Bruleif

Really? UCLA's speed and play calling had NOTHING do to with it? C'mon, man. You make good points. But (in my admittedly biased view) the Huskers really crapped the bad last year in Pasadena. I really give UCLA credit for taking advantage. However, even with home field advantage, 600+ yards of offense, +1 in turnovers, and a safety, the Bruins still only won by 6 points. That's where I get most of mt confidence that the Huskers will win this year; I don't think UCLA will have that many advantages again. All that being said, you should check out the thread about whether Husker fans handle losing well. You might be right about this year. I have said for a while that I think the game will be close and will be decided by turnovers You know prior to last year Franklin had a fumbling problem but only fumbled once during the 2012 season, so in a way you caught him at his best. Good for us, bad for you. He did have a great game and, yes, a part of that was due to poor tackling by Nebaska. You know in previous years Franklin had a real fumbling problem but last year he only fumbled once.

Really? UCLA's speed and play calling had NOTHING do to with it? C'mon, man. I'd probably say that the 8 missed tackles on every other play by NU's defenders had more to do with it, but what the hell do I know? There were tacklers there to make the stop every play, but our guys looked like little girls trying to take down Franklin. Absolute most frustrating game I've seen in my life. Listen, I have been on the losing side of games like that many, many times, so I know how you feel. It is VERY frustrating. I used to yell at the TV "Tackle! Tackle!" It's very frustrating to watch your team when they are NOT performing up to the level that you KNOW they are capable of. (Sorry for ending the sentence with a preposition.) What used to frustrate me the most was stupid penalties, like hitting a player out of bounds. That would make me go ballistic. I didn't mind penalties of effort, but brain cramps would really bother me. Also, I would hate it when a coach would not call a time out at the end of the first half to try to score before halftime. Some of the UCLA coaches - Terry Donohue chief among them - seemed to think that you could carry your timeouts from the first half into the second half. He drove me nuts on that. Now that I realize that I have absolutely no effect on the game - whether I am at the Rose Bowl or in front of the TV - I am much calmer. Still hurts to lose, but I can shrug it off pretty quickly. (Except for losses against USC - those sting for a while.)

Really? I did not know that. I know that Oklahoma says it's "white" is "cream".

Actually, I've never had any problem wearing Bruin colors to away games and that includes visits to some of the most iintense college footbal venues (Texas, Tennessee, Alabama, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Ohio State and Nebraska). The closest I ever came to be hassled was actually at the Rose Bowl when Oklahoma was visiting. Some drunk Oklahoma fans were out of control but the problem was taken care of pretty quickly and without harm to anyone. Just in case you get on Jeopardy!, the current Bruin uniforms are what is called "true blue" (no longer powder blue) and gold, not yellow. Perhaps it's not as exciting as red and white (the colors for at least 15 other teams) but we Bruin fans really like it. I can't think of another team that has our exact colors. Am I wrong? He wasn't referring to UCLA fans - he was telling Nebraska fans not to wear blue/yellow , because that's what our opponent wears. I can't tell if your condescension is on purpose or not, but for the record, I really like UCLA's color combo and always have. Your home uniforms always pop. I did not mean to be condescending at all. I have always respected the Nebraska program and its fans. And thanks for the compliments on the UCLA uni's. I've always liked them since I saw them in the 1966 Rose Bowl vs. Michigan State. For some reason both teams in the game wore their home units, so the Spartans where in their home green and white. Back then the Bruins wore powder blue jerseys, khaki pants and the gold helmets. It looked GREAT on TV. Give it a look on YouTube and I think you will agree.

It's been my experience that the fans cannot really create any enthusiasm for a particular game, especially by what they wear. It's the quality of the matchup that does it or if there is history between the two teams. I've never heard a coach say in a postgame presser "Those black shirts worn by the crowd turned the tide for us." Don't get me wrong. A pumped-up home crowd can really get a team going early in the game but that's about it, IMHO.

Really? UCLA's speed and play calling had NOTHING do to with it? C'mon, man.

