Dawg to the Bone

I have to like that guy in your sig. I didn't mean to imply that UGA didn't want to win, but simply that Nebraska seemed to play harder from my perspective. I am used to UGA scoring about 40 points or more on anyone we play. This game was field goal city. We couldn't find the way to knock it in the end zone. Nebraska's will to keep us out of the end zone was stronger than our will to get into the end zone. The credit goes to Nebraska for that. It seems to me that these two teams are very close athletically and competitively. The score the last two years bears this out. If the two teams are that close than whoever plays better (or wants it more) on a given day will get the victory. Anyway, I don't want to diminish from the Cornhusker victory. I am a closet Nebraska fan (after UGA, of course). You guys have always been a clean program with a blue collar work ethic that just worked hard and imposed their will on other teams. I would love to see Nebraska return to dominance again on the national scene. Of course, I would also love to see UGA return to dominance on the national scene. I can't help but wonder if it is going to take a coaching change for both teams for this to happen, but that is a discussion for another day.

I don't think either team was particularly sharp, but it did appear that Nebraska wanted it more. The muffed punt was indicative of Georgia's season. We had a muffed punt against Vandy (and a punt snap go over the punters head) that cost us that victory. We made similar special team mistakes against most teams that we played this year. You have a right to be justifiably proud of the Cornhusker effort. 3rd and 99 for a touchdown? Are you kidding me? The team that wanted it more won this game. The Georgia gameplan seemed very conservative. I don't know if it was because of the weather, the new Georgia QB or what Nebraska was doing defensively, but UGA just wouldn't or couldn't open it up. You guys still did a good job of containing Gurley. You couldn't tell from this game, but if he gets on a roll, he's a beast. Abdullah looked great just like last year. He has great vision and strength for his size. The Nebraska run defense was very good against us. The offense seemed to find a way to rise to the occasion on third and long. Hopefully, we will not see you next year, but good luck just the same. Maybe I should say hopefully we will see you since that means we are probably one of the top four teams in the country. I think that is the only way we get matched up again.

The BIG TEN still has cache. The problem is that the rest of the league took a step backwards and the current flagship Ohio State keeps losing the big game. If nebraska had come in and been dominant, they would have went right back up to the top of the college football world, but that hasn't happened either. Nebraska still has a great brand. Certainly top ten and some would argue top five. Like Notre Dame, the old ghosts will wake back up when Nebraska starts winning and competing for national championships again. I think it was a goo move by Nebraska, especially with Texas stacking the deck. Same for TAMU.

According to Rivals (non paid content) 1. TEXAS TOTAL/AVERAGE: 1,850/185.0 HIGH/LOW: 214 (2006)/ 169 (2005) It's no surprise Texas topped the list of BCS-producing states. For starters, that section of the country is bonkers for football. Texas also ranks second in total population. In a typical year, the state not only stocks the rosters at in-state schools but sends several players to many of college football's elite conferences in other parts of the country. In the 2011 class, an astounding 125 players signed with Big 12 schools. Fifty-one others inked with other BCS teams. 2. FLORIDA TOTAL/AVERAGE: 1,688/168.8 HIGH/LOW: 198 (2011)/ 126 (2002) The Sunshine State not only produces a ton of FBS players each year but an abundance of BCS-caliber prospects. The state's jump in BCS players in recent years coincided with USF's move to the Big East. Four BCS in-state programs (Florida, Florida State, Miami and USF) get the majority of their players from Florida. Many SEC programs also make a living there. 3. CALIFORNIA TOTAL/AVERAGE: 1,276/127.6 HIGH/LOW: 141 (2004)/ 114 (2009) California's large population is a key to its high number of BCS signees. California, Stanford, UCLA and USC don't have to go very far to find high-quality players. The other schools in what was the Pac-10 (now Pac-12) have also feasted on California talent, as have programs such as Colorado and Notre Dame. This state has produced tons of top-level talent. Tennessee plucked All-American Eric Berry from the Peach State. 4. GEORGIA TOTAL/AVERAGE: 922/92.2 HIGH/LOW: 126 (2010)/ 73 (2007) After Florida, the Peach State is the South's biggest producer of BCS signees. Much of it has come from the metro-Atlanta area but South Georgia also consistently puts out major talent. Georgia and Georgia Tech aren't the only schools that have done well here. Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State and Tennessee all typically recruit the state heavily. 5. OHIO TOTAL/AVERAGE: 694/69.4 HIGH/LOW: 91 (2010)/ 52 (2003) How good is Ohio at producing BCS players? Consider this: In 2011, Ohio State, one of the country's most consistent programs, signed 14 in-state recruits. And that's pretty much the norm. Ohio produces so much talent that every Big Ten program spends a good bit of time recruiting there. Ditto for Notre Dame, which has landed 22 Ohioans since 2002. - See more at: http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1239398#sthash.HWeoceAC.dpuf

