nebraskanative

I didn't see Williams do this. I think it's wrong, however I think it's even more wrong for Bo to point it out in the media, especially if you saw Bo and how he reacted to Coach Eck after the fake punt. Bo was waaaaay out of line for way to long. Players follow their coaches leads

It's always the B12 North in non-conference games, with one exception and that is Colorado. I hope they go 0-11 or 0-12 every year Within the conference it depends greatly on the matchup, standings etc.

Maybe not...but we held them to their lowest point total and total offensive yards of the season, and held harrell under 300 passing yards. I would say that is a pretty impressive defensive performance. Although I don't discount some improvement in the TT game, defensive stats don't show the true picture in my opinion. The fact is, had it not been for the NU offense significantly controlling the clock, the defensive stats would have been troublesome. If the time of possesion would have been even, it is likely that TT would have put up over 600 total yds and probably scored another 2-4 times (we only stopped them from scoring 1 drive the whole game). Thus, although there is improvement, it was the offense not the defense that kept us in the TT game (although for the life of me I still can't see why Bo didn't go for 2 and the win in regulation)......Time of Possession in OT is not a factor and to think we could match scoring with them was a pipe dream at best, IMO. ISU is still ISU.....not a real indication to me. For the defense to earn blackshirts and show they are back, it will take a dominating defensive game against the likes of OU. NU doesn't have to win for the defense to earn it. And an NU win doesn't mean the defense deserves it. They need to at least slow down if not stop a legitimate top 20 offense.

My answer would be: It Depends. Are you investing short or long term. What is your risk tolerance? Are you willing to risk your principal? The market is, and I suspect, will remain extremely volatile at least until the election, possibly longer. Personally, cash on sidelines is my preference right now until we stabilize a bit. But then again, I'm not as concerned about trying to hit the absolute bottom, but rather limit my downside exposure. Just my 2 cents

QB- B....Ganz showed mobility but I thought he made some questionable throws besides the 2 INT's. I think scrambling is great but at times he wasn't able to see open receivers soon enough if ever. Not bad though. RB's- C....Lucky still not hitting the hole. Power running is non existant. Decent blocking from the backs during pass protection. Good recieving backs WR's - A-...No complaints. Only 1 dropped pass by Holt. Decent blocking OL - C+....Run blocking was poor.....Pass protection was good, but Ganz helped save sacks by his scrambling ability. Not the performance I was looking for from the "supposed" strength of the team. DL- B+ ....Good run support and decent pressure from really just a base defense almost the whole game. LB- C+.....Decent effort. Glenn showed athleticism, but the LB's, especially Glenn bit every time on play action and had to play catch up to cover. Solid tackling was nice to see CB's- B....Decent coverage.....Turned for the ball (finally)......need to play a little more physical and smarter Safety's ....C+.........Good run support...A little slow on the help over the top........Not as physical as I'd hoped. Punter- C........Dan didn't start off the season that well Kickoff (Adi)- A.......strong leg Field Goals A+....what can you say, 4 for 4 from 44 and 5 PAT's Punt return - B.......tough to say, but I like Niles Paul back there.... Kick off Return- B-........looked better once Asante was replaced Kickoff Coverage C-........When Adi didn't kick it out of the end zone, the coverage looked very suspect..fortunately Adi slowed a return so it didn't result in 6 Coaching- B......Team played with effort and a very vanilla defensive package....I liked that we pretty much played base and told the boys to beat their guy. Offensively I expected more from the line and RB's..... Solid win........I think we can find 6 more.......possibly better with some improvement. LB's scare me.....not enough depth and experience and athleticism won't make up for out of position or mental mistakes in the big 12.

I have over 100 HD channels on Direct TV........only way to go

David, I remember when your Dad walked on. Everyone thought he was crazy and he proved them wrong. Ended up being a co-captain and still holds the NU record for most tackles in a game (31 for those of you who don't know). Unrelenting pursuit to the ball. (still in the top 10 for most career tackles too) Your uncle Jim was no slouch either. both your Dad and your Uncle made me the Husker fan I am (I'm related by the way). They used to take me to games, down to the locker room, etc. Unbelievable experience. I know as a Pillen, you have the work ethic, desire and genes to be successful. Live the dream and good luck. Work hard and I look forward to watching you on Saturdays.

Only have 2 games to go off of, but when I saw TR last year playing, I was not impressed. Work ethic and determination didn't seem there. His size in High School was his advantage. Technique didn't seem great, footwork wasn't excellent, and frankly I thought he looked slow. This doesn't bother me at all that NU lost him. He will never play on Sundays.

# 85 J.B Phillips #61

Curious thought about all the hype around Turner Gill. If he didn't have prior affiliation with the Huskers, would anyone even consider him for a HC at this level? I know his name is getting play at places like SMU, but does his background really warrant the HC at Lincoln. Also, if you are tied to the past and believe his ties to the university are key, how long do you really think Husker nation would support Gill as head coach when the Huskers are a consistent .500 team, but TG is coach. I'm not saying Bo is the savior, however at least his experience has him consistently (last 4 yrs) at winning programs with good statistics and performance. Although, his no experience as a HC is a major concern. I guess I'm wondering, how far have we really slipped to have lowered our coaching expectations to mid or lower tiered coaches, or those without any experience. I'd like your thoughts.

