NM11046

Would not change a thing for me. You'd still feel exactly the same if it was another 5-7 season? Sure.... I +1'd this instead of hitting the reply (toooooo early here). So don't think someone agreed with you on this. Indeed that's the case - doubt me all you want. If you knew me personally you'd know I'd been saying this for a year. If we don't have reputable people leading the team we'll never get recruits, never maximize the talent, never win. We would have continued to spiral. So (I think) we'll continue to improve this year and in the years moving forward. If not I will still support him whole heartedly because he is the face of the program and he's a great one. Without that we are nothing. I'd rather lose (yes) and have the interview with my coach (for the university and the state I love) at halftime be a respectful, cordial, insightful, professional one than a snot nosed, bitter, grumpy "why do I have to do this" interview like Bo gave. Really? Because they could have hired my neighbor. Super nice guy, always happy, smiling whistling. But has never watched a down of football. But, so long as he is nice and gives a good interview. Yup. But you see snarky Teach, Mike has watched a down of football. But that wasn't you point, was it? Your point was you don't care about wins. I don't think that is the case. I think you care about the team winning. I think we all do. My point was that if this season was like last season no, I wouldn't care about wins. I think you need the morals and ethics to get them and sometimes that doesn't come overnight. I was disappointed last year, absolutely - but not angry or bitter or blaming the coaching staff. I was prouder of the team last year than any winning season under Bo. There is a broader picture and I feel you can have both.

Would not change a thing for me. You'd still feel exactly the same if it was another 5-7 season? Sure.... I +1'd this instead of hitting the reply (toooooo early here). So don't think someone agreed with you on this. Indeed that's the case - doubt me all you want. If you knew me personally you'd know I'd been saying this for a year. If we don't have reputable people leading the team we'll never get recruits, never maximize the talent, never win. We would have continued to spiral. So (I think) we'll continue to improve this year and in the years moving forward. If not I will still support him whole heartedly because he is the face of the program and he's a great one. Without that we are nothing. I'd rather lose (yes) and have the interview with my coach (for the university and the state I love) at halftime be a respectful, cordial, insightful, professional one than a snot nosed, bitter, grumpy "why do I have to do this" interview like Bo gave. Really? Because they could have hired my neighbor. Super nice guy, always happy, smiling whistling. But has never watched a down of football. But, so long as he is nice and gives a good interview. Yup. But you see snarky Teach, Mike has watched a down of football.

Would not change a thing for me. You'd still feel exactly the same if it was another 5-7 season? Sure.... I +1'd this instead of hitting the reply (toooooo early here). So don't think someone agreed with you on this. Indeed that's the case - doubt me all you want. If you knew me personally you'd know I'd been saying this for a year. If we don't have reputable people leading the team we'll never get recruits, never maximize the talent, never win. We would have continued to spiral. So (I think) we'll continue to improve this year and in the years moving forward. If not I will still support him whole heartedly because he is the face of the program and he's a great one. Without that we are nothing. I'd rather lose (yes) and have the interview with my coach (for the university and the state I love) at halftime be a respectful, cordial, insightful, professional one than a snot nosed, bitter, grumpy "why do I have to do this" interview like Bo gave.

Would not change a thing for me.

Define "illegally turned away"...because aren't most juries picked by the prosecuting and defending attorneys according to their perception of which jurors would be most likely to lean their way? You people have some bizarre statistics that are just numbers floating out there in space. Here, let me give you one: Whites were much more likely to be found fighting for the freedom of African Americans than African Americans themselves. Although this is true, does it really say anything of interest? If not, why not? "You people" is a slight bit condescending Bowfin. Instead of retyping the info you can read all about it, the Supreme Court Ruling, etc. in the following links. Net net is depending on the state each side gets a certain number of strikes, and they have to provide a reason ... some of these have been "he looks like a drug dealer" "They live in a high crime neighborhood" which are obvious etc.: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/us/02jury.html?pagewanted=all http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/06/23/lyon.racial.jury.selection/ https://thinkprogress.org/racist-jurors-are-hidden-from-the-public-this-scotus-case-could-change-that-43cf074c7dcb#.bcnxdfiq9 http://thegrio.com/2010/06/07/blacks-systematically-blocked-from-serving-on-juries-study-says/ http://racialjusticeproject.weebly.com/uploads/6/9/3/9/6939365/eji_race_and_jury_report.pdf Bowfin, I have little doubt based on your posts over the last few days where you stand on this issue, and that no matter the data, links, opinions or arguments that are presented here that your mind is made up. That's your right. I'm guessing however that this is probably a thread that you'll find very little that you agree with moving forward.

I have been a fan of Mike Riley since he arrived. I can not imagine a better person to be at the helm of our football ship than this man as we deal with a very messy two years. Although he was getting a $hit ton of backlash in his first year he stayed committed, optimistic and focused on the team and his staff. I can not imagine what it took to stand at the front of a press room filled with angry fans after last years games, and he was professional and honest and expressed confidence in the team. He earned the trust of his team and it showed in the later part of last season. It has shown in recruiting and in the team's attitude and commitment this summer and throughout the start of this season. Dealing with the death of a team member, the passing of a great coach (one that he involved with the daily activities of the team without hesitation), the arrest of a well respected and high performing assistant, and now how he is handling the anthem situation. There is no better man to be leading this team or mentoring these young men than Mike Riley. He is the man I want representing Nebraska on Saturdays, on recruiting visits, at Big10 meetings, at press conferences and on what i think may be turning into a national stage with the current drama. It's about more than football and he is a great example for our state. On top of that, he has surrounded this team with strong leaders in the form of assistants, and, AND they're coaching well (and we're winning). When you do the right thing good things will come of it. Mike Riley is showing that by his example each day. We will win. And the men who are fortunate enough to be coached by him will take the lessons he has taught and those he has shown by example into every facet of their lives.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2015/05/06/institutional-racism-is-our-way-of-life A few of the top eye catching stats (this is from 2015): About 73 percent of whites own homes, compared to just 43 percent of blacks. The gap between median household income for whites (about $91,000) compared to blacks (about $7,000). The median net worth of white families is about $265,000, while it was just $28,500 for blacks. On the New Jersey Turnpike blacks make up 15 percent of drivers, more than 40 percent of stops and 73 percent of arrests – even though they break traffic laws at the same rate as whites. Qualified black jurors are illegally turned away as much as 80 percent of the time in the jury selection process. About a quarter of juries in death penalty cases have no black jurors, and more than two-thirds have two or less.

