BigRedBuster

That's about as honest as Bo has ever been ref an injury. Who knows. It would be nice that he's using this to make Wisky game plan for 3 different backs.....Sadly, after 6 years of Bo and Co, I have yet to see Bo or this staff really do anything strategically early in the season to set up something later on. From the "vanilla" play on D (thought we were holding back) or the vanilla on O (ready to unleash the red storm and still waiting) etc....... I think its Bo being honest. I'll be shocked if AA has secretly been going full speed the past few days and is ready to unleash the beast. Would love it, but doubtful.... Then you haven't paid attention.

Probably still forking out $50 to watch games on friggen pay per view.

I honestly don't understand a fan who thinks ranting against a program like that is enjoyable for either themselves or anyone who even hears it. What purpose does it really serve other than showing how absolutely immature and idiotic the fan is.

The more I think about this, the more I honestly don't like it. I'm usually not someone who cares about this stuff. But, this is just a horrible idea of a trophy and a forced issue with the game. "Freedom Trophy". This game, these teams, this trophy has absolutely nothing to do with "Freedom" and quite frankly, I think it actually cheapens anything that pertains to what freedom and our military stand for. It's two organizations trying to make more money off of the entire thought.

Have you even watched our D line play this year or are you just reiterating arguments from past years and assume they are true now?

He is not a starter and will likely only get 10-20 minutes per game. He gives us depth, but he lacks any shooting range. Of course, we may see more of him once we play against more physical teams in conference. Yeah...but, with even just the 8 minutes he got, I was hoping for more than 2 rebounds and no points. It's his first time on the floor with this group. He has time to develop and get chemistry with the other players.

It's not that the GOP won't make it easy for them... it's that they make it damned impossible for anything to get done. Obstructionism is their sole goal, and then you seem surprised that the Democrats didn't get more done. I'm talking about more than just the last 3-4 election cycles. I'm talking long term. Neither side really wants to "fix" anything. It is all wedge issues that both sides really really want to keep going to motivate their base and get votes.

Ummm....no.....me wanting out had very little to do with that particular game.

Stuck in neutral....with the #9 rushing offense in the country? Averaging 6 yards a carry Is beck running for those yards that make us the #9 rushing offense in the country? A lot of it is the fact that we have a running back who is just that good...I think I could call an offense with AA and have them ranked #9 nationally in rushing. Wow....you need to go get a coaching job then.

I'm a bit more cynical than that . . . I see the Republicans winning more elections when people see that government isn't working. Republicans can make sure that the government doesn't work . . . and the media will still play the "both sides" game. So the GOP short circuits the government and then campaigns on the claim that the government doesn't (and can't!) work. The Democrats have a more difficult path in that they actually have to make the government work. It's rather ingenious actually. Similar things can be said about many issues. The Dems win the more poor people their are if they can convince everyone it's republican's fault they are poor. The Dems win if racism is still front and center in the media and they can convince everyone it's those mean conservatives that are keeping them down. The Dems win if there are major problems in the environment when they point to the Republicans supporting those big evil corporations. The Dems win on these issues even though when they are in office, nothing ever really gets accomplished to make them much better. When it doesn't happen, they just cry and point to the other side as the big meanies that prevents them from doing anything. The poor, black, environmentalists then race out to the polls to vote for them and the Dem politicians laugh all the way to the bank. There will always be poor people. There will always be black people who are affected by racism. There will always be an environmental issue somewhere. The Dems love it. Why do you think that is? Is it because the Dems didn't try to do anything? Or is it because, for example, the GOP and their propaganda television station make the EPA seem like it is headed by Hitler himself? Hey....I didn't say the Republicans don't make it easy for them.

