any of this.

No there aren't. It is the norm. Every team's fanbase has their share of idiots. Hell, you'll piss off a certain percentage of people coaching Pop Warner teams. Society doesn't have to be that way and the Husker fan base doesn't have to be that way.

Ummm....that's what he was doing.

I saw that. Probably depends on what he ends up doing. I'm wondering if Leonard Fournette doing so well is causing him to wonder what chance at playing time he'll have over the next three years. If that's the case, I would think Bussey would wonder the same thing. I know I shouldn't try to figure out the mind of an 18 year old kid. However, RBs get injured all the time. Especially ones that the team is using heavily. Back up RBs become starting RBs everywhere because of it.

For me the fans that I see are the least satisfied with the program are the ones that were somewhere between 12-16 years old in 1993 and saw one of the best five year runs ever by a team. Those are very impressionable years and what really shapes their memories of what they think NU should always be like. Many older guys, like myself, that grew up watching NU in the late 70's through the 80's we may have a little broader view of what is satisfying. Not saying all older guys are like that, but many are. For me being consistently good is very important. Winning conference championships and national championships is something I want to see, but I also recognize it is much harder to do now in this world of college football. Pretty much sums it up. Obviously, Championships are the ultimate goal that you are continually working towards. If we win the CCG and don't make it to the playoffs, then obviously, our ultimate goal wasn't met and you always look to see what can be improved on to get there. HOWEVER, I'll be pretty happy. I won't be throwing a hissy fit wanting coaches fired...etc. after losing one game after winning the conference.

It would be ironic if, after the better recruits Bo has pulled in the last year or two, another coach comes in and eclipses Bo's achievements. We'd hear no end of "We should have kept Bo! See!!!" It would be the polar opposite of the kind of fandom I have been rebutting lately, but equally annoying. Honestly, I think we would hear more of...."aaaahhaaaaa.....see....we should have gotten rid of him much sooner." I don't see anyone saying, "Everything is great. He is the greatest coach that ever lived and I'm perfectly content and happy". Now, there i the "Bo needs to go" crowd and they can't get rid of him soon enough. They seem to think their mission is to make sure everyone else is being tortured to death by how horrible this team is". Then, you have the people that say, "OK, we have issues, but, they are fixable and we are one heck of a lot better than when he came on board. AND, we are better than most programs in the country and even our conference." In other words, "we have a good program that can improve to be great".

How am I changing the question? The original post, depicted the idea that black people are nowhere close to white people in America. I believe you erroneously threw out a response that didn't apply to what TGH (in his post) was talking about. Hey, if you want to bow out...I'm fine doing that too.

No. Was that the question? Some people seem strangely eager to add conditions to what seemed like a straightforward question. Same answer. I'm just confused by your response as it pertains to the OP. The OP displays how far behind black people are in America compared to white people. You then list a bunch of improvements. When i question if those really helped black people get more equal to white's, you act confused. So, I'm confused by your confusion. Look at the post that I replied to. I quoted a specific post. It wasn't the OP. As a matter of fact . . . the post that I quoted didn't even specifically respond to the OP. Hopefully that clears it up. Fore which, I said that I believe he was talking about specifically what has improved to make Blacks more equal in America and you then responded to my post where I responded to that post. So...it gets back to the fact you responded pretty much to the original post.

No. Was that the question? Some people seem strangely eager to add conditions to what seemed like a straightforward question. Same answer. I'm just confused by your response as it pertains to the OP. The OP displays how far behind black people are in America compared to white people. You then list a bunch of improvements. When i question if those really helped black people get more equal to white's, you act confused. So, I'm confused by your confusion.

I think that's what TGHusker meant as well That's not what he said . . . but we can address those for "black America" if you'd like: 1. Economy - Not race specific. 2. Unemployment - Peaked relatively early in the recession and has since receded. Did more black people find jobs than white? Are there less racist employers than there were 10 years ago? I actually would like to see the statistic. If everyone is correct and the world is stacked against black people, then I would place a bet that unemployment went down more in white America than Black. I hope I'm wrong and welcome the proof. 3. Combat deaths - I think that (2010 numbers) around 30% of active duty enlisted women and 16% of active duty enlisted men were black. Around ~12% of Americans are black so it's fair to say that they are disproportionally represented in our military. It's probably an improvement that they aren't dying as frequently, right? You are really stretching here as a benefit as it applies to racism in America. The military is completely voluntary. Yes, fewer black people are dying on the battle field But, so are white people. Are fewer people discriminating against black people because of it? 4. Uninsured rate - The uninsured rate for black Americans dropped from 18.9% to 15.1% in the first year of the ACA. Is it still higher than in white America? 5. Environmental protection - Not race specific. 6. Medical inflation rates - Not race specific. 7. Financial regulation - Not race specific. 8. Deficit - Not race specific. Either way . . . whether TG meant just black Americans or whether he meant all Americans . . . you'd have to have your head jammed pretty damn far up there to think that nothing has improved under Obama. The OP was about racism and how black people are in such horrible conditions compared to white people. Your post doesn't speak anything of that.

Somewhat you are right. It can have an affect on blocking if the linemen are still communicating on blocking assignments...etc. when the ball is hiked. It can also affect it if the QB sees a blitz and doesn't get the audible called yet and all of a sudden the ball is hiked. Now, there were more issues with blocking in this game than the plays where they did the clapping. I'm not even remotely claiming this had an affect on the entire game. However, on those particular plays, it could have an affect.

