Unless Logan wanted to go FCS, I kind of doubt there's another place in P5 where he can go and compete for the starting job. So I think he's here until he's for sure out of consideration to start. Even if he's 3rd string behind Chubba, chances are he sticks around and competes for the starting QB spot next year.

26 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

I am optimistic and think we did pretty dang good in the portal this year.  The real problem is in your last sentence...  Trying to get that many new guys to gel in just a few months is pretty hard, especially when they are joining a team that has struggled to perform in the last few years.  Building early confidence will be key imo.    

You could also look at it that perhaps the psyche that caused this team to lose all those close games last year can hopefully be erased with all the new pieces in place, especially at prominent positions (starting QB specifically)

2 hours ago, Toe said:

 

What's more worrisome to me is the quality of the guys. We took a lot of guys, which got us up on the ranking, but most of them aren't exactly stars. Look at that average rating column - there's only one other team in the top 25 that's that low.

BIG ERN beat me to it:

42 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

 

 

Time will tell but the portal for Nebraska has been more positive than negative this year. The only guy who left that was key is AM but I think we upgraded. We also upgraded on Rogers and Payne. Also have a few previous years guys who could start like Martin and Johnson. 

 

Casey Thompson: Starting QB

Ochaun Mathis: Starting DE/OLB

Trey Palmer: Starting WR

Devin Drew: Starting DL

Timmy Bleekrode: Starting Kicker 

Brian Buschini: Starting Punter 

Chubba Purdy: Backup QB and will start when CT leaves 

Isaiah Garcia-Castaneda: Backup WR that will see a lot of PT if healthy 

Kevin Williams: Backup OL that could break into a starting spot

Hunter Anthony: Backup OL that could break into a starting spot

Tommi Hill:  Backup DB that could break into a starting spot

Omar Brown:  Backup DB that could break into a starting spot

Could be as many as 7 to 9 starters directly from the transfer portal, plus a host of other guys who will factor into the 2 or 3 deep rotation. And another at least solid rotation guy if you consider Anthony Grant who is a JUCO transfer. I'd say that's a successful class of transfers. Of course now they all have to put together a cohesive and quality product to put on the field.

44 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

You are in this thread defending a guy who is currently arguing in court he conveniently lost FOUR cell phones that could implicate his company to fraud. Just like his aides conveniently burned evidence. And top secret documents conveniently showed up at his crappy golf resort.

 

It is possible to walk and chew bubble gum. There are in fact different degrees of bad. And I understand that the federal government is the devil incarnate to Libertarians (who are not entirely wrong) but getting in bed with that scumbag really undermines your credibility.

No one's getting in bed with him. My position has been pretty clear:

1) There are plenty of criticisms I could level toward Trump, but reasons anti Trumpers use to hate him are largely silly and most times exaggerated &

2) Trump's corruption is no anomaly when it comes to presidents or politicians at large. Almost all of them, especially over the past 100 years, have been pretty horrendously crooked individuals. Most of them just receive cover by the media and the bureaucracies that Trump did not receive.

Somehow that makes me a Trump worshipper on this forum... So frankly, if you can't acknowledge the absolutely reasonable points I put forth then I don't really care what you think about my credibility

21 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 I already knew the answer.

I'm glad you already knew I trust my wife. Thanks homie

2 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

I didn't ask who you don't trust. I'm asking who you do trust. You clearly support conservative politicians, even those in the federal government. Who, specifically, do you trust? And why?

I trust my wife, my business partners, my parents and in-laws except for my sister in law, Jesus Christ, and my friends.

And just for a comprehensive list, I trust Luke Combs, Justin Moore, and Morgan Wallen to continue to make great music.

That answer your question?

11 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It is 100% NOT a call for violence. Stop pretending this is remotely the same thing. @RedDenver provided the context of "a call to arms" as a motivator for anyone who really wants to pretend they've never heard that phrase before.

 

Don't be such a try-too-hard.

