luvthecorn

Staying in the Big 12 may have resulted in a different overall makeup of this year's team, but if this year's team with its current roster and set of coaches had played a big 12 schedule, it likely would have fared even worse.

I'm too lazy to look this up, but could the offensive numbers be skewed by an out-of-the-ordinary number of instances when the team is down one or two scores in the 4th quarter? When a team is down one or two scores in the 4th quarter, the opponent often goes into a "prevent" type of defense that gives up short plays to prevent the big plays. If you get the ball 2 or 3 times in the 4th quarter under those circumstances, you can count on 50 to 100 "easy" yards that likely wouldn't have been gained if the opponent remained aggressive on defense. In other words, an average offense can post above-average numbers if it has significantly more opportunities against a "prevent" defense. On the flip side, defensive numbers could also be skewed a bit if a defense never has to play "prevent" defense and the opponent's offense goes "conservative" to avoid an interception. Sooooo, if my totally unscientific theory is correct, a team can have deceptively good numbers on both sides of the ball if it plays a large number of close games that it loses.

I wouldn't classify myself as an angry fan, but I do think it's dangerous to evaluate the situation based upon "what could have been." Yes, we have lost many close games, but many of the few games we have won have also been close. Frost's 11-20 could also easily be 7-24. To me, the eye test is important. You can look at historical stats and recruiting rankings 'til you're blue in the face, but if the product you see on the field every week looks the same, it becomes pretty clear that "progress" is just a mirage created by those who want to see Coach succeed. That is human nature. Anyone but Scott Frost would be justifiably on a very hot seat right now. On the other hand, it would not be smart to gamble on catching lightning in a bottle with a new coach without giving it another year or two to see if things get turned around.

Or, we could both go in for heart surgery and I could have the crew with 1-3 years experience which has a 95% positive outcome rate and you could have the crew with 5 years experience and a 60% positive outcome rate. My crew was better trained in its 1-3 years than yours was in 5 years. Who is more likely to survive? Your argument totally ignores the fact that many coaches have gone into "dumpster fire" situations and turned the program around in the first 3 years.

This whole "transparency" argument is ridiculous. Do you really think that the experts who provided the medical information upon which the postponement of the season was based provided that information only to the Big 10 and no one else? That the information they had is some sort of top secret, confidential, not-to-be disclosed false research? The information the Big 10, and the other conferences/organizations had to postpone sports and activities is out there for all of us to see. It's been used by all of the other conferences and organization that decided to postpone activities and mass gatherings. You may not like it or agree with it, but it's there. If "transparency" is code for " tell us who voted against the fall season?," then your quest for transparency has nothing to do with the validity of the decision and everything to do with anger at those who voted to postpone. And why aren't these players also suing the other teams and conferences who canceled and prevented a full slate of nonconference games? Aren't they complicit in this "breach of contract?"

As to credibility on this topic, I'll put my 30 years as a lawyer up against your attempts at humor any day. That had nothing to do with a temporary injunction.

The fact that it's a novel, never-been-tried-before, legally-flawed claim that football players are third-party beneficiaries of a conference contract among 14 universities makes it virtually impossible to get a temporary injunction. They also have necessary party issues because the the member schools made the decision and they are entitled to input in the case and should have been made defendants. Filing this lawsuit and seeking the temporary injunction could easily be deemed frivolous which, in Nebraska, entitles the other party to have their attorney's fees paid for having to defend the frivolous proceedings. I hope these parents are ready to open their pockets to pay the BIG's attorneys. My guess is that Attorney Flood did not mention this aspect of the case as he pursues the publicity that accompanies the lawsuit.

Uhhh.... I think he told you exactly who he thought was responsible and your response actually answers your own question. Re-read his post and put some thought into what you've read. He's taking the position that our leaders, political and otherwise, and the general public, all have responsibility for the season being canceled. It's not Kevin Warren's fault that businesses prematurely reopened, public gatherings prematurely resumed, and people refused to wear face masks and appropriately socially distance. Warren is just doing his best to clean up the mess while relying on medical and educational professionals -- the exact people he should be relying upon. The fact that you can't watch your favorite team play football every Saturday is small potatoes compared to the significant health concerns and uncertain long-term impact of the virus.