JTrain

As a disclaimer, I am absolutely in favor of keeping the current helmet design throughout my lifetime. I love it. That said, I think it's amusing how everyone seems to think we've had the exact same helmet since 1890. If we had always been such staunch traditionalists, there may have been riots when are helmets changed color from red to white in 1961. Or how about when we dropped the traditional numbered helmets in favor of the modern, newfangled "NU" logo in '67. The outrage must have been almost unbearable when Nebraska dropped it's 24 year tradition of gray facemasks, and in the bowl game at the end of the '81 season, came out in RED facemasks. Ugh. Blasphemy! I thought we were about tradition, focusing on football, toughness without the flash. And here we are with these damn shiny, colored facemasks. Barf.

I know it's popular opinion to hate the Oregon uniforms, particularly from fans of tradition-rich programs like Nebraska. But I actually loved the Lights Out look last year against Arizona, which is basically the all-black pictured above. And I think a lot of the combinations actually look really sweet. I wouldn't want Nebraska changing their uniforms like that, because the classic helmet and uniform design is part of what makes Nebraska great. But that doesn't mean Oregon has to do it our way too. Like a couple people already said, they have developed a tradition of being on the cutting edge in uniform design, both aesthetically and performance-wise. If you watched the press conference, you saw a slide show of renders of many of the uniform combinations (there are 80 total) and what they would look like, and many of them look awesome, IMO. The steel helmet with the yellow top and steel pants might be my favorite. Steel-Green-Steel is also nice.

34th.

I'll indulge you... I have faith that we will at least be a top five team competing for a national title late in the season, within the next eight to ten years. Here are the odds of actually winning one, IMO: 2009: 0.5% 2010-12: 3% 2013-15: 5% 2016-18: 6% Meaning the chance of winning at least one national title from 2009 through 2018 is 13.8%. Now, the chance of KSU winning a national title in the same time frame? I would say roughly around 0.003%.

No clue, but the Bills fans are sure supportive: http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=145472

If this stat is true (regardless of how arbitrary 2001 is) that's pretty sad. That said, the drought will be over soon, with Va Tech, OU and the Big 12 title game (if we get there) all being definite opportunities to end it, while Texas Tech, Kansas and the bowl game are also possibilities. I think we'll get it done this year.

Either... 1. Be a full-time dreamer 2. Get a bit stupid and make a fool of myself in public 3. Work with children

A win at VT would be big for the program no matter what, but it would be absolutely huge if VT beats Bama. Then VT will be ranked in the 5-7 range, and a win against a top ten team on the road would be monumental. We almost did it last year against Texas Tech. The last time we actually did it was 9.20.97 (27-14 at Washington). So not only will a win be the biggest of Bo's short career, it will probably be the biggest since 2001 OU. It'll boost us into the top 15 or so, and at that point, anything is possible.

I agree it's in the B or B+ range

Congratulations on your ability to be dismissive of the other things these two did. And congratulations on your ability to oversimplify the situation to such a silly degree that the above post is pretty much laughable. Seriously. Congratulations. Woah, somebody's pissed. But seriously, thank you. My point stands, and anyone willing to look objectively will likely agree. These guys got kicked off the team for being in porn. All the other previous things they did don't amount to squat. Do you really think another underage drinking ticket would have been the straw that broke the camel's back? Of course not. It was the porn, and the gay connotations that went along with it. Seriously.

Look at it this way: would these two have been kicked off had they gotten DUI like Niles Paul did? No one knows for sure, but let's be honest... not likely. But do a harmless porn shoot and suddenly they're horrible kids. Social stigmas are a bitch, I guess. A message to the children: Get behind the wheel while intoxicated, kick the sh#t outta someone at a bar, drag your girlfriend down a few flights of stairs by her hair, rob a gas station... those are all naughty things to do, but everybody deserves forgiveness and a second chance. On the other hand, partake in the perfectly legal business of posing nude so that other people can pleasure themselves from the privacy of their own living rooms... now THAT is unacceptable.

