beorach

I'm sure the goods will continue to be shared but I wanted to write and thank people for both the educational and humorous feedback. I suppose I could have had TM and TA on the list, too, but I just thought the offense was too different (not that the Tagge one wasn't, I guess, but I have only watched the Game of the Century once a long time ago).

I had a brief exchange with another Husker alumnus and fan on Twitter last weekend. He wouldn't offer up a basis for his claim that Scott Frost was the "best QB to ever run the option at NU." I personally think it's a toss-up between Crouch and Frazier but I'm not old enough to remember some others. I started watching during Turner Gill's time under center but was too young to really judge his place. My case for Tommie is as follows: 1) true dual-threat QB who seemed to know how to get the most out of any option play; 2) statistically superior career numbers despite missing games due to health issues; 3) true leader of his team every day of the week and not just by setting an example; 4) should have won the Heisman; and 5) signal-caller for what may have been the greatest college football team of all time. My case for Crouch is as follows: 1) true dual-threat QB who retained his "homerun hitter" ability throughout his career; 2) statistically superior career numbers overall, even compared to Frazier's, despite not having the same kind of talent around him; 3) won the Heisman; and 4) carried Nebraska to a national title game it didn't deserve (but at least we can say we were in the discussion this century as a result). The toss-up, for me, has to do with whether Tommie could have had the whole offense run through him in 2001. Part of me thinks that any athletic difference between him and Eric might have been made up for by that team having to deal with being accountable to TFraz. What do y'all think? It's Jerry Tagge, right? p.s. - I tried to be as inclusive as I could think of being within reason. If you think it's Mickey Joseph or Gerry Gdowski, please feel free to make your case. I'm sorry if this is old news but I'm partly checking to see how many people have Frost Fever.

I gotta go with the bowl win against Arizona because we made them look like the basketball school they are. I can't recall another game in which the Corn were really clicking on all cylinders for an entire game (under Bo) like that one.

Purdue was running it up on us and I felt like someone should have put the hurt to one of theirs for the lack of respect they were showing... I don't believe that happened. As one who follows the Irish as well, I've long been familiar with the no-win situation it is playing Purdue (because it's exceedingly rare for them to put together a great season such that all they can do is spoil yours) but this wasn't even a good Boilermakers team.

I think the Nashville Predators did themselves no favor ahead of the puck drop last night. First, they had some no-name sing the Canadian national anthem ahead of Sheryl Crow singing the home side's. Second, they brought out that former Ohio State RB who stole Tommie Frazier's Heisman. That guy was outplayed by a gimpy Biakabatuka FFS! TFraz had maybe one less than stellar game against Iowa State (early in his Husker career, mind you) you could maybe call a draw but he was certainly never clearly bested by his counterpart on the field. The hockey gods were certainly not pleased.

It's those helmets they stole from Princeton. It's a B1G thing going way back (that we used to complain about until we joined). It's the same reason we have to play at a whore named Ann Arbor three times before we get a second home game. p.s. - http://www.spartanjerseys.com/michigan-state-football-jersey-helmet/winged-helmet/

I think the real problem is people thinking that "N" on the helmet is magical (when it comes to the issue of people having to recognize there are kids with limits wearing them). Haven't you heard things like, "We should be destroying <insert team with comparable talent here>!"? It might be fair to add, "Just run the damn ball!" Once we can see we have the ability, thanks to a lot of ingredients we write about all the time, these statements will hopefully be realistic again.

I feel your pain. When you have a team that seems to be as good as any other during the regular season, it's tough not to think your guys might have left a Stanley Cup on the table. That's why it's the greatest postseason in sports, though. For my Bruins, I'll also blame a terrible format. Having to play the "3" and then the "1" to make the finals was always going to be a tough ask. I think that Toronto series took a lot out of the B's while Tampa, having earned the right to play the true "8," was able to get some rest.

To me, as a fan, Boston's style of play has generally been one that requires two-way players. It doesn't matter if you're a Kessel or a Seguin, to use recent examples for demonstration. This year's squad (of current golfers) had more going forward than I'm used to seeing, though. When you're opining that it's just understood the B's are dirty, it makes me wonder what you'd write about a team you did have an issue with. I get that 63 is polarizing and I get why that is (e.g., check this out: Penalty Analysis) but no team will ever be filled with Lady Byng candidates.