Then I guess you won't mind applying the benefit-of-the-doubt precedent to your favorite cheeto either when he says "We've gotta fight like hell", especially when he explicitly instructs people to remain peaceful...

K, cool.

8 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Pssst.....I'm not the one who comes on here and always claims people who disagree with me are brainwashed or indoctrinated.  That's what I'm pointing out.  You obviously are......even though you claim everyone else is.

Just taking notes on what you're saying:

*BRB says he doesn't come on here calling people brainwashed

*BRB claims I'm the only one who calls people brainwashed

*BRB calls me brainwashed

8 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

What "precedent" are you talking about?

Lightfoot says this is a "call to arms" which is pretty obviously an encouragement of violence, and you dismiss it.

Trump explicitly tells people to protest peacefully, and you say he incited "insurrection"

Your judgements are obviously not based on any sort of precedent or underlying principles. If it's anti-trump you'll support it, and if it's not even pro-trump but just neutral-trump your head pops off with rage. 

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

You can try to whitewash history all you want. We have the receipts.

 

You also, probably mistakenly, I'm sure, left out quite a few of the cheeto's quotes. I'm sure that was an oversight.

 

Trump Supporters’ Own Explanations For Assaulting The Capitol Are Undercutting His Impeachment Defense

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

And you prove my point that you don't care about precedent, only your hysterical emotions surrounding the issue.

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

You know very well that's not what she's doing. 

 

Are we really pretending that "call to arms" is not a common phrase? 

And you claim that Trump "incited insurrection" when this is what he actually said:

Quote

Here is what he actually said…
 

• “We’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue and we’re going to the Capitol,”
• “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women.”
• “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
• “So, let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I want to thank you all. God bless you and God bless America.”
• Later, after the rioting began, he tweeted, “I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, we are the Party of Law & Order, respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you.” 
• A second tweet, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful.”

*sigh* .... 

13 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

You proved my point. Thanks. 
 

Fact is, you claim everyone else is brainwashed or indoctrinated…..meanwhile, you are radical in your own thoughts because of media that you have obviously consumed. 

You constantly post tweets from a guy with a Ukraine flag in their twitter name because he satisfies your anti-trump kink... something about glass houses and stones...

Musk explains his rationale which is absolutely 100% on point.

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Is that the same type of hysterical as someone who believes the US government is the most corrupt organization in the world and all politicians are power hungry criminals?

HAHAHA Please name an organization more corrupt than the US government.

16 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Who do you trust?

Definitely not anyone who tries to tell me how I should think or what I should be allowed to do.

The real question is: WHY, after mountains of evidence of horrendous malfeasance, corruption, and lying to the American people would ANYONE trust a single person within the federal government or its bureaucracies? ESPECIALLY after the last 2 years of constant lying and manipulation by public officials...

Just now, knapplc said:

 

Lots of questions for Musk about where the line is, then. The bloated cheeto instigated his useful idiots to attack a sitting session of Congress. A woman was killed and others suffered medical events that led to their death, all fomented by the cheeto. That's not a line in the sand for Musk?

 

What is, then? 

 

 

 

 

 

A secondary point is, does TFG come crawling back thanks to Musk's charity? Can his ego allow that? I haven't seen anyone really talking about that. TFG himself said he wouldn't come back to Twitter if the ban was lifted, but I don't know if that's true.

 

 

You're just hysterical about everything huh

22 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

We most certainly do not live in the same reality.

 

I'm sure by "framing and trapping their political opponents" you're referring to Trumps phone call with Ukraine, requesting they "find dirt" on Biden, then maybe on second thought we agree on more than I thought. 

 

Seriously though, voters like you remind me that this country is in a complete and hopeless situation. In 40 years, let's hope that the liberal democracies of Western Europe are powerful enough to solve the world's problems will simultaneously propagating democracy across the world. I have my doubts, but all we can do is hope at this point. 