I'm a bit more cynical than that . . . I see the Republicans winning more elections when people see that government isn't working. Republicans can make sure that the government doesn't work . . . and the media will still play the "both sides" game. So the GOP short circuits the government and then campaigns on the claim that the government doesn't (and can't!) work. The Democrats have a more difficult path in that they actually have to make the government work. It's rather ingenious actually. Similar things can be said about many issues. The Dems win the more poor people their are if they can convince everyone it's republican's fault they are poor. The Dems win if racism is still front and center in the media and they can convince everyone it's those mean conservatives that are keeping them down. The Dems win if there are major problems in the environment when they point to the Republicans supporting those big evil corporations. The Dems win on these issues even though when they are in office, nothing ever really gets accomplished to make them much better. When it doesn't happen, they just cry and point to the other side as the big meanies that prevents them from doing anything. The poor, black, environmentalists then race out to the polls to vote for them and the Dem politicians laugh all the way to the bank. There will always be poor people. There will always be black people who are affected by racism. There will always be an environmental issue somewhere. The Dems love it.

If I had to guess what might possibly keep a guy with this much potential around here for one more season, it would be simple: his boys. Assuming he has any and they're close. One thing I find interesting about this whole conjecture-fest is that it seems like very little is known about the personality of Gregory. Does anyone know him or what he's like? Ever interacted with him? Why did he come here in the first place, and how does he fit in in the locker room? I never sensed he was a vocal team leader, but he doesn't have to be, and no one appears bent on making him fill that role against his wishes. On the field he just looks like a dude going about his business, not much caring about what's going on around him. Ive thought this for a long time. He is just one of those players that goes about his business and makes plays, trots back to the side lines and then goes home. He isn't one of those personalities that we all know. I think one thing that would keep him is he believes this team could make a major move towards the playoffs next year.

The movement on the line has absolutely zero to do with his health. If the line came out at 4 then moved to 6, that means more gamblers were putting money on Wisconsin. That is it. It has nothing to do with experts picking anything. Now, what it may mean is what the public's opinion of our chances if his knee isn't healthy. Big difference. And would AA's health have anything to do with more people picking Wisconsin? Therefore moving the line... How many people in the world really know the facts about how Ameer's knee is doing? Now, if you are talking about the PERCEPTION of his health, then you are right. The public has very limited information on this and gamblers are talking that limited information into account. That may move the line. However, that perception has absolutely nothing to do with reality for which very very few people actually know. Guess I should tell you I'm a conspiracy theorist when it comes to Vegas finding out info that most people do not have. The Illinois game thus year was a perfect example of it! Then you are misunderstanding betting lines. The ONLY thing Vegas cares about is equal money on both sides. The ONLY thing that will move that line is if Vegas sees more money going to one side than the other. Vegas is not secretly trying to figure out which side of this bet to make. They want to put out a line that makes the money equal on both sides. If they are successful at that, they don't give a flying rip who wins. So, the only thing that matters is public perception. In a perfect world for Vegas, all information would be public.

I wouldnt call two blowouts out of three games a rivalry. Also if Alverez wasnt at Wisconsin i really wonder if we would attempt a rivalry with them. Let's face it, none of the B1G opponents feel anything like a rivalry. Nebraska and Colorado were real rivals. They hated us, we hated them. It has tradition being a Black Friday game yearly. I for one thought I'd never say this, but like some have said, I miss playing Big 12 schools. I miss playing Oklahoma, Texas, Oklahoma state, k state, Missouri, Colorado, A&M etc. it just took a few years to realize it. I agree. Living in Tulsa, I miss going to the OSU, OU games here. Also, NU is never in the paper/news down here anymore - it as though we don't matter - well be don't anymore down here. But I liked jawing wt all of the fans here - now there isn't much in common. In regards to the trophy, I don't have a problem with it. I thought Wisc would be a better 'contrived' rival than Iowa. Iowa is like Missouri - a want a be rival. Some fans claim Missouri, Kansas, KSU, ISU were our rivals. We kicked their azzes almost every year. Now, some fans claim Iowa isn't a rivalry because we are so much better of a program than them. Now, I see you say Iowa is like Missouri....a want a be rival. Well, we have some...want a be rivals....in the big Ten. So, what's the difference? Nebraska fans miss the Big XII for two reasons. a) They live in the old Big XII states and miss having games close to them. b) They miss these programs that we kicked the crap out of every year. To me, those are not two good reasons to stay in the Big XII as a program. Sure, it sucks for some fans. But, there are just as many fans in Big X states that now benefit. The program is better off now. More money, more stability, we didn't down grade in football, we drastically upgraded in basketball. So friggen what if we don't play these programs that we played for so long. I'm having a blast watching us against new conference foes. And, to whom ever said Wisconsin fans don't give a crap about us......BS. I traveled that state in sales long before we joined the conference. There are lots of fans who cared about Nebraska back then and would gladly give me a really hard time if we lost. Now, they view us as main opponents to winning the division and the conference. They care about this game. They know how important this is to both teams.