That is like bragging about being the smartest person at retard camp. We played absolutely awful and lost by six on the road. Yeah, beating THAT Nebraska team on THAT night is nothing to brag about.... Ok, let me see if I can understand your logic. If a team I support beats another team I should not be proud of that victory because the other team did not play at its best and/or did not have the right talent and/or did not have the better coaching? Doesn't that essentially mean that I could NEVER be proud of ANY victory by my team. Doesn't it also mean I could NEVER state that my team was the better team that day? The whole point of the games is to see which team can bring their "A" game that day. It ALWAYS comes down to turnovers, penalties, better execution, better tackling, better play-calling. I submit as my proof that I have never heard a losing college coach say in a post-game presser "Well, we played and coached our absolute best and could not have played better but they were just better than us today." They NEVER say that. They always detail the shortcomings in their team's performance on that day. One of my college football rules is that when my team loses I ALWAYS say "the better team won," because that is exactly what happened. Saying otherwise is just a feeble attempt to make myself feel better. It's nice to say things that make you feel better, but it is not necessarily the same thing as telling the truth. Am I wrong?

Actually, I've never had any problem wearing Bruin colors to away games and that includes visits to some of the most iintense college footbal venues (Texas, Tennessee, Alabama, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Ohio State and Nebraska). The closest I ever came to be hassled was actually at the Rose Bowl when Oklahoma was visiting. Some drunk Oklahoma fans were out of control but the problem was taken care of pretty quickly and without harm to anyone. Just in case you get on Jeopardy!, the current Bruin uniforms are what is called "true blue" (no longer powder blue) and gold, not yellow. Perhaps it's not as exciting as red and white (the colors for at least 15 other teams) but we Bruin fans really like it. I can't think of another team that has our exact colors. Am I wrong?

I do that all the time. I know I type the wrong one/won but even knowing I have this problem, I still do it. The wiring gets messed up and it never seems to go back. That's what happens when you get old.......... Ouch!!!!

oops..better team "won". Too many root beer floats tonight.

I promise that if Nebraska beats us fair and square this year I will come here and admit the better team one and offer congrats to the Nebraska fans. And believe me I've had to do a lot of that on many different boards in the last 10 years.

Ok, fair enough....I over-reacted. But would you at least admit that there was no doubt that on that day UCLA was the better team and that the win was no fluke?

Sorry, hate to be a bad guest, and I have been very civil up until now, but when a numbskull makes fun of the UCLA bowl game loss in the same season when the Bruins beat the Nebraska and racked up 600 yards of offense in doing so, he/she should be prepared to have the result of that game thrown in his/her face. Might be a good idea not to talk smack about a team that beat you the last time you met. I certainly follow that rule. We will see in September who is better THIS year but there is no doubt that the Bruins were better last year. Does anyone disagree?

Wait, didn't the Bruins just get smashed in the Holiday Bowl by perennial football powerhouse Baylor? lol But yeah, the 1998 Holiday Bowl was not a high point of Husker football. It pretty much marked the end of our '90s run. No, but the 2012 Bruins sure kicked Nebraska's ass in the Rose Bowl.

As opposed to the bowl performance of Nebraska at the end of the 1998 season, which was a loss to that perennial football powerhouse, the University of Arizona, in the always highly prized Holiday Bowl.

Since we are all over-analyzing something we have absolutely no control over, I thought I would toss one more more factoid into the mix. This upcoming season is the first season since 1998 in which UCLA has had both the Defensive Coordinator and the Offensive Coordinator back from the previous season. 1998 was not a bad year for UCLA - the Bruins came within 4 points of playing Tennessee for the NC.

I just finished listening to a two-hour podcast that is a recap of the first week of Bruin fall practice by two gentlemen at Bruin Report Online. Their summary is basically that the freshman class looks like it will be ready to contribute more than was previously thought. Raves for the DL and OL. FWIW.

