Dr. Strangelove

IMO, Bo was very close this season. After the UCLA beating and Minnesota debacle, a loss to Northwestern might have sealed his firing. The hail mary may have saved his job.

We often need bowl game upsets or comeback victories to get to those numbers. To think Nebraska is a shoe-in for 9 wins each year is outlandish. We could have easily finished 7-5 last year if it weren't for the Northwestern hail mary. I'm not saying it's GOING to happen, but all of the 'OMG ESPN hates us' crap gets old.

I guess I don't get why the 8-4 prediction here is so outlandish. Few people outside of Nebraska think we're going to do much better than 9-3, so why is 8-4 not 'credible'? Because they famously said we'd lose in 1995? They highlighted games that Nebraska will likely lose (Wisconsin, Michigan State) and other toss ups (Iowa, Miami, Northwestern). This isn't a secret, we all know these are the games that Nebraska must win, and their formula says that we will likely lost all 5 (with 3 being just around 50%). Personally, I think these predictions are somewhat accurate considering they're just trying to use a mathematical baseline to identify a particular teams' chance of winning, they were able to identify the games we're likely to have trouble with. For the record, I think we win 2 of the 3 toss-ups to finish 9-3. All fan bases think ESPN hates them. Every time they predict that a particular team won't go 12-0 or that they don't recognize the underrated 'diamond-in-the-rough recruit' as a 5-star player, it riles them up. It gets old.

For being a dual threat QB, his running ability leaves something to be desired. That was his best run of the season, for an option QB, and I don't remember to many other scampers that impressed me much. As far as running QBs are concerned, he was average list year. Hopefully he gets healthy and can run with a little more authority next season.

8.5 is much more accurate. 8 wins for the Huskers is very likely, but 9 is a toss up.

In defense of the top tier SEC teams like Alabama and LSU, they sign large classes each year because they lose 5-6 juniors to the NFL draft. I think over-signing is a much bigger problem at SEC schools that aren't doing that (I'm looking at you Tennessee and Ole Miss).

I wish my Kool Aid was as strong as yours, but a lot of us have burned out on the notion that we are going to be world beaters every year. Most of us didn't look at the schedule each of the last few seasons and see 4 losses on there without going "out of our way to do so," yet here we are. Year after year. There are some baffling losses in there, and some embarrassing showings. I think we've always had the talent to win 11 games, not just this year, but since 2009. Hell, I'm not a huge fan of Pelini, but I'd also say we've even had the coaching to win 11 games. There's been a lot of good things in front of us as fans every year, and we get our hopes up. The potential is always there. But it hasn't worked out. They can't stay consistent. They either can't put it all together or they can't keep it together. That leads to going out of our way to earn 4 losses, despite having the talent available to do better. It keeps happening. So now many of us are predicting it to continue. I reeeeeally hope you are right and can rub it in our faces at the end of the year. This is another one of the same discussions that have been all over this board for months now, so for now I'll say "Go Big Red" and toast to Redux's optimism. I feel exactly the same way. I think we have to make serious strides on offense for me to think we can easily break the 4 loss streak. Could we? Sure, but I just don't see the offense putting up enough points on a consistent basis to think we're going to win enough games.

