SWAMI

It's been my experience that my best bets were the ones I felt least comfortable. I would be all over the Huskers on this game. Your welcome in advance.

Yea,, why should anyone express displeasure in a below average product? Just sit there and take it.But it's nice to know that the opinions of the fans ( many of whom are alumni) aren't wanted. Instead, maybe we should just end the sellout streak. Why should anyone give a coach more than 9 games before deciding whether to fire him, the athletic director, and the chancellor????!!!oneone I could have swore that Riley had years of experience. At least that's what we were led to believe. He does and it was on full display last Saturday nite 4 and 6....... Hip, hip, hooray. Now maybe he can figure out how to not get blown out by the worst team in the league. I know how. By being the worst team in the league.

Yeah. It's scary when you go ahead with :17 left in the game, and worry that it's STILL to much time for the opposing quarterback. Immediately after we took the lead, I texted my son "He'll find a way to lose this one, too." Then the squib. What this coach is thinking is anybodies guess. Kick the ball deep! We're lucky to come away with the "W".

"...not having a good year." How about a good decade?

You didn't see the $3 gift certificate from TGIFs inside the bowl?

I asked this one day and I opened myself up to a sh#tstorm of rhetoric, blind perception, and population bullsh#t. And that's pretty much all it was. It was laughable to the point that I was speechless and walked away. Nothing anyone said answered my question. It doesn't matter what they do have, it matters what people believe they have. Even if it's bullsh#t, if people believe it, that's a problem for us, and it's obvious that people believe it, because a lot more people live there, and they always out-recruit us. Regardless, they still have more to offer even just as a state without going into anything related to the football program. They have a lot more people. People like that. They also have more dense population. More people + same amount of space = more people nearby = more cute girls/more friends/more jobs/etc. They have 21 cities with 70,000+ people compared to our 2. They have professional sports teams. They draw more things like bands, plays, musicals and other touring events and also more frequently. They've got a better university and university system and college selection as a whole. They have a lite version of an ocean. They have less conservative government and more diverse population. They have casinos. They have huge music festivals. They have a legitimate amusement park. And they're close to other states that have more of the same. And great Salmon fishing in that pond westward.

this is a good post. But me personally I still dont see where it answers my question of what does Michigan have to offer that we dont in a big picture. I'm not tryin to find a way to say Nebraska has something to offer that Michigan doesnt. I think the two are pretty damn equal. But it just feels like there's this perception natianally that compariing Nebraska to Michigan is like comparing Nebraska to say Florida or USC in the recruiting front right now. And to me when you look at some recruiting disadvantage perceptions such as weather, midwest, Big10, and so on, Michigan isnt free from those kinda things either. So it's not really about being better but being equal. And I still dont see where an opportunity at Michigan blows out of the water an opportunity at Nebraska. What is the one thing that nearly every single D1 recruit with a star rating of three or higher wants to achieve? They want to play in the NFL, correct? Which university you mention has a coach who just came from the NFL? Which school has a coach that coached his team to the Super Bowl? Which school has a coach that put Stanford back on the football map? If Pete Carroll quit the Seahawks today and was named the HC at Wyoming, I'd argue he'd have no problem luring top talent to Laramie. I'm not sure how much attention potential recruits pay attention to money and such, but Michigan just made Harbaugh the highest paid college coach. I'd see this as a great commitment to the sport I'm being recruited to play. I'm excited about our situation here at Nebraska and Riley as our coach. However, it's pretty easy to see why Michigan will enjoy an easier time recruiting. Damn, I knew we should have kept Calahan.

In all fairness, Sandusky hadn't been their DC in quite a while. No, but he still had keys to the locker room and access to everything. Should have gotten the death penalty which they lied about. Saw an interview on ESPN, and they said the NCAA didn't consider it, but the guy they interviewed was adamant about that not being true.

Four turnovers doesn't equate to a brilliantly played and executed game.

There are a lot of really good high school players who go unnoticed.

You can't just look at the home state's population and say that's that. The surrounding population near Michigan is way bigger. They get a lot of recruits from Ohio.Nebraska borders Iowa, North Dakota, Kansas. You forget Missouri though I didn't forget it. I didn't mention it but I've actually gone and added up the populations from surroundig states for different teams before and Nebraska's is way smaller. I think I did it for Michigan. (I seem to recall they have 8 million people but I don't want to look it up). And a great Pawn shop.