I won't argue with you Brulief. I been in Memorial Stadium for some snoozers. Our crowd can be a bit sedated sometimes, not sure why, but probably no different than any other stadium in the country right? I mean, I haven't been to any others, so I don't know. By what I've seen on T.V. I'd say VT and Wisconsin look like two of the most kickass crowds to be in. Looks like a lot of fun. Either way, as sedated as we can be, I've seen some of the loudest and craziest moments in college football happen in Memorial Stadium, and when things are going right, there's no stopping the Big Red Machine or the crowd that roots for them. Watch out, cuz' if we get rolling on UCLA, your asses won't know what hit ya til' it's over. On the record though, I think it's gonna be a good game and count me as one that thinks this thing will be close. ^^^just a little sh#t talking. I'm AMPED! GBR!!!!! On the topic of homefield advantage I was at Texas Stadium (I think it was called that then) in 1997 when UCLA beat Texas 66-3. The Bruins were 0-2 going into that game and not ranked. Texas was undefeated going into the game and ranked #11. It was just one of those days when Texas could not do anything right and UCLA could not do anything wrong. I think it was 36-3 at halftime. That was an example of ZERO homefield advantage. I think most of the Texas fans had left by halftime. You could hear a pin drop in the stadium. The funniest thing about it was that there was a couple sitting behind my girlfriend and me that was totally decked out in UCLA regalia but who spoke with obvious Texas accents. Out of curiosity I finally asked them "Are you guys UCLA alums?" They responded "No, we are Texas A&M graduates and we hate Texas so much we root for anyone who plays them.". Ouch !!!!

I won't argue with you Brulief. I been in Memorial Stadium for some snoozers. Our crowd can be a bit sedated sometimes, not sure why, but probably no different than any other stadium in the country right? I mean, I haven't been to any others, so I don't know. By what I've seen on T.V. I'd say VT and Wisconsin look like two of the most kickass crowds to be in. Looks like a lot of fun. Either way, as sedated as we can be, I've seen some of the loudest and craziest moments in college football happen in Memorial Stadium, and when things are going right, there's no stopping the Big Red Machine or the crowd that roots for them. Watch out, cuz' if we get rolling on UCLA, your asses won't know what hit ya til' it's over. On the record though, I think it's gonna be a good game and count me as one that thinks this thing will be close. ^^^just a little sh#t talking. I'm AMPED! GBR!!!!! So we are on the same page. Of course we could BOTH be wrong and it could be a blow out by one team or the other but I really, really doubt that. I think the quality of the coaching on both sides will prevent that from happening. Besides, the likelihood of the game being close is what makes the anticipation of it so much fun.

Please. I've been to many different college football venues, including Nebraska's. I can tell you from experience that the Nebraska home field is no more intimidating the the home fields for Texas, Tennessee, Alabama and Ohio State, just to name a few I have been to. I've also been to all of the PAC-12 venues and no stadium that I have been to has better acoustics for the home team than Washington's stadium.

As a Bruin fan, my take is that the game will be close and will be decided by turnovers. I am somewhat surprised by the predictions I see here that Nebraska will clobber the Bruins. I don't see that. The game was close last year and while Nebraska will be better (according to most posters here) I think the Bruins will also be improved, despite the loss of Franklin and Fauria. Plus I think that in college football the homefield advantage is overrated. The Bruins have won away games in the last decade at Tennessee, Texas and Alabama, normally pretty tough places to win.

Owa's being out for the season should increase the likelihood that Eddie Vanderdoes will see more action earlier. How much more action and how much earlier is difficult to tell. I hope he plays in the Nebraska game because that would be a good gauge of his talent. Vanderdoes should play a lot during 2013. I do not think that the UCLA coaching staff is thinking of reshirting him due to injuries to the DL. This is just my guess.

But what if I sign a letter of intent to go to a school which is 1,000 miles away from where I live and then there is a serious illness in my family and I want to be closer to home. I have not been "stolen" by another school. It is just that the factors in my decision to choose the distant school have now changed. As long as the recruit has to prove that his or her case is unusual I have no problem with it. And to the comment made somewhere in this site that Vanderdoes is not really close to home because Auburn, CA is about 370 miles from Westwood, the point is that there are many flights from LAX to the Bay Area and they are all about one hour, so he would be about one hour from home, air travel-wise.

Of course as UCLA fan I am happy that Vanderdoes got the waiver. But is it really that important? Will a true freshman D-lineman make that big of an impact? Perhaps yes but perhaps no. Plus I do not get the feeling that the NCAA's ruling is going to open any floodgates of recruits changing their minds AFTER the NLI has been signed and submitted. Of course I could be wrong.

Can a prospect get out of his NLI if either the head coach or his position coach leaves his school of choice AFTER he has submitted his NLI?