Born N Bled Red

I learned targeting is not a thing if it's done against a 6'5" QB wearing red.

Simms turns the ball over and finds ways to lose. Haarberg turns the ball over yet finds ways to win. That's the difference.

All of you demanding Simms get another chance can STFU now.

Boy, that situation right there might, in itself, lead to a preposterous number of losses in one score games. Then throw in the refs swallowing thier whistles when Nebraska is on defense and not being able to breath without blowing them when Nebraska is on offense, and you have Nebraska siting out bowl games for a few years.

I know exactly what happened on that play, I've done it in games myself. Your eyes are watching both players and both get open, mentally you decide to throw the ball and somehow your brain aims for right between the two open players instead of for one or the other. It sucks, its like you're mentally tracking them both at the same time.

I think it really depends on what time frame you're looking at. If you look at just this last game, Sims didn't have any and Haarberg had several, so I'd say Sims is trending up...

And T Mart on the scout team. I bet Pelini would give his left testicle to go back and figure out a way to get TMart in at qb that year. 1 decent QB away from a natty.

So do you like that we are forced to play young guys then?

Maybe a Demornay Pierson-El type player? Could definitely use that production.

And because its going to snow this week, it certainly can't mean the earth is warming. - Its all good dude. This has already gone on too long for a joke that Clemson somehow stole our mojo. If you need a win, here you go, take it. I'll ship you a medal sometime.

1) You didn't use the same metric as I. I used win percentage. Not total wins. 2) even with that, this graph shows two programs holding relatively steady across a random 8 year time span, during which each program hit plateaus in their overall trendline. No one measures long term trends in 8 year clips. I get that you're trying to play devils advocate and illustrate how data can be cherry picked and looked at differently, but dude that's a stretch and a half.

Here you go, I backed the data up 5 more years, and included trendlines.

Do you know what trendlines are? A one season variation of half a percent does not make a trend. Do I need to back the chart up 5 more years to more clearly show the Huskers have been trending down since 1997??? Seriously you are arguing just to argue. We have been in a 25 year decline. The only hope is last year we hit our floor and we.go back on the upswing.

Ok dude, I get it. Sometimes you just want to argue, I get it. Its ok, let it out man, all that anger, its cool, I can take it. Sorry you had a tough weekend. Bo Pelini beat Dabo Swinney on January 1, 2009. My suggestion, made in jest is on that night, even though Nebraska won, Clemson somehow stole our ability to win. You seem to take umbrage at my suggestion that in 2008, Nebraska was a program in its decline, while Clemson was on the rise. So lets see- before 2009, what does Nebraska's trend line look like? Hmm- steadily going down. And Clemson's? Stabilized. Two years after that game, Clemson surpassed the Huskers in win percentage, and have not fallen below it since. Nebraska's has continued the downward trendline. I fail to see your point or issue with my comment, but like I said - sometimes a person just needs to argue. I get it. Hope your night gets better.

What happened after that season and in the ensuing season? Put the 20 year win totals on a line graph for each team and compare. Clemson's program was on the rise, Nebraska's was experiencing a dead cat bounce. I was jokingly conjecturing that Clemson somehow stole our MOJO when we won that game, as their program continued on to Natty's and ours continued on to Riley and Frost.

When Bo Pelini beat Dabo we were a program in decline and they were a program on the rise. Maybe we somehow stole our MOJO back from them

Haarberg may have made some poor decisions and had some dumb moments, but if you now feel, after 4 games, he has caught up to Sims in the number of those mistakes, the fact that it took 4 games to match Simms 2 shows who the better QB is. I still say, if we started HH instead of Simms, we have a win at Minny.

I learned you can now hug, have hands on two planes and have two guys with arms out clothesline a player and none of it is holding.

Hey guys. We have like 0 wide receivers left let's run 70% passes against a team that cont stop the run... idiots.

Ketp get blindsided running his route or what??

Yes, and buckeyes are poisonous nuts, and Hawk eyes aren't even the whole animal, don't know why they only wanted to celebrate the eyes of a hawk.

That would have been the outcome had we started Haarberg against Minny anyway. With an average offense we would have hung with, maybe beat Colorado, for the whole game.

Why wasn't that targeting? 10 years ago, great play, today's rules that should've been flagged.

One thing I'm surprised I haven't seen more of is how much it hurt to see the guy who should have been the centerpiece of our defense running around tackling like a Blackshirt for the Wolverines. Hauseman could've been the guy to build a defense around for four full years. Stung everytime I saw him out there.