RichardHangslow

No sit Sunday 2.0?

Oh well would you look at that haha. 

Hey I was wondering how you guys would feel if we had a general conversation thread in each of the recruiting years.... I personally don't like having conversations like the one we are having in a prospect thread because every time we post I think there is new information on the prospect.  Food for thought. 

2 minutes ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Size is good but I’d rather they be 6-4 or 6-5 with quick feet. Seems like the 6-8 guys are often lead footed.  I like guys who can stay low enough to keep DL from getting as much lift etc.  i do know blocking techniques have changed.  Just so they have quick arms/hand movement and power.  I’m old school so what do I know on O line methods.  Lol.  I learned what little I know from Tenopir about 3 decades back.  

Yeah I hear ya I was born in 85 so most of my football knowledge is from what TO did. Anyway my arm chair coach analysis is that with the bigger bodyied o linemen it will just be harder for them to be pushed around and they will have a longer wings spand so that will help keeping defenders a bay from our QB. Also d linemen will get tired playing against a bigger bodied linemen. again, I know it is all surface value evaluation but there is some truth to it as well. 

My hope is to not be tired in the 4th. And to have a big O line to march the ball down the field. 

I sure do like all of these offers going out to 6'8 fellers. Would be nice to have a monster pipeline, a more B1G looking O line. 

2 hours ago, seaofred92 said:

 

Jazzed for this one

Oh Heady you crack me up!

16 minutes ago, default_28 said:

Well, that escalated quickly.

Dare I say, President!

National friggin Champions. 

I was going to say Musselman, but at 4M a year we would have to offer him a shiny penny. I like the LINDER feller

6 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said:

I doubt this will have any impact on Raiola's recruiting or interest.  QB's know that guys are brought in every year, including before and after them.  If anything, Watson's "lower rating" may give Raiola more interest as it may look like "less competition" at NU.

I hope Dylan feels that way, however I think his mind will quickly change after competing with this young man. 

10 hours ago, Stumpy1 said:

Whipple offered Watson as an 8th grader after he camped at UMass.  He out threw kids that were 3-4 years older then he was.  
 

If he was taller,  he would be going to tOSU.  

I noticed that he had a Pitt offer and was curious when he received that offer. Then I noticed that Whipple offered him at Nebraska 1-22-22. So I assumed that the Pitt offer was under Whipple and that he had been under his radar for some time. 

I am wondering how this will effect Raiola's interest in Nebraska. 

Where did I say that?

52 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

If thats the case I'd advise you to never eat out anywhere. These terrible resturants and food stands making a profit. How dare they! 

BAHAHAHAA, are you kidding me? So you are comparing restaurants and food stands to University's ?  I forgot how many restaurants get a slice of a 1.1B dollar pie EVERY FREAKING YEAR.  You sir, need to stick a sock in it. 

41 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Didn't know going to the game was about the concessions. I've been doing it all wrong! How about we have the B1G make out Nebraskas portion of the check to you then you can eat concessions at current prices without worry.

No it's about the "experience"  I just don't understand why any of you are getting your nips hard over someone else making money and then when I suggest lowering the price to go to games you throw rocks at me. So far none of you have been able to explain why lowering the price of food at the game is a bad thing. Listen how about you pay for my over priced concessions and then I wont have anything to complain about. Better yet buy everyone in the row drinks and food. 

UNL is not hurting for money they have been trying to build a 150M dollar sports facility for 4 years now. And since they have been dragging their a$$ about doing it, it is going to cost much more than the initial 150M since we now have a 7 percent inflation over the last 9 months.  But you are right the Runza sales are where the big money is at. 

3 hours ago, Hedley Lamarr said:

Then leave the game hungry or thirsty, I guess. 

I wouldn't have to if they lowered the cost of concessions

14 minutes ago, Warrior10 said:

Take $6 next time. 

No

12 minutes ago, DrinkinwitTerrellFarley said:

Look at what Rob Manfred and the MLB owners are doing.  IMO it's naïveté to think a business cares much about the consumer and altruism in general.  It's about maximizing revenue and not being concerned about running over anyone that gets in the way.