Considering Baker's talent level (best-rated overall player among our past several recruiting classes) and the fact that all indication is that he is physically ready for this level, I'm really excited to see what he will be like by the second half of the season. I know no one expects him to be a superstar right out of the gate (he probably won't even start right away), but after 5-6 games of crucial experience switching with Crick, opposing O-lines might be in a lot of trouble for the final stretch of the season (especially if Turner can return to pre-injury form).

Nebraska won't have a top 20 defense until they develop a great linebacker and more importantly, add some serious talent to the DB corps. When you play as much Nickel as we have to (playing against Big 12 spread offenses), you need good cover guys. Right now we have West, who actually developed into a pretty darn good corner over the course of last year, and then Prince, Blue and Dennard, all of whom are unproven and mostly inexperienced. Add to that Asante, who has been good-not-great, and Rickey T and O'Hanlon, neither of whom have been consistent enough to stand out as the definite starter, and you have a secondary which isn't scaring anybody. Our passing D was 89th in the country last year, and we lose arguably our best corner in Murillo. You could make the case that Bo will be implementing more of his schemes now that people are becoming more comfortable with the playbook, although it wouldn't be much more than speculation.

You give Mizzou too much credit. They had 2 good seasons in a row for the first time under Pinkel. They will not have 3. They will lose to Nebraska handily, and very likely to Baylor. This Mizzou team will resemble their 2004 team. I hope you're right, of course, but I just can't see it that way. Nebraska still does not have the personnel in place on defense to deal effectively with Mizzou's offensive system. Just re-watch that game last year. It was pure ugly... us trying to keep up. I know they lost their top three players, but Gabbert is a talent and they have receivers that know what they're doing in that system. They pretty much take Suh out of the game because they don't use much of an inside running game and their passing game has so many quick reads. Then you have to look at the fact that they've beaten us the last three times in Columbia by an average of 23 points. Generally not a great sign. Like I said, I expect a close game, but unless our running game really controls the game (I doubt our offensive line will be where we need them that early in the season), the edge certainly goes to them.

1. Kansas - Offense too good for anyone else to challenge. NU, MU will be close but the nod goes to the veteran QB. 5-3: W (ISU, CU, KSU, NU, MU), L (OU, TT, UT) 2. Nebraska - Suh, Helu and a whole bunch of question marks. Historically the second year is a good one for a good new coach, so the defense in particular should be good to very good. Zac Lee could make or break the season. 5-3: W (TT, ISU, BU, KSU, CU), L (MU, KU, OU) 3. Colorado - Hawkins might finally start to produce this year with all his top receiving threats returning. 4-4: W (KSU, MU, TAMU, ISU), L (UT, OSU, NU, KU) 4. Missouri - Gabbert is inexperienced and doesn't have much to work with. The defense was horrible last year and probably won't be much better with only four returning. The Nebraska game will be a good one this time, but the HFA goes to MU. 4-4: W (NU, BU, KSU, ISU), L (OSU, UT, CU, KU) 5. Kansas State - No more riding Freeman's back, which means an ugly season. 1-7: W (ISU), L (TT, TAMU, CU, OU, KU, MU, NU) 6. ISU - Just think, Dan McCarney is sipping a piña colada somewhere in 90-degree weather wearing his big fat National Champions ring. I bet he misses Ames. 0-8: L (KSU, KU, BU, NU, TAMU, OSU, CU, MU) Of course, if one of those top four teams gets a surprise win against Oklahoma, Oklahoma State or Texas, everything changes. You never know.