More impressive based on the facts. The best systems we have in place to rate teams are unbiased systems that are able to do calculations based on tens of thousands of connections between all 128 FBS teams. These systems will all have, for example, an 11-1 Miss St. team far ahead of a 12-1 Nebraska team because Miss St will have played many teams that rank far higher than those Nebraska played. I don't understand what is difficult to comprehend about that. Your second line of "argument" is incoherent. Upsets are all factored into the system. There is no need to throw out the system because upsets happen.So, it's a scientific wild ass guess. Hmmm....and, my comment about upsets is perfectly relevant here. Sports are won on the field. Not in a computer. If a team goes and wins a game, they have a better record. That is how sports work. Also, conference championship games are arbitrary games created for money. Sometimes they are necessary and break ties (like last year's B1G game) but often they do not. They do not tell us anything more about teams than any other game of the season, but they are given arbitrary added value because they are at the end and labeled "championship" games. If, say, 5-3 Florida plays 8-0 Alabama in the CCG and Florida wins (after losing to Alabama in the regular season), do I think Florida is the most accomplished team in SEC play for that season? Not even close. They finish 6-3 while Alabama finishes 8-1. And the teams are 1-1 head to tead, Florida gets a trophy because of the label. ​You have a point other than for the fact that conferences now are so big the teams don't all play each other. Let's turn your example around. All the almighty experts claim the SEC west is God's gift to college football and basically they could win all win the super bowl if they were allowed to play in it. So, let's say a 19-3 Alabama plays an 11-1 team from the east (Which is perceived to be much weaker). And, Alabama wins. Do you still agree with your assessment above? Alabama has more losses. The "perception" going into the game is that the west was soooo much stronger and the teams better. The problem with your argument is that it's all based on assumptions. Yes, you can sit with huge equations in a computer and THINK you know who is better. But, until the teams play on a field, nobody knows.

Hmmm....I could be wrong and TGHusker could correct me if I am. But, I took his comments as meaning in the area of improving life for black America.

But, that doesn't support the constant complaining and trying to convince everyone that we suck.

because Bell doesn't catch that ball with confidence. Returning punts is completely different than returning kicks. It is absolutely the hardest thing to do in ST. DeJuan Groce is the last good punt returner that NU has had before DPE. Really good punt returners are hard to find. I remember a punt returner back in the early 80's for NU his name was Dave Lidel he was like a 3rd string cornerback but #1 punt returner for like 2 years. He was fearless and pretty good. You never know who is going to be a good punt returner. That's my point.

Well there are only four spots, so they will certainly leave out a conference champion. And there's no reason they wouldn't leave out two, if one non champion is clearly more impressive. A 12-1 team with one top 25 win (maybe barely two with the addition of something like #25 Iowa) is not going to beat out an 11-1 team with five top 25 wins, just because the former technically won a conference (ie. went 1-1 vs. Michigan St.). In addition, Nebraska would certainly not beat out: One-loss ND One-loss Oregon (champ) One-loss FSU (champ) One-loss Baylor (champ) One-loss OU (champ) One-loss TCU (champ) One-loss Okie St (champ) Every one of those teams are not only currently ranked higher, but also have more impressive remaining schedules than Nebraska. So even if the committee refused to put two teams from the same conference in the playoff, all of the above teams would need two losses. The chances of that happening? Perhaps around 0.01%. Here is what drives me crazy about the bolded statement. More impressive based on what? It is absurd to look at schedules and say...well...team A beat team B so that makes them more impressive than team C because they only beat team D. That argument gets blown up every single season what a team D goes and then beats a team A. Ever hear of upsets? Do those happen every year? The only way I could see taking a non conference champion over a conference champion is if that non champion already beat the champion. So, let's say Oregon is not the Champion of the Pac 12. They might get in over MSU because they have already beat them head to head.

I honestly think one of the major reasons why he has been successful over someone like Bell is because he is young, over confident and hasn't been here the last 2-3 years when people have been dropping a lot of punts. Look at the MSU punt return and tell me why Bell, if he catches the ball with confidence, can't make the same play. He didn't make an amazing juke to make a tackler miss. The punt return was set up well with blocking (thanks Randy). He ran the blocking lanes well which Bell does well after catching passes. And, he has speed which Bell has. What he doesn't have but Bell does, is the thought in his mind of...."oh crap, I hope I don't drop this ball".

LOL....last year, in late November, I was at the state football championship games. It was cold and I was waiting for someone so I just stepped inside the doors on the west side of the stadium (the doors to go up to the suites). In walked two guys who I could tell they probably were basketball players but I had no clue who they were. One of them was Petteway because I remembered the hair when I saw him on the court. Yeah...I felt pretty stupid.

Oh, I just look at what recent history has shown us, it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure it out. And, the words of former players weigh heavy with me. But, in your defense, it's easier to make ill informed opinions when you're 1500 miles from Lincoln and don't pay attention to those things. It is easier to have a conversion with a former Husker in Omaha than in Cali, so you do have a built in excuse. If you're referring to instances where Callahan alienated players, that is still happening. It apparently appears to be the "right" players, and not the wrong ones that BC did. And California has plenty of former Huskers and alums as well. Yeah,i probably should have thought a little more on that statement, i know there's quite a few former Huskers in Cali. I also know that not all former Huskers aren't wild about Bo. But, i wasn't referring to that anyhow. I was referring to how toxic the program was at that time, and how much work it was to change the culture. It was extremely toxic and like Bo or not, he has worked to restore it to be not as toxic with everything related to the past.

Good. This was the over signing of the 90's Sooo....take away our ability to "over sign" but have rules in place so that other schools can do what you say is the same thing? Personally, I don't see a reason why a kid can't come to Nebraska, attend school and work to become qualified before he participates in the program.

Basically, what us losing to MSU has done is taken our destiny somewhat out of our hands. Yes, we need to win out in an impressive manner. However, also, some other teams will need to lose along the way.