Okay a dawg perspective. I really didn't want a rematch, because we have nothing to really gain. We haven't played Michigan but once in our history (which we won), so I really wanted that match-up. That's the way it goes I guess. About those UGA losses: Clemson, close game. Could have gone either way. Special teams mistakes cost us any chance we had. From the eyeball test, I thought Clemson looked a little better. We do tend to start slow every year. Vandy. We should have put them away early, but we let them hang around and in the 2nd half we muffed a punt return that lead to an immediate score for Vandy and we mishandled a punt snap that lead to a Vandy TD. We gave away a victory. To Vandy's credit they kept playing hard enough to be in position to take advantage of these mistakes. Mizzouri. Like Clemson, close game that could have gone either way. UGA made some special teams mistakes that took away any chance of victory. Mizzou came to play and UGA played sloppy. The team that made less mistakes won the victory. Auburn. A tale of two halves. UGA should have won, but by now everyone has seen the immaculate deflection. This UGA team is not quite as dynamic as last years, but it is very similar. The defense is a little better at run defense than last year and worse at pass defense. The Offense has the potential to be explosive at times, but also can be penalty prone and static if the run is stuffed. So much is based on a good running game on 1st down to make the play action passing game work that stuffing the run seems to shut down our offense some. With Murray you could put it on his back and let him pass us to victory. It remains to be seen if Mason can do this as well. I haven't got to see nebraska much this year, so i don't really know what to expect. I picked them to win the UCLA game and then got pissed and stopped watching Nebraska after that loss. It is certainly a better match up than many of the bowl games, so i guess we can be thankful for that.

Well, Sadly, you have to remember that a lot of our young fans and posters are too young to remember when Nebraska was a nationally dominant power, perhaps the dominant football program in the land. UGA is about 11th all time in wins, etc. and that is probably about where we deserve to be ranked as a program. I do think UGA has a lot to offer as a program because of the fertile recruiting ground. Still, there are other factors to consider with listing something as a desirable coaching job. Fan expectations, program support overall, university support, living area, etc. , are just a few of the things that come into play other than recruiting potential. Recruiting location is a nice luxury if cultivated well, but it is not everything. Explain Boise State? Aside from that is Notre Dame really in a recruiting hotbed? I would probably question a few of those, but really is there really that much difference in the top 20 programs or so?

Sadly, I tend to agree with you. I really thought Nebraska might take this one. UCLA is only in the second year of Mora coaching right? And I would think that Nebraska has recruited better than UCLA in the past with the exception of maybe last year. Pellini is supposed to be a defensive coach, but there was no push at all from the defensive line and the defensive woes continue. Nebraska has not played really good defensive ball for awhile now (Suh excluded). The offense had no response when the pressure came and the defense couldn't perform because the D-line had no separation from the blockers and couldn't get off the blocks to pass rush or to stuff the run. I was pulling for the Big Red yesterday like I had money on them, so I was very disappointed that the big lead was blown and there was no real response when UCLA started making a comeback. We have all seen big leads disappear, but usually both teams respond like the A&M/Bama game. Nebraska is too good of a program to put up with that level of performance. I guess we'll see how the rest of the year goes, but if it doesn't improve tremendously, Nebraska is going to have to decide if they just want to be good or if they really want to make a run at the national title by getting in a big name coach capable of getting top shelf talent and using the talent they have effectively. I say this not to rub salt in the would, but because I follow Nebraska and for some reason would like to see them return to prominance. I want to see someone other than Ohio State and Michigan rule the BIG Ten. I get tired of hearing about those two programs and Nebraska has just as proud a history. There is still a lot of football to be played, Hopefully The Big Red can turn it around.