You can't just look at the home state's population and say that's that. The surrounding population near Michigan is way bigger. They get a lot of recruits from Ohio.Nebraska borders Iowa, North Dakota, Kansas. You forget Missouri though ...and South Dakota, Wyoming, and Colorado.

You can't just look at the home state's population and say that's that. The surrounding population near Michigan is way bigger. They get a lot of recruits from Ohio. Nebraska borders Iowa, North Dakota, Kansas. But what's the draw? Climates similar. Current prestige of the program is, well, equal I guess. Probably just my bias. But I guess I just dont see what Michigan has to sell. Why cant we compete with those guys in recruiting? Everyone just seems to write us off. The projection is based mostly on Harbaugh.

Had Ohio St. only beaten Wisconsin by 7 they never would have had a chance to play for the NC. They wouldn't have leaped TCU.

I don't think Bo has much contact with Carl anymore. Mary Pat (Bo's wife) was pretty freaking pissed when Carl cheated on his wife, as the two women had become close friends. Mary Pat was one of the big reasons (along with TO) that Bo pushed Carl to get another gig. Oh what a tangled web we weave...

And many of these families don't have much to begin with.

I think at some point you have to consider the number of games played. Even if you don't buy into the fact that these are student athletes, you have to take into account the direction the sport is taking re: injuiries i.e. concussions. We haven't heard much about it recently, but the NFL knows this topic isn't over by a long shot.

If a 2 loss team, for example Michigan State this year, is better than a team with no losses, Florida State, who cares? I want the best teams in the field. There's no one on earth that can convince me that FSU was better than TCU. 8 teams fixes that and doesn't "water down" the regular season. If anything the regular season was heightened this year and prevented the awful BCS matchup of Alabama and FSU based on media hype. Taking 8 teams out of 125 does not diminish the regular season IMO, it's not close to the NBA or NFL ratio. I wouldn't be against doing away with the conference championship games to enable 8. Having the first rounds games at campus sites of the higher seed eliminates any travel concerns. IMHO Playoff teams should never be awarded home field advantage. It's how a lot of playoffs in a lot of different sports work. That doesn't make it fair. Don't we want the fairest system? Isn't that what this is all about? I can't believe you who are fine with awarding a home field game. One of the reasons I'm against it is that bitter taste I still have when Nebraska had to play Miami on what was essentially their home turf back in the "Go for 2 game." Bring them up here and we win by 2 TDs.

If a 2 loss team, for example Michigan State this year, is better than a team with no losses, Florida State, who cares? I want the best teams in the field. There's no one on earth that can convince me that FSU was better than TCU. 8 teams fixes that and doesn't "water down" the regular season. If anything the regular season was heightened this year and prevented the awful BCS matchup of Alabama and FSU based on media hype. Taking 8 teams out of 125 does not diminish the regular season IMO, it's not close to the NBA or NFL ratio. I wouldn't be against doing away with the conference championship games to enable 8. Having the first rounds games at campus sites of the higher seed eliminates any travel concerns. IMHO Playoff teams should never be awarded home field advantage. It's how a lot of playoffs in a lot of different sports work. That doesn't make it fair. Don't we want the fairest system? Isn't that what this is all about?

Did you hear Steven A. Smith this morning bragging about how he backed Ohio St. leapfrogging TCU? That type of thinking is part and parcel to the problem of the old system. The fact is we'll never know if Ohio St. could beat TCU. The new format is far better than yesteryear's, but it's still not optimal; and, quite frankly, never will be regardless of the number of teams invited. I'm not a TCU fan, but it sickens me to think we have a system which allowed for a team to be moved up 2 spots to 3rd then win by 50 and get dropped back to 5th because OSU walloped Wisconsin. That's just wrong. I understand what the ramifications are, but based off of what took place Ohio St. should have been odd man out or, better yet, if you leapfrog Florida St. then you should have stayed atop them. The committee didn't think through the 'What ifs" prior to that last week. I also believe there was a racial component considered.

If a 2 loss team, for example Michigan State this year, is better than a team with no losses, Florida State, who cares? I want the best teams in the field. There's no one on earth that can convince me that FSU was better than TCU. 8 teams fixes that and doesn't "water down" the regular season. If anything the regular season was heightened this year and prevented the awful BCS matchup of Alabama and FSU based on media hype. Taking 8 teams out of 125 does not diminish the regular season IMO, it's not close to the NBA or NFL ratio. I wouldn't be against doing away with the conference championship games to enable 8. Having the first rounds games at campus sites of the higher seed eliminates any travel concerns. IMHO Playoff teams should never be awarded home field advantage.

