Kernal

Yes!

I learned our O-line is in bad, bad shape. We need to somehow get healthy and/or get other guys ready to play. 90% our our problems on offense today were on the offensive line. Plays were blown up before they started. Blocks were missed. Protections failed. We'll lose several more games this year if we can't get the O-line shored up. I learned Indiana is a pretty good team this year, particularly on defense. If their running/wildcat QB Diamont could execute more of their offense we would have lost. 6-0 is better than 5-0 and 5-1. I learned the players watch/see ESPN gameday and were offended at the segment on Nebraska.

I think a bigger problem is trying to justify/rationalize why someone will behave goodly without any real reason other than societal acceptance. That's what scares me. Fear of law? Fear of opinion? Or simply not really ever taking a moment to even think about it. sh#t, some people live and breathe to help people - they even die without ever considering why. Does that matter? Why does it need be fear of anything? People can be kind because they have empathy. They can be kind because they feel gratitude. They can be kind because they enjoy being kind. Why do you think people only behave well out of fear? It's entirely possible to take a moment to think about it and come to the conclusion the god of religions is make-believe. That doesn't preclude a person from believing in an order to the universe, or a reason for being, or the virtue of decency or faith in those same things. You are right. Mike Riley may show tremendous kindness because of his empathetic personality. He may be kind because he experienced it many times during his life - or for some other reason, who knows right? I am only saying that if Mike Riley is acting this way it could be based upon his life experiences - he reached a point where showing these behaviors made him feel like he is following the societal standard. The other possible reason is that he believes this is how his higher power acts and he wants to imitate him; that and it's possible he believes his higher power has commanded him to act this way. Where does love fit into this either/or explanation? I love my daughter not because society expects it or due to any thought about imitating/following God. My love for her is deeper than human explanation and would exist 100% without religion or society. So it's possible that some people feel love for other people, and don't necessarily treat them well due to fear or conformity but a genuine desire to lift other people up.

I think a bigger problem is trying to justify/rationalize why someone will behave goodly without any real reason other than societal acceptance. That's what scares me. Fear of law? Fear of opinion? Or simply not really ever taking a moment to even think about it. sh#t, some people live and breathe to help people - they even die without ever considering why. Does that matter? Why does it need be fear of anything? People can be kind because they have empathy. They can be kind because they feel gratitude. They can be kind because they enjoy being kind. Why do you think people only behave well out of fear? It's entirely possible to take a moment to think about it and come to the conclusion the god of religions is make-believe. That doesn't preclude a person from believing in an order to the universe, or a reason for being, or the virtue of decency or faith in those same things.

It's available to everyone. The arrogant are the ones that don't feels like they need anything other than themselves. Everybody believes in something; some people just have a hard time accepting that that something may not be the same thing as they believe. I judge a man's faith by the fruit it produces, not his sales pitch. It's usually pretty obvious what is what. And to me, that is the case with Riley. It is obvious to me he is a man of faith (in something).

I'm all for a dual-threat, but the guy has got to be a QB first. He has to be able to operate a passing offense and complete throws to other playmakers. Then if he can run too it is a bonus, like you say: "a one-person advantage." But those guys are hard to recruit, because the good ones? Everybody wants them. We talk about "dual threat" QBs at NU, but what we've really had here are runners who could throw a little bit. I have been very frustrated prior to Riley/Langsdorf because we've been almost one-dimensional without an efficient passing offense. So I like that Langsdorf made this point as well. Yes, everyone wants the best dual-threat QB's, but that doesn't mean NU shouldn't be trying to recruit and use them. When you have a QB that is no threat to run, it makes the offense so much harder to be effective. Yes, the QB needs to be an efficient passer, but it's easier to do that when he's also an effective runner. I wonder if Riley at Oregon State didn't "settle" for regular QBs because the elite dual-threats were too hard to recruit and as a result, these coaches never had them to use. So maybe having Armstrong as well as Nebraska's better recruiting cachet has whet their appetite. I think we should definitely try to get the elite dual-threats. But if my choice is a running QB who's a 50% passer or a 70% pro-style guy, I'll take the pro-style guy all day long. Unless the pipeline (and Osborne) returns we need a QB who can get the ball to the other playmakers- who are much more abundant to recruit.

I'm all for a dual-threat, but the guy has got to be a QB first. He has to be able to operate a passing offense and complete throws to other playmakers. Then if he can run too it is a bonus, like you say: "a one-person advantage." But those guys are hard to recruit, because the good ones? Everybody wants them. We talk about "dual threat" QBs at NU, but what we've really had here are runners who could throw a little bit. I have been very frustrated prior to Riley/Langsdorf because we've been almost one-dimensional without an efficient passing offense. So I like that Langsdorf made this point as well.

It's obvious Riley lives by a code of decency, humility, respect and care for others. I couldn't care less if he got that way from attending church or from life experience. And I get a little tired of religious people pretending they possess some goodness unavailable to other people- that's nothing but pride and arrogance.

