khaake

One thing about Mills... I haven't seen anything from him to suggest that he's very explosive. He does remind me of Ozigbo a little bit, but he's had a hard time making the first person miss.

Nebraska: 34
Colorado: 27

Rushing: 181
Passing: 241

The O-line looked bad. The defense looked a little better, but this was against South Alabama. I sincerely hope our D-line hasn't been getting talked up this fall simply because they've been practicing against a bad o-line.

I expect our offense to get better as the year goes on, but they did not play well today at all.
 

28 minutes ago, knapplc said:

As a bone to our Trump supporters who continue to post in these threads, let's remember back to one (just one!) of Obama's many scandals.

 

 

Scandalous!  Oh how far we have fallen.

Speaking of echo chamber - this was just put out by their campaign. It's breathtaking how effortlessly Trump and his cohorts lie.

Twitter is crazy right now. It is obvious that the Trump and GOP strategy is to get the echo chamber going with "No Collusion and No Obstruction" as loudly as possible, when the report itself does not appear to support that. We are a country divided into two different realities.

Transparency! Drink!

7 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

You've brought some very important questions ITT. Thanks for that. I'll take this in a different direction.

 

The difference is those organizations theoretically have no agenda other than reporting news. Obviously partisan publications differ in this regard, but theoretically non-partisan institutions like NYT and WaPo exist without regard to politics to unearth fact and truth for more educated society.

 

Wikileaks, on the other hand, seemed under Assange to have an implicit agreement to share news on and critique the West. They have largely ignored Russia, China and other Eastern powers, and I believe it is intentional.

True, they have been very critical of the West, and haven't had a lot of publications aimed at China (or Russia). But at the same time, they were based in the West and so to some extent I think that can be expected. I'm not going to try to argue that they weren't an asset of Russia - maybe they were, and I have no way to know. But on the other had we haven't seen actual evidence to that effect yet, have we?

4 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

They also seem to target only one particular party in the U.S. and ignore others.

I think that is the common perception, but generally speaking it doesn't hold a lot of water. Here is the wikipedia list of their publications: Wikileaks Publications

8 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

How was it obtained?

 

what about how the Clinton emails were obtained?

Good questions. For what it is worth the stated reason for the US extraditing Assange is due to activities in 2010 - not the Clinton email case.
This was part of it.

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I am uncomfortable with “journalists” getting information by committing crimes and not having to worry about getting into trouble. 

 

Should the omaha world Harold be able to hack into your financial records on your computer and publish them?

Valid points. I agree that the line has to be drawn someplace. But in this case I don't think we were talking about a publisher breaking into a personal computer of a private individual to expose their information publicly. Instead we were talking about a publisher obtaining information about what governments were up to. There seems to be a difference there.

10 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Well said.

 

This is really awkward territory for setting or following precedent. Daniel Ellsberg looked like a hero. Julian Assange looks like a worm. But they walk a similar line. 

 

I remember loving WikiLeaks when they exposed people who held dirty secrets. But perhaps I can't pick and choose my outrage and retribution. 

It is awkward. People have various reasons for hating Assange, but I'm worried about the potential long term ramifications of this action. Eventually more info will come out, though.

3 minutes ago, commando said:

when they dump secrets of how our IC does business it crosses over to spy territory.   

Do you feel the journalists and the publications they work for were also in spy territory when they published the contents of these dumps? Also, in general should it be illegal for any journalist to publish articles about how the IC does business - i.e. should the IC be unquestionably treated as being above the law, and above being criticized? 

9 minutes ago, commando said:

spy is another term that fits

What is it, in your opinion, that differentiates Wikileaks from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, etc.? Are those who run traditional newspapers also spies in your book?

What is it that journalists do, if not expose that which the powerful do not want exposed? I understand that the charges made public today deal with an alleged computer hacking conspiracy, but this arrest seems uncomfortably close to being political retribution directed at a publisher. Are we to abide by the rule that journalists are to report only information that was provided willingly? If so, is there any reason to have journalists at all?

Idiots - what have you unleashed!


 

40 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Now you're getting closer.

 

Question....and it may not have a huge bearing on the outcome.  But, how old was he when this was happening?

I could be wrong, but I don't think his age matters.

Just now, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

W/ 2 tbsp of granola

And candy sprinkles!

2 hours ago, man eating mastodon said:

Think of the balloons man!!!

Balloons are so 20th century, man. It's time embrace the future of stadium bubbles!
 

Oh yell yes. Welcome aboard, young man!

If we finish out 3-0, I still do not think we enter the year in the top-25. We'll likely be close to it, but will need to show it on the field before we find our way back in.

Nebraska 55
Cookman 24

Rushing 350

Passing 300

5 hours ago, Undone said:

 

Biggest positive difference I've noticed is that Scott came out against Wisconsin throwing the ball quickly to the edges in the first quarter and hasn't looked back from that game plan. That completely changes how a defense plays you. It opens up the running lanes after just a couple of those throws. We've scored a touchdown on our first drives in back-to-back games now and both of those opening drives looked effortless.

I've loved it too - it's definitely been fun to watch. Is anyone else concerned, though, about a faster defense being able to jump one of those quick outs? There were a couple of those against Minnesota where it seemed the defender would have had a decent shot at an INT (& likely pick-6) if he would have anticipated the throw better.

Nebraska 34

Minnesota 24

Rushing 231

Passing 249

5 minutes ago, Undone said:

Spielman is totally a "Chip Kelly" kind of guy; small and extremely fast. It will suck when he's gone.

 

But...we have him next season. So then Spielman will be the guy getting double-teamed. I'm not worried about not having two guys on the field at the same time that can house it on any given play. I want a quarterback that can hit guys when they're open, and we have that now, no matter what any of the naysayers might say about Martinez's throwing ability.

Naysayers? Meh. I've been really pleased with how well Martinez has done so far. That piece of the puzzle is in place, and he's bound to get better as time goes on. We're blessed to have him.