Huskers19911

What are your predictions for the game?

Seems like every time we see pictures or videos of practice, the players are in shorts. Today was one of those times.

Does anyone know if the NCAA requires teams to not be full contact a few practices of the week? High school now has some regulations, I believe, where they can't be full contact a few days a week.

I'm not a fan of burning POBs redshirt this late in the year. Though, the staff will have the best plan in place and know more than we do. From what I've heard, TA isn't an option for this game (likely done for the season, from a girl dating a NE player), but the plan is for Fyfe to play with a protective cast on his arm, but that is a big if.

I think many on here forget OSU came into the game with better athletes top to bottom, and with a chip on their shoulder after their loss. When they started the season, their goal was to win the championship. How many posters on here thought we would win the championship, realistically? Include players and staff. Tommy went down, coaches went into panic mode. Already down big, and our leader was out.

I think we win out regular season in close games.

This is my opinion, feel free to disagree, but I felt our play calling on offense produced this blowout. I don't know exact statistics, but after Tommy went out, it seemed like we went too pass happy, and put our defense in multiple bad situations, against the best offense we have faced all year.

I read a post earlier about running up the score--they didn't do that to us. If their second and third stringers are scoring at will, the blame is on us. They needed a big win after last weeks loss, but also, it was a great opportunity for younger players to get experience in an actual game.

If he plays, we probably won't know until he is in. No reason to give OSU another option to prepare for--catch 'em off guard.

I didn't see the call as wrong or correct. If we were on the other side, and a PI was called, I feel like many on here would have argued about the call and wanted it reversed. In this case, the call didn't go our way. As a coach, I never let my players blame refs for the outcome of the game (and most posters don't seem to be blaming the loss on the refs, but some are hinting at it).

Play through adversity, through refs, and play the game. We had chances to win, and some would argue we actually had more calls go our way than Wisconsin.

I'm not sure that is a fair comparison necessarily. Most athletes play the sport because they enjoy it, but also receive a free education. I don't think sweat shop workers enjoy their jobs, plus, they probably don't get free gear/clothes for doing it.

Don't get me wrong, I do think it is silly that college athletes aren't receiving some form of compensation outside of scholarships, I just think that comparison is a stretch. Most college students go into debt after college, before getting a job. Football players shouldn't go into debt if they are on a full-ride scholarship. If they do, it shouldn't be much.

Thanks for the tip. I think he was just kidding, but if he isn't, remember he's just one of many fans, and isn't gaining respect here by the joke. Feel free to chat in the forums and join conversations, I would guess your comments will be appreciated by many on here, as long as you aren't just here to instigate drama, which you don't seem to be.

The previous coach left many gaps in recruiting, with the o line as one of the major ones. At offensive line, I think it is common that a scholly winner will take a few years to gain not only the necessary weight, but also the strength and speed to go with that weight. Some guys can do it, others can't. It's not even just linemen, how many other players that have scholarships don't see the field until they are juniors because they aren't ready yet?

I don't think his scholarship would still be there for him, unless we offered him a new one. Scholarships are presented for a specific year, and since he didn't come here, he technically turned it down. Not sure of how his career is going, but I also don't think we would want to offer him a scholarship if he decided to come back to football, unless he was heavily evaluated in regards to his ability. I can't imagine he would be as good as he once was, though, he could probably get back into football shape.

Students being recruited aren't concerned about the brand of the college. They're more concerned at winning or going to the NFL. Winning a championship is also on the top of their lists. You can tell me I'm wrong, and feel free to do so, but, they're thinking of their future's rather than a brand.

I don't think the coaches poll is worried about building hype for a program, just to watch them lose and drop. Maybe a few teams playing us would like to see it, but most of the football landscape doesn't need to build us up to lose to them.

With injuries for Oregon as of late, and losing to us, they haven't been playing well. If Oregon had been winning out, our win against them would have looked more impressive. Instead, they have folded and have been losing.

My brother went to a game there. Said the fans were terrible, even had people throw nachos and other food at him during the game. With that said, he was also near their student section, and isn't afraid to run his mouth at times.

As it currently stands, any business that denigrates a former employee to a prospective employer is subject to legal action by said employee.

 

They might be a perfectly decent person. Or a train wreck you'd be morally obliged to warn against. But if someone calls HR asking about an employee, HR is instructed to only divulge the dates of employment.

 

If I'm correct, it isnt illegal if the statements are true to the new employer. If it was illegal to tell different perspective employers about the employee interviewing, why would you bother contacting the previous employer?