The movement on the line has absolutely zero to do with his health. If the line came out at 4 then moved to 6, that means more gamblers were putting money on Wisconsin. That is it. It has nothing to do with experts picking anything. Now, what it may mean is what the public's opinion of our chances if his knee isn't healthy. Big difference. And would AA's health have anything to do with more people picking Wisconsin? Therefore moving the line... How many people in the world really know the facts about how Ameer's knee is doing? Now, if you are talking about the PERCEPTION of his health, then you are right. The public has very limited information on this and gamblers are talking that limited information into account. That may move the line. However, that perception has absolutely nothing to do with reality for which very very few people actually know.

Meeehh...I really don't care. The fans and players care about winning the game. When one team wins, them carrying off this thing just doesn't have the same appeal as an old jug or axe. Win the game. Everyone's happy. Well.....other than badger fans.

I haven't been able to watch the game. Looking at the stats, Moses Abraham seemed not much of a factor. Is that correct? I'm hoping he can build into a good addition in the paint.

Interesting. Let's look at the head to heads. * - Nebraska 4-1 8-1 * - Minnesota 3-1 6-2 * - Iowa 3-1 6-2 * - Wisconsin 3-1 6-2 Northwestern 2-3 3-5 Illinois 1-4 4-5 Purdue 1-4 3-6 * - Missouri 4-1 7-2 * - Georgia 4-2 6-2 Florida 3-3 4-3 Kentucky 2-4 5-4 South Carolina 2-5 4-5 Tennessee 1-4 4-5 Vanderbilt 0-5 3-6 Nebraska beats Missouri Minnesota loses to Georgia (maybe) Iowa and Florida is close, edge to Florida Wisconsin crushes Kentucky Northwestern and South Carolina is probably pretty close, Not sure here but edge S. Car for arguments sake Illinois crushes Tennessee Purdue crushes Vanderbilt I count 4-3 B1G here, but it could swing either way. I would say yes, B1G West is better then SEC East. B1G East is certainly much better than SEC East. Why would you give the edge to Florida over Iowa? Iowa has the better record. Admittedly, they didn't look that good this weekend against Minny. But, how good is Minny?

The movement on the line has absolutely zero to do with his health. If the line came out at 4 then moved to 6, that means more gamblers were putting money on Wisconsin. That is it. It has nothing to do with experts picking anything. Now, what it may mean is what the public's opinion of our chances if his knee isn't healthy. Big difference.

If I had to choose between the two options in the OP, I would take the second option. However, I think they could make a lot of hay with: a) Create policies that would bring manufacturing back to the US. No, that doesn't mean punish those horrible business owners. Make them want to be here. This would help out the low to middle class by bringing more jobs that actually create something. We can help out these groups without policies that appear to many people as only...."Tax those evil rich people". b) Improve social security in a way that actually is smart and would make the program need based and actually sustainable long term. c) Pass budgets that accomplish what needs accomplished without a bunch of crappy waste that we really don't need. Continue any efforts that have been made to reduce the deficit. d) Create new tax reform that actually makes sense instead of doing things that appears all you do is give things to the rich. Make them pay their share but don't go over board with "those evil rich 1%ers." e) pass immigration policy that actually shows you have a brain in your head. No....that doesn't mean round 8 million people up with brown skin and ship them south. f) Address higher education cost. It is totally outrageous what kids pay now going to college and the debt most are in when they get out. g) Address our energy problems. Continue to use our oil resources as needed. But, have an all out effort to develop new energy sources. Actually, if you accomplish "a", the rest are a lot easier.

