GBRedneck

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier." We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns? Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes. There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

eating-popcorn.jpg

Yeah, I've heard of Google. I just figured if you had actually looked it up you'd know right where to find it. http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?doWhat=archive&sportCode=MFB TURNOVER MARGIN (the stats start at 2012 in the link you provided) 2012 NU #105 OSU #27 2011 NU #67 OSU #100 2010 NU #62 OSU #35 2009 NU #33 OSU #31 2008 NU #107 OSU #58 Granted, Oregon State's turnover margin is nothing to write home about. Little better than average, I'd say. But out of the last five years Oregon State was better than Nebraska four out of five times in turnover margin. Am I reading this wrong, or is the data saying pretty much the opposite of your statement above? Or maybe it's because you cherry picked one stat (interceptions, but not fumbles) in one year to support your statement. Is that what it is, cm husker? Can you point out where CM said that Pelini was NOT also plagued by poor turnover margins?

Yeah, I've heard of Google. I just figured if you had actually looked it up you'd know right where to find it. http://web1.ncaa.org/stats/StatsSrv/rankings?doWhat=archive&sportCode=MFB

Because when Husker fans remember the Michigan State game, that's EXACTLY the play that everybody remembers. I guess you missed the common thread in my list. Even in his one big win, Riley made a bonehead endgame coaching decision that almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, which pretty much defines this season. No, I didn't miss it. I just think it's a shame that instead of remembering anything positive about this season, you're choosing only to remember things that corroborate your belief that we have a terrible coaching staff. I've noticed a lot of people seem to think they have ESP around here. Apparently you missed the point of the thread, because you're taking it off course. Start a thread about the top ten positive things about the season and I'll list those.

Because when Husker fans remember the Michigan State game, that's EXACTLY the play that everybody remembers. I guess you missed the common thread in my list. Even in his one big win, Riley made a bonehead endgame coaching decision that almost snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, which pretty much defines this season.

Do you think that could have anything to do with the offensive systems moving away from the ground oriented game? Frankly, due to the reality of recruiting to NU, NU should deploy a "Navy" strategy where NU minimizes possessions by the other team. A lot of that is about offensive ball control. TOP is a decent stat for that, but I wish I had time to go back and look at the detailed numbers from the 80s and 90s. I would bet a lot of money that NU's opponents averaged less possessions per game against NU than most other teams during those years. Strategically, philosophically, however you want to frame it, NU won't consistently compete with and beat the top 10/20 programs trying to out recruit them and running a "match up based" system. We have to have a system that out schemes opponents, not one that relies on "my guy is better than your guy," if we are going to stand a chance. Going toe-to-toe is a receipt for average to below average results. We have the pure talent on the roster to be a 10+ win program if we have the right coach. You use words that people who talk about football use, but your logic can't survive a single sentence. So: We have the pure talent right now, but we can't possibly compete in head to head talent because Nebraska can't recruit pure talent, so we have to rely on a scheme that keeps our offense on the field because we've given up hope that our defense can hold up its end of the bargain. And they shouldn't have to. That's the offense's job. The right coach would understand all this. Right? Listen, I know you're busy and who has time to look up ancient TOP stats these days? So let's speed things up with TOP this year under the wretched stain of Mike Riley and fling-it-all-over-the-place Langsdorf. Nebraska is 26th in Time of Possession in the NCAA, averaging 32 minutes a game, or two minutes behind #1 Stanford. That means this year's Nebraska offense had better time of possession than Clemson, Florida, Iowa, LSU, Oklahoma, run-happy Georgia Tech and Houston, TCU, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Penn State, Ohio State and lingering near the very bottom of TOP, Oregon at #111, Baylor at #115 and North Carolina at #126. TOP doesn't appear to prove much in terms of rushing or defense or winning, because there are a lot of moving parts to the game of football. A better metric has traditionally been turnover margin, an area where Nebraska truly sucks, at #119, a suckage that extends to our former coaching staff. You gotta be careful with subjects you don't know much about and information that doesn't fit your agenda. I know you won't disappoint me. HAHAHAHA! You're focusing on TOP, when he said it was a decent stat, but he was really focusing on number of possessions. Did you not read this sentence? " I would bet a lot of money that NU's opponents averaged less possessions per game against NU than most other teams during those years." As fast as teams scored against Banker's porous D, TOP will be a bit deceptive if you're really looking for number of possessions. And turnover margin has very little to do with number of possessions by either team. Not sure why you suggested that one??? I think your post reveals a new variation on Skitt's law.