Really? I think it's easy to see road losses to Wisconsin and Michigan State. You can throw in a few toss-up games like Miami, Iowa, and Northwestern (who plays us close every year). Drop one or two of those and we're at 4 losses. Let's say we lose one of those three, finish at 9-3 and play a tough SEC team in a bowl game, say LSU or S. Carolina. Boom, 4 losses again. Do I think this will happen? I dunno, but we certainly don't have to go out of our way to find 4 losses with our schedule. With valuable experience on our o line, talented QBs WRs and RBs galore, and a defense thats beter than they should be yeah I really think losing four should be a challenge. We stack up fine with wiscy Iowa and Sparty, the fact its a road game is the hardest challenge to overcome at least it should be. We should expect to win all or most of them. Can we lose four? Absolutely. Should we lose four? Absolutely not. I would expect a damned good reason for it. I think we could argue about our experience on o-line, QB and WR. We're losing quite a bit of experience from OL and lost our best WR. The rest of our WRs have been inconsistent (Turner) and even Bell to some extent. Our QB is probably as far from being counted on as a returning QB can be. We do have several talented RBs on the roster, many of them would be the featured back in most Big 10 offenses outside of Wisconsin and Ohio State. Our defense has a chance to be top 3 in the conference. Outside of that, I don't see our turnover or field position issues being alleviated enough to think we won't drop a game we shouldn't (repeat of Minnesota last year) on top of several tough road games. I see 4 losses this season, but obviously I hope I'm wrong.

Really? I think it's easy to see road losses to Wisconsin and Michigan State. You can throw in a few toss-up games like Miami, Iowa, and Northwestern (who plays us close every year). Drop one or two of those and we're at 4 losses. Let's say we lose one of those three, finish at 9-3 and play a tough SEC team in a bowl game, say LSU or S. Carolina. Boom, 4 losses again. Do I think this will happen? I dunno, but we certainly don't have to go out of our way to find 4 losses with our schedule.

you really think the media wants to portray the big 10 negatively? how do you suppose the big 10 should be portrayed given their recent bowl history? I certainly think the media (ESPN mostly) likes to bring up the relative weakness of the conference when given the chance, warranted and unwarranted. If Michigan or Ohio State had Florida's season, with a loss to an FCS school, I think it would've been mentioned quite a bit more. As for the Big 10's bowl season, it is by far the most difficult in the country. We play what are essentially road games against the countries best teams (SEC schools in SEC country, the Rose Bowl in the PAC-12s back yard, etc). In my opinion, a .500 bowl record for our conference in bowl season should be considered great. I would also say that if Nebraska can go .500 in a given decade with the B1G's bowl slate, I'd consider that a victory as well.

As good as these games are for our conference, I see the B1G going 1-2 in these games. The narrative will just be 'OSU beats a VT team that has been down for the last few seasons' and 'B1G Title Contenders lose to nations elite'. It'll be spun to make the conference look bad no matter what. I really hope the league shows up in those games though, going 3-0 would leave the media no choice but to give the conference some credit.

So, let me get this straight: we've been building a relationship with this recruit for several years, was widely considered (by his own admission) to be his second favorite school after Washington... he signed papers to transfer here after spending several days communicating with various UNL officials about letting him attend the University, while also calling into several local radio shows explaining how excited he was to be a part of our football team. Instead he decides to transfer to a school that barely recruited him out of high school after his first official visit? It's pretty obvious what happened here.

This is pretty interesting. Also keep in mind the likelihood that these individuals show up to the voting booth. Those at the extreme end of the spectrum are by far the most likely to vote in an election. The individuals in the middle who show mixed feelings do so because they are less fired up and less interested in politics. They are, therefore, typically less likely to vote. This penalizes Congressmen who compromise even more than it should, because those who show up to the voting booth are disproportionally against compromise.

I remember freaking out after he made a game saving tackle against Georgia, best play he had all season!

I think this is true. Fact is, our elected leaders do a fantastic job of representing their districts/states. The lack of cooperation in Washington has less to do with the politicians themselves but more with the people who elect them. Politicians behave exactly how we want them too. Unless your Eric Cantor, who wasn't lost because he behaved and cooperated to often in the eyes of the voter.

I like the discussion about fixing things, but it's important to remember that from a Political Science point of view, understand that voters hate compromise. It's seen as selling out/caving rather than being a problem solver.

Personally, I think Kenny did this with the intention of riling up the fans. Not in a way to entertain himself (although I'm sure that was part of it), but more in order to make a mockery out of the local media. But really, who knows?