EXCELLENT! Thank you ThatGuy.

FIFY Fair enough - most people, when they actually dig into the issues that she has lied on see that the weight of them vs. the attention they are getting is a wee bit skewed ... vs the gaps of supporting information and outright lies that come from the other one. But you're right. She has lied. Not sure if anyone saw John Oliver this weekend, but he (I'm paraphrasing here) said lies to politicians are like raisins in a cookie. You don't like them, they shouldn't be there, but they are. You hope your cookie has no raisins. Hillary's cookie has some raisins, but Trump has only raisins .. no cookie whatsoever.

What it comes down to is one is a experienced, smart, qualified candidate that rubs some people the wrong way. The other is a lying, uneducated, uncaring, unqualified bigot. The decision is an easy one.

But most of us love the 80's! Wait ... Apollo Creed was a black man. What are you trying to say here? Why did you put the gif of them hugging? What significance does the ocean have?

THIS! I chortled. (Wasn't that you this morning that said that? Loved that too)

You mean explanation, although it is actually neither. Translation would be if your post would have been in German or the like. The point still stands: You are what you say you despise in others. There is no such thing as this "semi-conditional free speech" you seem to think exists. You, me, and Ivey all qualify for it or none of us do. You're free to say it - we are also free to think it's offensive and shocking that there are people that in today's age still feel that way and don't have an inkling about expressing it, in writing, on a public forum.

It absolutely does, you just aren't willing to admit it. Certain things are inappropriate in certain venues. If Rose-Ivey isn't going to be considerate of those around him, it would be duplicitous to demand it from others. No, you are off here. Not one person on that team has said it was inconsiderate. You and a handful of others seem to be bothered by it (or really, I think not bothered by the action so much as you are bothered for what he's calling attention to as a problem in the US). The tomb of the unknown soldier is not comparable to the anthem at a sporting event. But, I'd be willing to bet if someone decided to take a knee and say a prayer during the ceremony at the tomb it wouldn't be looked at as a problem. And you certainly wouldn't be chirping about it on a chat board.

It's called Free Speech, my friend. You used to be for it until you were against it. You missed it. Here's a translation for you: it's tough for many of us to believe that there is one person that would write such a comment, even harder to believe there are two additional people that gave it a +1.

It absolutely does, you just aren't willing to admit it. Certain things are inappropriate in certain venues. If Rose-Ivey isn't going to be considerate of those around him, it would be duplicitous to demand it from others. I think Rose-Ivey was considerate of the 69 other players and coaching staff when he spoke to them about the issue before the game. I don't think MRI is demanding respect from others, I think he was disappointed in the reaction he got from some fans. He is being a little naive in expecting 100% positive reactions, but it still can be disappointing to get death threats from people who thought cheered for you during football games. Yeah .... "disappointed". That's what he feels.

Thanks for joining us.

No to the first question and yes to the second question. I am not one to miss an opportunity to speak up on such matters. Neither do these guys: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsdHxUXf2CE This has nothing to do with this conversation.

The unfortunate aspect of this article and these protest is that it creates an image for the profile of a husker fan, and that image is not good. Husker fans are racist, biggoted a$$hole$ who attack their players. We all know that is not a good representation of our fan-base. Attacking stereotypes with more stereotypes doesn't seem to be the answer. Couldn't have put it better. I swing between pride for the supportive comments I see from husker supporters, and extreme disappointment to see the hate speech and general lack of awareness that other fans are showing. I'm trying to keep perspective ... there have been far more positive reactions than negative, but the bad are so very, very bad. And those saying them are truly, absolutely, unaware of how bigoted and hateful they are. They don't even know enough to recognize it and keep it on the down low. My heart is broken that we're still acting like this as a nation, and that members of my home state (including the governor) are setting such a poor example. And that same heart is full with hope that good outweighs bad, and perhaps this is the moment that the conversations can really start with those who haven't been able to see or admit there are issues.

Barry said that - not MRI.

Yes, yes he is. AND Cuban supported him until somewhat recently ... an interesting perspective for sure. I'd love to see those two go at it. He would eat him alive.

And their seat number at Memorial ...

He learned from the best.

This is a very touchy subject. My first and quick reaction is....hell yeah.....we need the moderators to fact check these bastards. Well.....then.....I start thinking about it. There isn't anybody moderating that is going to know every single fact a candidate might throw out there. So....what happens when the moderator corrects a fact from one candidate while not correcting a false fact from another simply because they didn't know it was false??? OR.....What happens when the moderator is actually wrong??? Agreed, but remember he's got that earpiece in, so somebody in the booth is in his ear with facts before he ever opens his mouth. Even if he didn't catch all, there will be flagrant misinformation shared, and zombies in the audience that will latch onto it and recite it tomorrow like it's fact. I'd like for some of that to at least be contested. Otherwise we risk the name calling and grandstanding as a distraction instead of an actual debate of issues.