OK, so I would've preferred Steele's or Athlon, but this was all the local grocery store had. Let's just say it wasn't particularly pretty for us. They have us ranked #22 and finishing second in the North, which is totally fair IMO, but when it comes to individuals, it really shows we're going to have to be all about the team effort this season. Indiv. - Lee isn't among the top 25 QBs (understandable) - Helu isn't among the top 25 RBs (a bit of a head scratcher I think) - None in the top 20 WRs - McNeil not in the top five TEs - No OL in the top 24 (top 8 in each position) - Suh #3 DT - None in top 12 DEs - None in top 24 LBs - None in top 24 DBs - Henery not in top eight kickers Team (unit rankings) - Not in top 10 backfields - Not in top 10 receivers (Kansas #1, BTW) - Not in top 10 OLs - Not in top 10 DLs - Not in top 10 LBs - Not in top 10 DBs All-Big 12 Team Suh first team Hickman, Asante second team

Who cares? This stuff gets so old. I mean, I know we're all biased to an extent... but the "you didn't pick my team as high as I wanted, so you suck" stuff is just tiring. Phil Steele is the most accurate of preseason predictors. Just because he picks your team 4th doesn't mean anything. Big deal. He'll get plenty of his picks wrong, just like everyone does. He obviously has some reasoning for why he picked them that way. He does more research than 99% of everybody else. I personally think he's wrong (I think Kansas will finish first or second), but who knows. Much stranger things have happened. Kansas went from a 12-1 in 2007 and returned a lot of key players last year, only to have a pretty disappointing 8-5 encore. Who's to say they couldn't have another disappointment this time around? Nobody knows, and that's the beauty of it. So take the preseason mags as a way to inform, interest and hopefully entertain you. But realize that even the most informed experts are still only guessing when it comes to who will win the close games. It'll be interesting to see Steele's justification for the KSU pick when his mag comes out in a week. Since Bill Snyder basically admitted his team sucks, it's hard to imagine them having a winning season this year. Steele obviously feels they'll have their marbles together by November enough to win a close one (the game being in Manhattan helps the case).

Lane Kiffin talking sh#t doesn't make his 5-7 team respectable. If Howard Schnellenberger started talking sh#t about Bo, would our season opener suddenly become nationally important? No. Even if Tennessee gets by UCLA, they won't be ranked (or even close to it) going into Gainesville. The #1 team at home against a team not even sniffing the top 25 doesn't compare to # 20 Nebraska (9-4) vs. #5 VT (10-4). And you look at last year's match-ups, NU-VT was a great game, while Florida stomped Tennessee 30-6 in Knoxville. Then add the fact that UF-Tenn is on CBS, and there are way too many factors counting against it. This is all silly to argue, of course, but it's June... what else are we gonna do?

What other games are on tap that day? West Virginia at Auburn Michigan State at Notre Dame Utah at Oregon USC at Washington Tennessee at Florida and........................ Furman at Missouri ! I betchya they go to UF. Yeah, if VT beats Bama they'll be ranked around #5 and Nebraska should be around #20. Notre Dame and Michigan State would both be in the 20-25 range (if ND can beat Michigan), and ESPN wouldn't be crazy about supporting an NBC game anyway. The only other real possibility is Utah at Oregon, with the storyline being "nation's longest win streak goes into hostile Autzen Stadium", but I just don't see those schools having the national appeal of Nebraska-VT. They certainly won't go to UF... Tennessee was 5-7 last year and things might bet worse before they get better.

No thanks. Enjoy reading his magazine and respect his opinion, but that's about it. Alright, we'll leave it up to hundreds of local writers and ex-players who watch about 20 games per season.

Oh, and if Virginia Tech beats Bama earlier in the season, there's about a 70% chance Gameday will be in Blacksburg.

ABC will have it either as a 11am national game of the week, or 2:30 regional with USC-Washington.

Well, here's how they turned out: 10. Ole Miss 9. Oklahoma State 8. Virginia Tech 7. Penn State 6. Alabama 5. Ohio State 4. USC 3. Texas (link) 2. Oklahoma* 1. Florida* * These haven't been confirmed, but I'm just assuming they would never do a blasphemous thing like not putting Jebow at #1.

Well, not really... he's still wrong a whole lot more than right, but that's to be expected from any predictions. But he is right more than just about everybody else. I don't care what his reasoning is, I love seeing Missouri at #5