If you watch much football, you'll notice many if not most successful OCs calling pass plays on 3rd and 2. Sometimes two passes in a row. I'm thinking of Scott Frost less than 24 hours ago. Of course sometimes the same OC chooses to run the ball. Sometimes that works, but sometimes the runner gets stuffed because the defense saw it coming. You have seen that happen, haven't you? Even Marshawn Lynch behind Seattle's offensive line wasn't a given on 3rd and 1 last Sunday. It's adorable how Nebraska fans think victory is as simple as just "ramming it forward" every time. You covered all of us with that ludicrous generalization.

Were any of Beck's calls dumber than throwing the bomb on 1st and 10 with a 7 point lead, 2 and a half minutes to go and Bama having only 2 time outs left. That was the single dumbest play I've ever seen. Another high on my list happened in the 1st have of same game: 1st and goal from the 1, a 250 pound QB, and they line up in shot gun with an empty backfield. Sneak the damn thing 3 times if you have to. They were stacking the box and he went for the kill shot. He even said it would have ended the game and he was right. My goodness, play to win the game and don't play to not lose the game. Maybe they should have thrown all 3 times and then faked the punt. Each one would have been ever more surprising to Bama. Play to win the game. Playing to win the game with a 7 point lead means run the clock, and if you don't get a first you punt. Hell, they had the ball at mid-field. Providing you don't get the first you put them in a position where they have to drive 80 yards with under a minute to go. This isn't rocket science. Play to win the game.??? Were any of Beck's calls dumber than throwing the bomb on 1st and 10 with a 7 point lead, 2 and a half minutes to go and Bama having only 2 time outs left. That was the single dumbest play I've ever seen. Another high on my list happened in the 1st have of same game: 1st and goal from the 1, a 250 pound QB, and they line up in shot gun with an empty backfield. Sneak the damn thing 3 times if you have to. They were stacking the box and he went for the kill shot. He even said it would have ended the game and he was right. My goodness, play to win the game and don't play to not lose the game. Maybe they should have thrown all 3 times and then faked the punt. Each one would have been ever more surprising to Bama. Play to win the game. Playing to win the game with a 7 point lead means run the clock, and if you don't get a first you punt. Hell, they had the ball at mid-field. Providing you don't get the first you put them in a position where they have to drive 80 yards with under a minute to go. This isn't rocket science. Play to win the game.??? If you score, it's game over. Is it risky? Of course it is but if you risk nothing, you gain nothing. Your scenario is playing to not lose. And that strategy fails as often as it works. I would agree with your plan if the team was up by 2 or more scores. Or if I knew my opponent had an incredibly crappy 2 minute offense. If neither of these apply, I'm going for more points. And if I think I can grab those points in one long bomb, I'll give it a shot. Wrong with your cliche. In this case if you risk nothing you gain from a running clock. Once again I ask you if it's such a great call why not do it on 2nd and third down, and then fake a punt on 4th. You've never coached have you? Well, the idea is that you try the play on 1st down because Bama is expecting you to kill clock. So they might commit another defender trying to stop the run. So you're going to have a higher chance for 1-1 coverage and I'm sure they were very confident in their WRs vs Bama's QBs. You tell your QB not to force anything. Cardale didn't. So when you throw it on first down, you then get Bama thinking that you might throw it again. It creates a little uncertainty. And I'm sure Ohio State was confident Bama wouldn't be able to march down the field in a minute with no TOs to tie the game. It was a calculated risk that didn't work out, but ultimately didn't hurt them. I'll trust Urban's decision making on that play. Help me here. I totally don't get the "I'm sure they were very confident in their WRs vs Bama's QBs." Makes no sense. I think you meant CBs. Who knows? Second, Why would they be so confident? Bama had already intercepted 2 passes. Third, you say "You tell your QB not to force anything." Go back and look at that play. The Bama defender had the receiver blanketed and could easily have made the pick had he turned around. Fourth, My thought process after seeing a first down pass would not be "Oh, they might pass on 2nd and 3rd down." It would be just the opposite. You can bet Saban was thrilled to see OSU pass, because the clock was his biggest problem which leads me to my final point. Bama had 2 timeouts. Did you not see the interview after the game where Urban admitted the decision to pass was ill advised? I wonder if he called the play or if it was the OC. Maybe that's why they want 2 OCs.