I would agree with that but you are talking about a college town, a city that has 283k people in it. This is not LA, and the people willing to travel in to Lincoln are not coming in big numbers like they used to. It is just easier and cheaper to stay home.  As someone before me mentioned they were giving away tickets last season 2 for 1. Now I don't think that it is uncorrectable we all know our fan base is hungry so we string together some wins and it will put butts in the seats again but it is not sustainable to keep raising the price and expect fans to to continue to shell out money the way they have in the past. 

22 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Dude, don't know what to tell you.  The ticket revenue goes into the pot to hopefully some day put a much better product on the field. I'm assuming from this, you would rather have a winning program than cheaper tickets if you had to choose.   I agree.  

Of coarse I want a winning program however I do not think that the university needs to raise the cost of going to a game in order to achieve that,   UNL has many many many revenue streams and I can garentee you that ticket sales and game day revenue while being a big single day money maker is not what the university is banking on to keep the lights on at memorial stadium.  I am not asking for much but maybe a $10 reduction on ticket prices and .50 to a 1 reduction on concessions. And again I believe that lower the cost of going to a game can lead to even more money being made by the university. 

There has been some discussion over the last year or so about having some of the worst seats not require a donation.  That would greatly reduce your cost of the season tickets.  (they may already be doing some of this).  That's the best you're going to get.

That would be great
 

22 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

Well you seem completely incapable of recognizing that more money helps the team have a better chance at being good, which gives you something of value, so yeah, if you want to whine and moan about a business doing what's good for the business, you should hope the team sucks. At least that way your high horse will stay strong and high.

I mean I would love for you to tell me or show me how throwing more money at the situation has helped Nebraska post Tom Osborne.  Tom made like 160K a year and took us to and won us National championships and Frost at 7 mill a year initially has won what's he at now 5 games?  Now it will be interesting to see if Frost has more success with his pay cut and new staff.

What high horse am I on? explain that. 

I do not think that it is unreasonable for a billion dollar company to pass on some savings to the consumer that keeps them afloat. I mean, if I go to a game with 5 bucks in my hard and a runza is 3 dollars and a pepsi is 3 dollars that means I am going home with 2 bucks. But if a Runza is 2.50 and a pepsi is 2.50 that means the university can potentially take  my whole 5 dollars instead of just 3. So I do not understand how lowering the price to attend a game is a bad thing. IF lower the price can lead to people spending more money or saving money. But I would need a big brain like Lorewarn to explain to me "about a business doing what's good for business" cuz I'm nota smmart maan. (Forest Gump voice)

as far as high horse goes you seem to think your opinion on the matter is pretty valuable. In my opinion though you used a lot of words and said nothing. 

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

It's unrealistic, which you know. But continue complaining in the face of good news if you like. 

How is it unrealistic? Explain to me how it is unrealistic to lower the cost of going to games. So it is complaining to ask a question about lowering the cost to go to games?   I am not complaining I am asking since the B1G has got such great fortune why not pass it along to the fans. You know the fans that packed Memorial stadium since 62' 

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Ticket prices aren't going to go down no matter what the TV deal is.  Good thing we have sucked for people who want cheap tickets.  Can get them outside the stadium way below face value.

 

But, the experience inside the stadium can be greatly improved.

So I am supposed to hope that the team sucks so I can wait outside the stadium in hopes to get a cheaper ticket to go and watch a bad football team so I can later tell my friends that the experience inside the stadium was greatly improved? 

Why can't they just lower the cost to go to games? They will make it up in the NIL deals or the tv contract deals or some way. I can guarantee you that lower the cost for the fans to go to games will not get the light shut off at Memorial Stadium. 

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

You got me. For a second there I thought you were serious.

Yeah I mistook you for someone serious as well, but it turns out you don't have any answers other than it is good for the program. Thanks I couldn't have figured out that the university getting a slice of a 1.1B dollar pie would be a good thing. Thanks for clearing that up. 

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

So, like has been mentioned.  It would be easier for the program to upgrade the stadium, which would greatly affect you.

In what way? it is too expensive to go to games as it is. Do you think that ticket prices are going to go up or down?