You'd think Boston was on some kind of dynastic run considering how they've gotten under everyone's skin. I have recently been trolled by strangers on Twitter over daring to root for Brad Marchand's team. When I left Omaha for college, I picked the Bruins (or "Broons" if you're Eddie Olczyk) as my team because a former Lancer was playing for them. I thought it was sort of fitting that they hadn't won a championship since my Cornhuskers (talking NC, of course) at that time. Now that I've seen them win, I'm not so anxious about the playoffs. I have never hated Tampa either...such that the sting of the recent loss could have been a lot worse. I saw Teemu Selanne get a hat trick (though one goal was off a penalty shot) against them in Expo Hall while on Spring Break. As it was, I just thought the series should have gone longer but for the most ridiculously one-sided officiating I've seen. The Bolts played the better hockey, though, so I'm not disputing the result of the series. I was definitely surprised by TB's ability to "D" up, though, in light of their regular season record along those lines.

I suppose you could say that but, when you're a 2-seed fighting off a 3-seed (talking overall for the East besides with these seedings - maybe Washington was tied for points with the Leafs, though) in the FIRST ROUND, I don't know that it has the same kind of feel to it as if you were talking about a 2-seed playing a 7-seed. Toronto is pretty solid and gave the B's all they could handle. I just hope they aren't hurting too badly afterward considering it won't get any easier...

Boston looked tired early in the 3rd period of game 6. I don't know what to expect tonight. They've outplayed the Leafs some nights and either won or lost depending on Fred A. more than anything. Rask doesn't deserve all the grief he gets either. I didn't even think he was that terrible the night he gave up 4 and they brought in Khudobin. Cassidy even had at least one costly lapse of attention/judgment in terms of rolling lines for matchups this series. McAvoy hasn't had a good series. The B's first line doesn't have a great +/-. Nash hasn't exactly been worth the money but I don't know why anybody would have expected him to dominate at this point. I have to point out that, for all the "bad press" Marchand deserves, he usually admits he was stupid about the stupid stuff he does. Kadri tried to hip check a player on his knees from behind and argued against his suspension.

That stick save was something else. It's a shame about the first goal coming from a power play that wasn't earned (delay of game given for a puck that clearly hit the boards on its way into the seats - there was even a linesman who ducked and probably heard the contact) but dem's da breaks.

Thanks, all, for additional responses. For whatever reason, I tried to access again today and it worked. I'll hope this continues to be the case and not question good fortune. How often does trying nothing different work?

It was the same for me. Those shots at a guy on his knees are always scary. It made me think of this one from a long time ago: Hartnell versus Alberts

Marshy's a great player who has earned a bad rep, of course, but he wasn't the villain of the game last night: Sportsnet.CA I don't see how that's a bad elbow to the face. He might not even have made contact. p.s. - I have been unable to access this site for weeks or I might have joined in on the bracket challenge. Good luck, you hosers!

Thanks for responding. Maybe I can figure something out.

Thanks, Enhance. That’s certainly possible, too. I’m just hoping that isn’t the case because I know I won’t get anywhere with them.

I wasn’t sure where to put this... I can no longer access this site at work. The security message I’m given indicates it’s because the site is categorized as a games or gaming page. I can visit other message boards so I don’t understand. Did something change here recently? Thanks in advance for any response.

That's true. What I was getting at was whether Auburn's great stats were helped at all by their schedule. Considering they played Clemson out of conference, I guess that helps balance out the fact they played Georgia Southern, Louisiana-Monroe, and Mercer. With that explained, though, I think the stats I was looking at were only ones from conference games. I do that to try and minimize the effect of SOS. How well is a team doing against their peers? p.s. - All in all, it still just means that Auburn posted better stats than others did in going through their conference schedule. Other teams didn't make so much hay doing the same but does that mean the $EC is the best conference, because they had some teams that dominated and didn't slip up with their OOC slate? That's what college football gets wrong, in my opinion. Only more games between teams from difference conferences will improve things where the national title is concerned.

Last season's Auburn team posted the third-best overall stats in FBS (by my method of tracking z-scores using just regular season conference games). You're damn right that was a meaningful win even if some prefer to apply the cliched "didn't want to be there" statement to the Tigers. I'm sure there's something to be said about strength of schedule, too, but we're talking about an American Athletic Conference team so...

The name is difficult to forget even if the legacy wasn't great. The water cooler talk on special teams may recognize that we have been blessed with kickers but not, in a relative sense anyway, kick "returners." Another low point from the Callahan era was having the "Suite Life of Zack and Cody" song mean something on sports radio.

Thanks, MD!

I liked #flaska but it shows a zero after I clicked it? It has been that kind of week...

I am more than OK with people who can't communicate, respectfully or otherwise, ignoring me on this forum. The error I pointed out wasn't grammatical either. p.s. - You could have just disagreed with the article in one post but, even after I humored you with a clarification, you had to: 1) go on complaining about it in a way that made it seem as if you only read enough to find something with which to disagree; 2) make some weird judgment as to my intent ("to defend the idea that ND wouldn't join the B1G, which it seems is what you were trying to do"); and 3) imply that I was making an argument I wasn't (which I already touched on above). Turnabout is fair play.