Is this directed at me? Bc Ive never once mentioned how great we are to opponents. In fact I ignore opposing fans when I see them in Lincoln, just like I said in my post. And I think the compliments by opposing fans thread is stupid.While your opinion may the minority view, I completely agree with you. I don't see why Nebraska fans go out of their way to be nice to others. We should strive to make our home field a hostile environment where opponents dread playing in. The other team, not their fans, are our friends. They want to destroy us on our home field. We live in a dog-eat-dog world these days where we should utilize the competitive atmosphere to intimidate our opponents, not make them feel welcomed. Not saying we need to go out of our way to fight every visiting fan/player, but there is no reason to be nice to them. However, this is just my opinion so take it for what it's worth. Maybe, I'm just spiteful after living in Chicago for so many years. The fans are there to watch a football game. They have nothing to do with the outcome of the game. The way I look at them is, they are on vacation. I wouldn't want someone messing with me when Im on vacation. But at the same time, I bought this beer and food so stay away from my tailgate unless I know you. Buy your own beer and food. But I agree with treating the opposing TEAM with hostility. Make it intimidating for them, not their fans. Fans may not directly affect the outcome of the game, but they have the possibility to indirectly affect the outcome of the game. For example, let the opposing fans feel welcomed may make them feel more welcomed to cheer at the games. In a close game, after a momentum shifting play in favor of our opponents, they may not be as worried or feel as much as an outsider to cheer for their team, even though they are sitting among Nebraska fans. When the opposing team acknowledges these cheers they may feel support and play better. To say fans have no impact on the game is silly, because if not then what is the fuss over home field advantage. As you've stated the best way to approach this situation, is to ignore the opposing fans... Some of the funnest times I have had in Lincoln is with opposing fans. Heck, in college, we were fierce rivals on the field with OU. After the game? We had a blast with their fans. I just don't understand the attitude some fans have that they need to be rude or intimidating to the opposing fans. It just seems like the most immature way to be a fan and it ruins the experience for so many people. Believe it or not, you being rude to opposing fans doesn't affect the outcome. All it does is makes you feel tough.

Yeah....that sounds like much more fun discussion this week.

If we lose to Wisconsin I'm investing in shower curtain rod companies because there are some husker fans they will instantly become suicidal. They will realize a shower curtain rod isn't strong enough to support them. They will need to be replaced. This thread really isn't needed.

No, this is not at all about racism or individual ability or doing things for yourself. A rule that introduces requirements that weren't there before is going to lower the percentage of people who vote. This is simple cause & effect. There's nothing that will ever change that. You make it enough of a hassle that some people are going to say, "You know what? I'm not going to bother." And everyone is not affected equally by this. It takes advantage of the fact that the extra bother is imposed not indiscriminately, but very clearly on certain people more than others. The bottom line is that any group that has to take additional measures is going to turn out less, as a whole. Republicans are taking advantage of a convenient reality that the groups that happen to be hit hardest by these measures, also happen to vote the other way as a whole. There is nothing more to this than those in power changing the rules of the game so as to help themselves stay in power. why don't we send people door to door to vote. Heck, have people on street corners finding the homeless people and getting them to fill out their ballots or just have anyone walking down the street fill it out. We could do it like those annoying polling people in malls asking you to fill out a questionnaire. I'm sure it is an extreme burden for some people to have to actually go to a polling place and vote. I'm sure that making them actually get to a polling place deters some voters. Isn't that suppressing these poor minority people who....just can't get over a burden in their way to vote?

If Nebraska would have played Alabama's schedule so far, I wouldn't say it's a slam dunk that they are worse than 8-1. Up to now, there could be four potential losses there (WVU, ole miss, a&mmamd Arkansas), but they could be ok too. Either way, that's a better schedule than ours by a damn sight. "potential losses" is totally different than "it ain't 8-1". Ok fine, If Nebraska played that schedule I would predict losses to WVU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, possibly A&M, LSU, Miss. st and Auburn. And oh man would the Auburn loss be ugly. I wouldn't expect you to predict anything different.