Why do women have two sets of lips? So they can piss and moan at the same time.

I think the Huskers have a shot. My fear though, is BC will preach ultra conservatism with Ganz to avoid turnovers, and as such, the O will struggle to sustain any drives or create big plays. The D won't give up more than 35 (and I say that like it's a good thing).....unfortunately Prince will out coach Cally. KSU - 34 NU - 17 Can't believe I could actually say that, but as happy as I was to see the O take some shots, BC will over react to the 4 Int's and go ultra conservative. Now, if he decides we have nothing to lose and let's Ganz go, different story

Remember Cally wasn't signed until very late, the 13 are determined as Solich recruits because they were recruited (not necessarily signed) by Solich and they still came to NU despite Solich leaving. The other issue (this was discussed on the same program talking about 13 out of 22 starters being Solich recruits) is the JUco's. Cally has relied extremely heavily on JuCo's, and they were saying it is a band aid approach. There is typically a reason a guy plays JuCo instead of Div. 1 as a freshman........they come with some sort of baggage (not always, but normally, Rozier was an obvious exception). My opinion, Cally utilizes a NFL mentality, even as it relates to recruiting. Of course we as fans, did not help this. How many people would have supported this regime if they would have come out and said we will be towards the bottom until we can fully stock our shelves with incoming H/S players, and due to the complexity of our schemes, these athletes won't play until their Jr. or Sr. year. Lastly, I think too much emphasis has been placed (by Cally and a lot of the fans) on Rivals or Scouts star recruit rankings. That doesn't relate to wins and loses, but rather only satisfies the fans and media. Coaches need to coach. They need to be flexible, adaptable, likeable and passionate. You can't coach college football with a stubborn mentality. As well, to expect kids (who go to school full time) to be able to learn new techniques, schemes and game plans while only practicing 3 days a week, and none of those in full out situations, is unrealistic. I've supported( and still do) the entire team and coaches, however, this isn't a business, this is college athletics at the highest level. There is a significant difference. My desire for a new H/C: Do not hire anybody elses reject (Cally was fired remember). I'm not in favor personally, of an NFL coach, however, to me proven, consistent and recent success (not being fired or failing) is more important to me than a name. Success breeds success.....it's contagious. I'm also not totally opposed to an "up and comer" but, I believe they must have been associated with Success. Pelini (I'm not convinced is the savior) although his 3 teams he's been associated with in college have experienced success...that's a good start. Gill - I'm not so convinced on. Former NU tradition isn't going to guarantee success going forward. He is making progress at Buffalo, but let him go for a couple more years.....then maybe. My rant is over....with not a whole lot of point to it

I don't think it was an excuse. It has to be somewhat of a distraction. However, I too think he feels he's in a no win situation, and in all reality he is. Listen to TO's words......do you really think TO hasn't all ready made up his mind what he thinks needs to be done. My only issue with BC, is he recognizes the team is struggling but can't put a finger on why, yet he is "staying the course", no changes. I disagree with that, as it most likely will on achieve the same results. I would have preferred an answer like: We are changing our practice regime: going 4 days a week with 1 day a full out scrimmage, hoping to find a little fire and desire. or We are going to make a few personnel changes as well as a few scheme changes. We're going to mix in a few younger players and take a more aggressive game plan. We may give up a few big plays with some mistakes, but we are going to be aggressive and play full speed. or Offensively, we are going to take our shots down the field, etc I think I would just like to hear, I recognize what we are doing isn't working, so we are going to try some new things and keep trying until we find a combination that works. I know it's frustrating and difficult for you fans, but know that we recognize we need to do something different and we are committed to making this work. If you could bring yourselves to positively support us, we will find a winning combination. Anything but I can't put my finger on it, but we aren't far away, players are in the right spot we just aren't executing....yada, yada yada. Embrace this opportunity.......recognizing it's not working is the first step........doing something about is a whole nother thing.......his stubborness and inability to change or try something different, IMHO, is what has caused him problems and will do him in.

5-2 isn't a good defense against a spread offense. I would have liked to see us try a 4-4, utilizing Dillard as a rush end, or even allow him some short zone pass coverage. As well, if Culbert was played as one of the linebackers you could have actually schemed it to have him play pass coverage. Out of the 4-4, I think with the right personnel, you have a lot more options to cover the spread offense, and can not sell your sole to get pressure on the QB.

I have no problem with them playing special teams. However, especially with all of the situational substitutions this team does, I do not believe there are not certain packages, plays or situations that we could utilize some of these individuals more. That, I believe, would help the 'fans" see if they are ready to take on more, as well as utilize each one's strengths and athleticism to their advantage.

Where is Major Culbert.........no where to be found on the depth chart....offense, defense, ST......no where. What a waste of talent.