I was worried we wouldn't be able to hang with Sparty, but then we did. A week after Purdue, that was really a surprise. So I think Nebraska's the kind of team that can play the right game and play with anybody. It's also the kind of opponent for Indiana that, if they play their game they can hang with us. If NU beats Indiana 38-17, it's a really solid showing. Not "it took an off day, and their best." Just trying to keep the expectations steady. Nebraska is better, but it's a reasonably tough matchup. I didn't mean to single you out. I find myself agreeing with your posts almost every time I read one. But your post reminded me of Husker fans saying things like, "Tommy had an interception but how many did the opposing defense drop?" Which totally overlooks the fact that other QBs also have bad passes not intercepted, in addition to their interceptions. That kind of thing. Husker fans seem particularly myopic. Anyway, you're right that Indiana is good, and the schedule gets tougher. The AP had a story today about it ------------------------------------------- I was worried we wouldn't be able to hang with Sparty, but then we did. A week after Purdue, that was really a surprise. So I think Nebraska's the kind of team that can play the right game and play with anybody. It's also the kind of opponent for Indiana that, if they play their game they can hang with us. If NU beats Indiana 38-17, it's a really solid showing. Not "it took an off day, and their best." Just trying to keep the expectations steady. Nebraska is better, but it's a reasonably tough matchup. I remember last year after the Purdue game, I was looking for tickets to take the family and everyone thought I was nuts because we were going to get absolutely blown out. I got free East Stadium tickets to the MSU game last year because people were so down on NU. Turned out to be the best game experience I've ever had in Memorial Stadium.

What did you think the MSU score would be last year? Not many people gave NU a chance to keep it close, let alone win. How about the Iowa and UCLA games? After two decades of lowering expectations, Husker fans are damaged goods. Indiana has improved. Indiana is a good team. Nebraska is better.

We reached pretty high rankings several times over the past decade or so, but we always go crashing back down to Earth at the first opportunity to prove our ranking (except maybe in 2009/2010). I won't feel like we really belong in the top-10 team until we start beating other top-10 teams. BTW, we're #9 in the Coaches Poll.

I wouldn't say NU is too low. I think #10 is fair. But Tennessee should have dropped way down. They should have three losses- one to an FCS team. The media sure loves keeping their football-consuming SEC demographic happy.

Our ceiling is undefeated. There is no team in the country that is unbeatable, and that includes Ohio State (MSU beat them last year with a backup QB. Hell, we beat MSU last year and they went to the Playoff). OSU looked plenty vulnerable against Indiana. It's all up to the coaches and players, and good health, where this team ends up at the end of the year. It starts again this week by working hard and beating Indiana next Saturday.

Oregon has thrown in the towel on the season. Illinois lost in OT to Purdue (I guess they're not quite as stout without an extra week to prepare against a name brand opponent). Ohio State looked beatable. Indiana looked tough. Bye week sucks.

Wear a "Go Big Red" shirt. Barry and Wisconsin stole borrowed that from us, too.

2011. We were ranked #11 in 2014 before getting humiliated by Melvin Gordon and Wisconsin.

Over. NG, CJ, TA Nick Gates or Nathan Gerry? No Cethan Carter? Over: 2. O/U: OSU -13

This is like a dumbed-down version of an RPI, no? I think in RPI you take win/loss record, opponent win/loss record, and opponent-opponent-win/loss record. Something like this.

I'm intrigued by how these beeping footballs work. Pressure sensors? Then I wonder how much pressure constitutes a good hold on the ball.

There is 0% chance NU rejoins the Big 12, or whatever they're calling it now. This blogger is click-trolling.

I remember a bunch of optimism, even right off the bat. When the hire happened I was still thinking maybe Jim Tressel, maybe Scott Frost, heck maybe they'd get David Shaw. When the name popped up, I went, "who in the world?!" But even a quick read after that made me really, really happy with the get. And I distinctly remember -- for all the bitter folks out there, and I know they're still in the woodwork -- I was not even close to being alone. It's been a really pleasant time. I seem to remember the general reaction after Riley was hired being: "Who?" Followed immediately by all the disgruntled Pelini fans attacking Riley's record at Oregon State. Riley wasn't the splash hire that Jim Tressel/Scott Frost or some other big name would have been, so I think some were disappointed we didn't win the press conference too well. But there were also a lot of people who were tired of Pelini's act and just wanted Nebraska Football to be fun again. Riley won me over with his interviews and statements, his hires, administrative decisions such as recruiting support staff and social media ops, and re-recruiting that first class. To me, "coaching football" isn't the hard part. Lots of people can coach football. It's everything that goes along with running a big-time program that predicts success or failure at this level. And Riley has shown very well with all those things. To me it was/is only a matter of time before the "football" catches up with the "program."

I had a positive outlook from the beginning and remain positive. That's mostly due to Riley's attitude and approach, and his CEO ability. I'm glad we're seeing better results this year too. I don't think we'll go undefeated, but it's nice to have Nebraska's program respected again after the joke it had become under the former staff. When we lost to Purdue last year I wasn't down on the staff. I felt bad for them that they had to deal with immature players who had been manipulated by the former HC, and grateful the new staff was willing to stick it out and keep a positive attitude.

Daub and Ricketts should be kicked off the team.

I'm not sure I would have rated this very highly at the time Riley was hired, but having witnessed this staff's inclusion of all things Nebraska and gratitude for their positions, I'd now rate it as one of the biggest reasons I appreciate these coaches. And I think the thing is: you can't know how to "get back" to what Nebraska once was if you don't even know or appreciate what it once was. I couldn't be happier with this staff.

Damn.