I agree with KRC. Phillips had a terrible childhood, and still almost overcame it. He had tons of issues, but the abuse he suffered was horrendous, and I'm hoping they show both sides of his story. Obviously, his actions weren't acceptable by any means, but that abuse was awful.

Good question. Sometimes I think I should have gone into business.

Michigan State is highly overrated. Their best win was against Notre Dame and ND just got beat by a bad Duke team.

Wisconsin will lose to Michigan and tOSU and will beat Iowa.

We should be ranked ahead of Wisconsin come game time but I think we'll lose to them again

I'm a Duke fan, and Duke is BAD this year. Not that they were ever great, but a couple of years ago they won 10 games (nowhere near that now, even in a bad conference).

With Oregon losing, and us winning a "close one" (score doesn't tell the whole story with the fumbles in the end zone), I'm surprised we jumped up to 15. If we had beaten Oregon this week, and Northwestern last week, we wouldn't be rated this high. I think Riley will do a good job of keeping players from reading into rankings too much and thinking we are unbeatable against our next few match ups. A simple reminder of last season can bring them back down to Earth.

Do we deserve being top 15? Time will tell. Rated? I think so. Still have a ways to go before we are "back," but being rated definitely helps our recruiting.

Go Cats Go,

Go Cats Go,

Hey Chicago whaddaya say,

The Purple's gonna win today.

Good luck!

For me, I think a win by a few touchdowns and seeing younger players play is key. Northwestern has always played us tough, so I won't be surprised if they do it yet again. Hopefully, our guys will be focused on the game at hand.

 

 

Also, even if you miss the conversion, give up a TD and then have to get a FG, it's not that you've lost the game. It goes into overtime and you still basically have a 50/50 chance to win.

 

Not the same situation but I had a similar discussion with a random Husker fan as we watched the end of the Iowa/NDSU game at the stadium. When NDSU scored to make it 21-20, I advocated going for two, which was probably against what your chart showed. The other guy said they should kick and go to overtime. My reasoning was if you go for two, you give yourself two chances to win - make the conversion or stop Iowa and get back to kick a FG. But the extenuation circumstances were what Iowa would do. I said - before NDSU even attempted the conversion - that if they missed, Iowa would play conservative and NDSU would probably get the ball back in good field position. That's exactly what happened and even with an average kicker NDSU had plenty of time to get back into FG range and win the game.

 

Not that one instance proves or disproves anything. But generally speaking, I think the more aggressive play is the way to go, especially on the road. Play to win, don't play not to lose. So there's even more that goes into the calculation than simply the probably of making the conversion. It's what's going to happen because you do or don't.

 

First it was "no one in the coaching profession would agree with you" Now it's "it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be". Ok.

We do agree that more aggressive play is generally the way to go. I just think that there is literally no advantage to get that second point up 32-28 with 9 min to go. 98% chance of 5 point lead or 40% (at best, 20% if we use Oregon's last game) of a 6 point lead. 5 points makes a huge difference over 4 points. 6 points makes no difference over 5 points. It the numbers back me up.

Yes, when we are talking about two different things there are two different answers.

 

The numbers you want to use back up your position. That doesn't make them the only numbers that can be used, let alone the correct ones.

I agree with Mav. 6 points vs. 5 is a huge difference in the game. Five points, a TD wins the game. 6 points, and you still have a chance.

Also, if you go for two points and get it, there's a momentum swing for your team. They get confidence.

Should Oregon have gone for two points all game long? No, but their coaches were successful after the first attempt, and I think they wanted it to gain momentum for their team.

This wasn't the Oregon of the past decade, but it was still a good win, and a confidence booster. The players beat a top-25 team and we should be happy about it. Not a perfect game, but we were able to finish the game with a win. For me, I think it is a good sign of things to come in the future. National Champs? No, not this year, but I do think the players will have some added "swag" to how they play, and will play with confidence in the next few weeks. We can't write anyone off, though. I think the men will be ready for each game, and continually improve.

Every game is different, and Ohio State isn't unbeatable, so we do have a chance. Michigan State was a loss for many on here last year, but anything can happen.

Technically, those tickets are sold to opposing teams athletic departments, and then their "unsold tickets" are up for resale. So, they were sold in fact, at least once. It's when we can't sell our tickets that the streak is in jeopardy. Which, if our season goes as it did last year, that may happen next year. I think this year the streak continues, regardless of how we play this season. I also think if it becomes a major concern that the streak will end, we will see super cheap tickets.

Cross country meet at 10, then going to my parents' for my moms birthday. And of course, snacks

 

I had a friend who lost their life to a swimming pool...

 

Did the swimming pool have too much to drink, climb behind the wheel and run into another swimming pool?

Or did his friend have too much to drink?