It doesn't matter who has played whom and/or how they faired. It wouldn't make a difference if NU beat USC. This is why we play the game. What if's and speculation don't decide it. However, if you think the history will determine the future, then by all means put your money down on the game. I for one believe this will be an exciting football game. I think MU holds a slight advantage having had their bye week and an extra week to prepare. However, I believe if MU trys and speeds up the game (no huddle, etc) that could actually play into NU's favor assuming we have the right athletes on the field. Coz will have to simplify and run his base defense which will allow our athletes to be athletes and not have to over think. However, if COZ tries to mix and match and "out scheme" MU, the Huskers could be in trouble. Unlike most, I see this to be a 2 TD+ margin of victory (17pts actually) although depending on the game plans either club could win. My heart however wins out and I call NU 38 MU 21.

Ok, well at least we've eliminated one person for any coaching job. Thanks SP, glad you are checking board, A$$hole........and as far as we catch just fine. Did you watch the same first two games I did.....haven't had a BAD drop in the last two, but Nunn and Hardy will, just give them time.

Asante wasn't the BIGGEST disappointment Sat. but he did disappoint. I was standing up cheering the deep touchdown before it was caught because that ball should have been picked off. I think he's confused though. COZ needs to simplify and just let the players play. Thenarse and Wilson should be the starting safeties

Move Culbert back to Defense? He was a stud against Mizzou last year, he can tackle and we are just wasting him on the bench as the 5th string RB. McKeon - Bench him and start Dillard Rudd - Bench him a play Brandenburgh (the truest tackler on the team) Green - Somethings wrong with him. He used to be fast, but looks terribly slow this year. Ricky Thernarse - Start him. Play maker COZ- stop trying to out think the other team and make it so complicated. Send in the D calls early, let the guys get into position, think and know what to do, pin their ears back and let them execute. We are only confusing our selves. Lucky - should only be a 3rd and long back. Let Castille and Glenn run the ball. O'Line- screw the zone blocking, go pancake someone. Play the young receivers. Let's put a speed threat THAT CAN CATCH on the field. Returners - Nunn, Grixby and Jones cannot be the best we've got! Coaches - Put speed and the best athletes on the field......simplify the verbage and plays, and let the boys execute. This isn't the NFL........outhinking and workman like approaches get in trouble when they meet and energized, emotional and fundamentally sound opponent.

Rudd/McKeon and others probably wore their blackshirts because they were afraid if they didn't keep them they might not ever get them back.............and you know I wish that was the case

Can't so 100% to specifics, but he's a relative of mine and I'd say he is 5'10" and played at maybe 185

Cally and Co. supposedly have brought in better talent. We had a ton of recruits on the sidelines watching the Huskers get man handled. I won't fault the coaches for their plans, as I feel it all comes down to execution anyway. Let's face it, USC ran a simple game plan and could have named their score with the basics: Put the best athletes on the field, block, tackle and just out execute the opponent. My issue is this, and I believe Saturday was the perfect opportunity to employ this. WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO PLAY OUR BEST ATHLETES!!!!!! Offensively, Lucky is far too tentative. If you are going to make a mistake, make it at full speed. I think we have better RB's than him, at least ones who will go full speed all the time. Sit him down and play the guys willing to blast through a hole, not side step. Nunn and Hardy, although no glaring issues this week, we have far bigger threats on the bench. They need to find a way to get on the field. Offensive line got blown up. I'm not saying everyone of them should have been replaced, but we do have some young talent that should have been given a shot. Our veterans couldn't do it, so what did we have to lose. Defensively - Not sure who we could have tried on the line. We were just over matched. LB's - Rudd and McKeon should have been pulled. They are far from our best athletes at this position and are supposed to be playing because they know the schemes and they are fundamentally sound. Missed tackles and consistently being out of position should have put them on the bench. Not to mention we needed some speed at this position. CB's - I won't complain, other than a few missed tackles. Safety's - Why is Green playing. He isn't aggressive and he didn't look like he had any speed (although I thought he was supposed to). We have at least 2 other safeties that are better than him. Special Teams - Holes were there, but we were 2 steps slow to get to them. One name: Prince. My point: We can recruit better athletes, but if the coaches do not find a way to play them (before they are Jrs. or Srs.) it will hurt recruiting. If the offense or defense is too complicated to pick up, the coaches need to modify it, to get the athletes on the field. This isn't the same game it was 10 or 15 years ago, we need to get the athletes on the field. It's really a simple game: Execute the fundamentals and play your athletes. Unfortunately, I think we are trying to make it far more complicating and are only ending up confusing ourselves. How big of a recruiting hit would it have been to put the "Young Guns" in late 2nd Qtr or early 3rd and see how we match up athletically. Couldn't have hurt and imagine the hype if we could have stopped the Trojans and made a move offensively. I think the coaches need to get back to the basics and quickly. Let's field a team with our BEST ATHLETES!

I find it unimaginable that they could be worse. Nunn&Hardy - speed only kills if you can catch the ball.