I was watching you paint yourself into a corner, and wondered how you'd try to squeeze out of it. Back to thread subject...My expectations over 5 years is that radar will still be peddling his opinions as facts Good friggen Lord.....like that doesn't happen with anyone else. I'm busy defending Riley against unfair attacks, but when I see a feverish Radar in my corner I tend to back away. I'm a big boy, I don't need defending. You missed the point. I'm defending Riley. Not you. Just guessing their are plenty of Riley skeptics who nevertheless roll their eyes when CM Husker goes off the rails. It's kinda like that. No. It's not anything like that. I haven't seen CM go off the rails. I've never seen RADAR anywhere near the rails. CM knows more about football than 99% of the keyboard jockeys here. He actually played AND coached D1 football.

Hail Mary Illinois Bootleg Pass Option with no pass option Wisconsin last series when they have all three timeouts: 1st down Cross, Imani rush up middle for 3 yards to the NEB24 Timeout Wisconsin, clock 01:22. 2nd down Cross, Imani rush up middle for no gain to the NEB24 Timeout Wisconsin, clock 01:18. 3rd down Janovich, Andy rush up middle for 2 yards to the NEB26 Timeout Wisconsin, clock 01:14. Iowa 4th down fade route Pooch kick late against MSU Offsides during Purdue PAT Offsides AGAIN during same Purdue PAT Offsides a 3rd time during same Purdue PAT I see a common thread here. . .

That's silly. Why would they wait until they're way behind to start scoring? Most teams put in subs in late game blowouts. Callahan didn't. He poured it on against the other teams' 3rd string to pad his stats.

Didn't Callahan V.1 show that a pass happy, West coast style offense not fit I Lincoln? Looks like Callahan V.2 is doubling down on the stupid. It wasn't Callahan's offense that got him fired.One of the great fallacies is that Callahan ran an effective offense. More times than not, it was offensive failures that led to defensive blow ups. Sound familiar? Look at the Purdue game this year. Do you carry a little red mao book too? Go back and look at the stats from the Callahan years and early Bo years. It was the defense stupid.... Incorrect. Everything was wrong with Callahan V.1. Remember USC? CM is 100% correct. It's funny how those that militantly defend Callahan V.2 also seem to wax nostalgic about Billy C.V.1. Guess you arent interested in facts. shrugs. All you have to do is look. Callahan's offense was non-existent against anyone with a pulse. All you have to do is look. 1/8 of the points his offense scored in '07 were in the last five minutes of games where he was behind by three TDs or more. Even Osborne's teams were guilty of those late game touchdowns. Why that bum! I don't think you'll find a case where a TO team scored with less than 5 minutes to go while down by more than 21 points. Partly because he was rarely down by more than 21 points. You'll find a few (very few) cases of a TO team scoring in the last 5 minutes when ahead by more than 21. But yes, I remember 3rd string I-backs busting long TDs in the final seconds a few times.

Didn't Callahan V.1 show that a pass happy, West coast style offense not fit I Lincoln? Looks like Callahan V.2 is doubling down on the stupid. It wasn't Callahan's offense that got him fired.One of the great fallacies is that Callahan ran an effective offense. More times than not, it was offensive failures that led to defensive blow ups. Sound familiar? Look at the Purdue game this year. Do you carry a little red mao book too? Go back and look at the stats from the Callahan years and early Bo years. It was the defense stupid.... Incorrect. Everything was wrong with Callahan V.1. Remember USC? CM is 100% correct. It's funny how those that militantly defend Callahan V.2 also seem to wax nostalgic about Billy C.V.1. Guess you arent interested in facts. shrugs. All you have to do is look. Callahan's offense was non-existent against anyone with a pulse. All you have to do is look. 1/8 of the points his offense scored in '07 were in the last five minutes of games where he was behind by three TDs or more. I remember pro-Callahan message board posters defiantly defending Callahan and his offense. The biggest thing they kept on saying was "There is no garbage time!!!" Blast from the past! I remember those guys did NOT like the term "Garbage Time"! But none of them could ever find a game where a team was down by 21 points with 5 minutes to go and came back to win. But Billy C sure did try to score when the other team put in their scrubs.