I am still checking in from time to time. I would love to see the Huskers unseat the "big two" in the BIG TEN. You know on another board they recently posed the question. "Who is America's team?" It's a stupid question, but if I had to answer I would say aside from teh service academies it would have to be either Notre Dame because of hte nationwide Catholic appeal or Nebraska. nebraska is right in the heartland and represents the best of America. It's neither west coast, nor east. It's neither north or south. It is in the heartland. I had also see someone mention that Nebraska would never be able to return to prominanace because of the lack of a recruiting base in it;s geographic area. I say hogwash. Nebraska never had a probalem pulling talent from all over the country. I don't know how many star players they pulled from Californis, Florida, Georgia, etc. With the facilities there, nebraska can be a draw again. They just have to put their name back on the map for the younger players. Sadly, Most of them can't remember the last tiem Nebraska had a truly dominant team. If Nebraska can get back on the national map, no one in the middle of the country can recruit with them. Who in the surrounding states has the reputation (and probably facilities) that nebraska has? No one. Well, anyway good luck agaisnt UCLA. Unless you guys trip up (lack of focus, whatever) you should win this one by about ten points.

You guys made a believer out of me in that bowl game. After I went back and watched the game again, I was really impressed with your offensive scheme and Martinez and the running backs. I know you lost that one kid to the NFL, but I am sure you guys will be fine. That game could have went either way. UCLA plays a pro set much like UGA, but I am not sure they are ready defensively to stop your offense. I am also not sure their QB can play as consistently or make the big plays tht Murray could make. I really like Mora as a coach there and think UCLA is a rising star in the 12 PAC. I just don't think they have enough to get past you guys yet. I'll be pulling for my 2nd favorite team in red.

If Frazier doesn't get in its a crime. All three are deserving nominees for sure.

The one constnat is that this is always being redifined. There was Miami in ehe 80's. You guys and FSU in the 90's. UF had a nice run as well. Bama in the late 2000's. Many schools before that. NU was the more dominant in the 90s. Bama has an impressive run going. Overall programs is probably Notre Dame, USC and Bama with NU and Texas not far behind. If Bama contunes this streak, they will certainly be able to make that claim.

#8 RB in the nation. Looks like you guys got you a good one. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1478836-scouting-report-analysis-and-predictions-for-nebraskas-new-rb-terrell-newby?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=recruiting

Well, I meant servicable as a compliment from the standpoint that he was consistently good for yardage. He didn't appear to have break away speed and was more like Toby Gerhardt than Adrian Peterson. That's not a bad thing. He was a very good back, but not in the league of the Alabama backs, or Lattimore, or Gilleslee. He's a damn good back, but I wouldn't trade our backs (Gurley and Marshall) for him. Another thing, UGA's defense has been suspect against the run all year, so before you go heeping praise for his performance against UGA's substandard rushing defense, I'd consider the source.

Exactly. You can't give a guy like Murray that much time or he'll make you pay. We need a front four that can get pressure all by themselves without having to send two or three more guys also because, as we also saw, a qb of that caliber will make you pay on an all out blitz also. Our D problems start up front. The same could be said about our O problems also but those are not near as severe. Been saying it for quite awhile; control the lines and we'll be sitting fat. Bingo! The teams that have really given us problems this year have a crazy good pass rush (see USCe). I think Peliini had a good plan and it worked for a little while. He basically stacked the line (thought disguised) to stop the run and put more pressure on Murray and went primarily man to man on our receivers. Your DBs were on them better than any other DBs I remember all year long. You could see on TV that they had a hard time getting open. The only real success that we had is with wither pin-point passing by Murray and great receptions by the recievers or with teh drag routes where there were some defensive breakdowns by Nebraska (TE Lynch and WR Conley for example). I would say if Nebraska had a weakness on defense it was lack of a serious pass rush to make Murray get happy feet and make more errors. You guys slowed down the run, but you couldn't capitilize on the second part and that is gettiing to the QB to knock him off his game. UGA had the opposite problem. We had a difficult time slowing down the run, but had a pretty good pass rush when the QB decided to throw the ball. With that QB (Martinez) and his mobility and your RBs that aren't outstanding, but very serviceable (like a possession receiver, dependable) you guys should run it 70 % of the time, IMO or at least do more run/pass options. Martinez could probably move the ball down the field on his own if you can get him in space. Just my 2 cents.

This is true. UGA was missing Marlon Brown, Micheal Bennett and then Malcom Mitchell got hurt at the very beginning of the game. Mithcell is a game changer, so I am sure we missed him. To be fair, there is a some drop off, but all of our receivers are pretty good "hands" guys. The difference is that a Mitchell or a Bennett is more likely to take it to the house. Mitchell is our best pure offensive threat. Having said that, I tought the other guys played well, so I am not sure it made that much difference.