How about General Flynn...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-flynn-entrapment-11544658915

Or an FBI attorney whiting out info on his FISA application that would have shown no basis for the spying operation on Trump...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

Seriously, voters like you who put their trust in politicians to make important decisions (tRuSt ThE eXpErTs) remind me that this country is in a complete and hopeless situation. 

17 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

What was that about the left wanting to silence dissenting voices?  Don't you DARE say something bad about Dear Leader.

I HIGHLY doubt Bannon is talking about throwing Esper in prison for criticizing Trump, but of course lefties (and republicans as well) love to chop up clips so they can morph what people are saying to fit their narrative...

17 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

This guy is so far gone it shows the future of our country is completely hopeless.

 

I guess Democrats did worse things than replacing electors they disagreed with, they hired a sham firm to recount ballots in Arizona, a litmus test to the primary candidates is promoting that elections are rigged, millions of illegal ballots were cast, etc. 

 

Instead of trying to convince you and other GOPers otherwise, I'm just going to plead with you: please, don't go to a voting booth. It isn't a place for you. There's nothing wrong with that. 

 

 

If framing and entrapping their political opponents doesn't count as worse than those things, we don't live in the same reality.

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

No, they're talking about a coordinated effort by the Russians to aid their bloated orange cheeto friend in the election. It's far beyond just the emails or some Facebook ads.

 

But you know that. 

Not according to the bulletproof article you just shared. 

For reference, America is FAR more radical than just about every single European country on abortion:

5 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That's not what we're talking about, which you would know if you even looked at the link.

 

Or if you read the Republican committee's report on Russian interference in the election. 

 

This is part of the findings of the REPUBLICAN-led committee. Republicans said this.

 

 

 

The Trump campaign’s interactions with Russian intelligence services during the 2016 presidential election posed a “grave” counterintelligence threat, a Senate panel concluded Tuesday as it detailed how associates of Donald Trump had regular contact with Russians and expected to benefit from the Kremlin’s help.

 

The nearly 1,000-page report, the fifth and final one from the Republican-led Senate intelligence committee on the Russia investigation, details how Russia launched an aggressive effort to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf. It says the Trump campaign chairman had regular contact with a Russian intelligence officer and says other Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid, particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers.

 

The report is the culmination of a bipartisan probe that produced what the committee called “the most comprehensive description to date of Russia’s activities and the threat they posed.” The investigation spanned more than three years as the panel’s leaders said they wanted to thoroughly document the unprecedented attack on U.S. elections.

I'm aware that they're talking about the wikileaks emails. I'm more fascinated than anything that the Dem media fairly successfully were able to direct the outrage toward how the emails were hacked, rather than the contents and implications of what was in the emails. Pretty impressive actually.

20 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

You mean the "Russia narrative" that was verified by all of America's intelligence agencies? 

Ridiculous and hilarious all at the same time. 

Russian accounts bought a whopping $100,000 of ads on facebook, not in support of a candidate, and not in reference to the election at all.

LINK

Quote

Stamos said the company had reviewed “a range of activity” to discern what had happened in this instance, but he noted that the majority of ads purchased by these accounts didn’t specifically refer to the United States election, or any of the presidential candidates. Instead, he explained, the ads mainly focused on controversial issues.

“The ads and accounts appeared to focus on amplifying divisive social and political messages across the ideological spectrum — touching on topics from LGBT matters to race issues to immigration to gun rights,” he said.

And yet here you are continuing to promote propaganda. 

34 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

That's laughable.

 

Are you looking up to see how much damage was done to the capital and how many died in January of 2017?

 

And.......I'm the one programed.  Got it.

Deaths that can be directly tied to the J6 riot? 2. If you count the 4 that committed suicide afterward, then 6. That's being pretty generous. And I've been quite clear that anyone who actually committed violence should be charged and prosecuted. But the idea that it was a terrorist attack, an insurrection, or a coup attempt is a complete and total joke.