I have many Republican friends who feel very similar. They hold many conservative views, but hate that the party has drifted so far to the right. One of my good friends really hates some of the anti-science tones in particular.

Tax code is something that will always be dangled in front of voters as the thing they'll tackle, but something that is very difficult and politically explosive to change. Much like how gun control and abortion are dangled in front of voters with little to no action taken by either side. When I studied Political Science, our professor referred to these issues as 'voter fodder'. I don't know much about NCLB, but I do know some teachers and they all feel similar to you. It's something that needs to be addressed, but is difficult due to our current state of budget cuts.

Hillary Clinton will win assuming she decides to run, which I think she eventually does. She'll have unified party support, she won't be forced to move farther to the left because she'll essentially be running unopposed. She'll have the flexibility to appear moderate to independents in swing states like Iowa, Colorado and New Hampshire. This will also keep great lakes states like Minnesota and Wisconsin safe. The Republicans, as it currently stands, have no electable candidate. I think Ted Cruz won the most recent straw pole (which means next to nothing), with people like Rand Paul, Donald Trump etc. still getting a lot of support. Those guys would be crushed in a general election. I think all of the other serious candidates would be forced to far to the right by their unelectable piers, mentioned above, and would struggle to win enough swing states to take the election. This is pretty crazy considering in 2016 we will likely see a Democrat President easily win a victory in the white house while the Republicans simultaneously hold both the House and the Senate. We likely won't see any agreement on major issues for the foreseeable future.

Possibly, but the 7th district in Virginia is pretty conservative. Chances are this guy will win in a low turn-out race. Traditional Republicans may not vote for him, while Tea Party supporters will come out in large numbers in support. There just aren't enough Democrats in that particular district for them to flip it.

Well, we were pinned against the goal line...on situational punts like that, the only option is fair catch...and the opposing team wants to try and touch it inside the 5...there is no option for return. You can tell if you watch the line on snap...they let the guys go because there is no chance for a return. This video is probably a poor example of what you were trying to illustrate...I agree with you though, punt returns need fixed. I've seen a billion football games and I don't think I've seen teams do it quite like that. The point of that video is how dumb the punt coverage is. Even if you know it's going to be a fair catch, it would still benefit the team to have a few more Huskers near the return man in the event of a muffed punt. If he doesn't field that cleanly we have no chance for a recovery. I've played a billion football games and was a punt/kickoff returner for a college football team...and I'm telling you what is shown in the video is normal with the short field and thus it is a poor example for the point you want to make. That's how it rolls. Once again, I'm not disagreeing with you...punt return coverage and returns themselves were atrocious last year...but this video is a poor example of that due to that short field. I understand. Still a bad idea to leave your return man on an island like that. Even if you know it's going to be a fair catch, it doesn't make sense to let the entire team run by you and to continue standing there. At least have a few guys go back to assist in case of a muff. Why wouldn't a coach do that? Same outcome with a fair catch but a little more added protection.

Just for reference, you can take a look at this chart and see the amount of bonus money a team can give a player for signing. If he is picked as high as #18, he'd get 2.145 million.

Well, we were pinned against the goal line...on situational punts like that, the only option is fair catch...and the opposing team wants to try and touch it inside the 5...there is no option for return. You can tell if you watch the line on snap...they let the guys go because there is no chance for a return. This video is probably a poor example of what you were trying to illustrate...I agree with you though, punt returns need fixed. I've seen a billion football games and I don't think I've seen teams do it quite like that. The point of that video is how dumb the punt coverage is. Even if you know it's going to be a fair catch, it would still benefit the team to have a few more Huskers near the return man in the event of a muffed punt. If he doesn't field that cleanly we have no chance for a recovery.

That's my second on the list. This goes hand in hand with our field position struggles. The Iowa game comes to mind where Nebraska was constantly behind the sticks the entire game. I really hope we improve our punt return game (it can only go up, really) this season. For example: What were we doing there?