Didn't Callahan V.1 show that a pass happy, West coast style offense not fit I Lincoln? Looks like Callahan V.2 is doubling down on the stupid. It wasn't Callahan's offense that got him fired.One of the great fallacies is that Callahan ran an effective offense. More times than not, it was offensive failures that led to defensive blow ups. Sound familiar? Look at the Purdue game this year. Do you carry a little red mao book too? Go back and look at the stats from the Callahan years and early Bo years. It was the defense stupid.... Incorrect. Everything was wrong with Callahan V.1. Remember USC? CM is 100% correct. It's funny how those that militantly defend Callahan V.2 also seem to wax nostalgic about Billy C.V.1. Guess you arent interested in facts. shrugs. All you have to do is look. Callahan's offense was non-existent against anyone with a pulse. All you have to do is look. 1/8 of the points his offense scored in '07 were in the last five minutes of games where he was behind by three TDs or more.

Nailed that one!

Winner, winner, chicken dinner

Gerry has many years of experience at a very high level. He knows what superior talent looks like at first glance. I played baseball through college. I can watch 2 pitchers throw a 20 pitch bully and decipher who has the better "stuff" based on that quick evaluation. So I very much believe the opinion of a seasoned coach and analyst. But if it can somehow still be Bo's fault then fans like you will be content until Riley is shown the door. That may be true about DiNardo. Or not. I really couldn't say whether DiNardo is better or worse at evaluating talent than any of the other talking heads. But it's sort of a moot point. When is the last time BTN did a preview segment on a team and said, "Yeah, these guys just aren't very talented." That's what those preview segments are all about: Pumping you up for the season. And before some troll crawls out from under a bridge and accuses me of saying our team is without talent, I'm not. This year's Husker squad has some very talented players. We have some deficits too. And also we've also had a lot of injuries, which affects the talent level on the field. My point above is that the title of this thread is misleading. But DiNardo compared us directly to Minny and Iowa, saying we looked much more talented.

FTFY No need to fix it. more than one person are trying to make it more than what it is. OK, you're probaly right. Commence whining about it. lol...who are you to accuse someone else of whining when your last 900 post have almost all been whining about the coaches? Pointing out their actual record and performance using facts and statistics is hardly whining.

FTFY One on this page. Four on the previous. Five -> people. Who were they? I saw one more besides SFW. I think it's awesome. Probably the best move Pederhorst has made in his career. Not sure why Spurrier needed a nametag though. Good god. God should be capitalized. HTH Not if your atheists Militant atheists might neglect to capitalize it on purpose. But it's still bad form not to.

Wow. You said a couple mouthfuls there.

Good post. Thanks for chiming in. A couple things bolded above. First one, I guess you haven't heard about our new highly paid special teams coach? Last year we were #1 in ESPN's Special Teams efficiency ranking. Riley brought in his good buddy as a full time special teams coach (doesn't even recruit) and we dropped to mid-50s in the same ESPN ranking. Last week, we had three offsides on one PAT! Second, it's actually a 10 win plateau. Bo won 10 three times, and 9 the other 4.

That is correct. Stan the man is a lot better IMO. No doubt. He seems to have pretty good vision back there.

FTFY No need to fix it. more than one person are trying to make it more than what it is. OK, you're probaly right. Commence whining about it.

FTFY One on this page. Four on the previous. Five -> people. Who were they? I saw one more besides SFW. I think it's awesome. Probably the best move Pederhorst has made in his career. Not sure why Spurrier needed a nametag though. Good god. God should be capitalized. HTH

Steve Spurrier

So the walkons have no talent? Are you saying Janovish isn't more talented than a lot of scholarship players on other teams? Silly statement. "End of story" makes it even more comical/ There are always exceptions. Walkons have talent. But do they have enough talent to win a championship? Win against teams like Ohio State or Alabama? If you haven't noticed the teams that recruit top classes every year are the ones winning championships. How many of the 97 team who had at least one start were from Nebraska? I believe 9 or 10 of the 11 regular offensive starters were from Nebraska. I'm not sure how many walk-ons in particular started at any point during that season, but I did find this: https://sites.google.com/site/nebraskafootballhistory/walk-ons-page-5 Bear in mind that many of those who had become scholarship players by that point also started their careers as walk-ons. So, anyways, from Nebraska, a very high amount, in addition to many of the contributors being walk-ons or starting their careers as walk-ons. (Yes, I realize things are different today and it is a bit more difficult to implement such a system today than it was then. Simply trying to help answer Joe's question). I believe there were times when the Huskers started all 11 from Nebraska in '97.