lol what is this nonsense Just saying. Guys good, sure, but best in the country?Gary Patterson says hello! The best coaches in the country don't need 5 star talent across the board to be "the best coach in the country"! Patterson is good no doubt but Urban is a little better. Patterson is 132-45 in his career. All at TCU Meyer is 141-26 in his career. Split between Utah, Florida and tOSU. Patterson started at TCU in 2000 and Meyer started at Utah in 2001. But the talent level is the difference!Meyer started Utah in 2003 and left in 2004. The WAC. And the Utes have largely held onto their success since. Basically, record is not the whole story. Utah was in the Mountain West then. Yes, it's not a Power 5 conference but going undefeated for a full year is nothing to down play.I don't know how people can say Meyer isn't a good coach. Part of being a college coach is bringing in the talent, and he has done that. With that talent he has won 2 NC's and is in a 3rd NC game tomorrow. His record speaks for itself. You ever wonder why he left Florida? Didn't the story sound a bit odd when you heard it? Scoop. The other SEC coaches had the goods on him and gave him an ultimatum - get out of the conference or we turn you in. Ya, he brings in talent. He also beat Bama. I wouldn't be surprised to see the old school boys from the south break their gentlemen's agreement. Stay tuned. That is one of the most cynical viewpoints of anything I have ever read on the subject. You may very well have written that in total sarcasm, but if not, I just don't understand the cynicism. Is it not possible that he actually left for exactly what he said? Perhaps, he actually felt he had complete imbalance in his life to a point that he was unhealthy and felt it necessary to step away, but he realized he had to come back to his passion after finding a way to balance it out so it didn't cause health issues? I have never understood the principle of going to the most cynical viewpoint first. Not only is the viewpoint expressed in the quoted text incredibly cynic, but conspiracy theorist, as well. Some people do things for reasons you wouldn't. It happens in every single aspect of life; because they choose a certain path does not mean they have something to hide. Take it for what it's worth, but I do not understand the constant cynic. And the winner for the most instances of using the word "cynic" in a post goes to... *carefully opens large envelope* .....BOJ! *award music plays* Well, it was a few, but you think too much? Me thinks you think I made this up. What do you think, think. Award music please. Make it "Hail to the Chief."

Were any of Beck's calls dumber than throwing the bomb on 1st and 10 with a 7 point lead, 2 and a half minutes to go and Bama having only 2 time outs left. That was the single dumbest play I've ever seen. Another high on my list happened in the 1st have of same game: 1st and goal from the 1, a 250 pound QB, and they line up in shot gun with an empty backfield. Sneak the damn thing 3 times if you have to. They were stacking the box and he went for the kill shot. He even said it would have ended the game and he was right. My goodness, play to win the game and don't play to not lose the game. Maybe they should have thrown all 3 times and then faked the punt. Each one would have been ever more surprising to Bama. Play to win the game. Playing to win the game with a 7 point lead means run the clock, and if you don't get a first you punt. Hell, they had the ball at mid-field. Providing you don't get the first you put them in a position where they have to drive 80 yards with under a minute to go. This isn't rocket science. Play to win the game.??? Were any of Beck's calls dumber than throwing the bomb on 1st and 10 with a 7 point lead, 2 and a half minutes to go and Bama having only 2 time outs left. That was the single dumbest play I've ever seen. Another high on my list happened in the 1st have of same game: 1st and goal from the 1, a 250 pound QB, and they line up in shot gun with an empty backfield. Sneak the damn thing 3 times if you have to. They were stacking the box and he went for the kill shot. He even said it would have ended the game and he was right. My goodness, play to win the game and don't play to not lose the game. Maybe they should have thrown all 3 times and then faked the punt. Each one would have been ever more surprising to Bama. Play to win the game. Playing to win the game with a 7 point lead means run the clock, and if you don't get a first you punt. Hell, they had the ball at mid-field. Providing you don't get the first you put them in a position where they have to drive 80 yards with under a minute to go. This isn't rocket science. Play to win the game.??? If you score, it's game over. Is it risky? Of course it is but if you risk nothing, you gain nothing. Your scenario is playing to not lose. And that strategy fails as often as it works. I would agree with your plan if the team was up by 2 or more scores. Or if I knew my opponent had an incredibly crappy 2 minute offense. If neither of these apply, I'm going for more points. And if I think I can grab those points in one long bomb, I'll give it a shot. Wrong with your cliche. In this case if you risk nothing you gain from a running clock. Once again I ask you if it's such a great call why not do it on 2nd and third down, and then fake a punt on 4th. You've never coached have you?