husker_fan

Why is it Nebraska back in 94 had no problem beating teams even when they had to use the third string qb but it ok for USC to use it as excuse for their losing? (Don't bothr trying to convince me that Stanford 07 was better then Kansas 94.) USC had no no more claim then 5 other teams and boohooing about having a hurt QB is a joke. They are supposed to have better backups then most teams starters. I'm wondering why in the hell you then you made the claim if Dixon didn't get hurt Oregon wouldn't have lost another game??? You do know you are comparing two completely different systems and eras right? Yeah you are right when your main qb goes out your 2nd and 3rd string should play just as good. Just because USC is suppose to have better backups than most team starters doesn't mean they do.

USC played a weaker team and Illinois wasn't even in the top 10. It doesn't matter how much LSU beat Ohio St by they still beat the number one team. Sound like a Penn St fan in 1994 when you say that USC should be CO National champs. Just like Penn St had no claim since they beat a Oregon team that was ranked a lot lower then Miami in Miami who was number 3 at the time of the bowl game. By the way if Kansas played a tougher schedule they most likely wouldn't have only lost 1 game. USC played a weaker team?? I seem to remember Illinois BEATING Ohio State, so Illinois couldn't have been weaker. USC, LSU, Georiga all practically played home games. LSU was the only team who had the most difficult time putting their opponent away. I not only said USC but also said Georgia. You also forget that since a lot of bowls have traditional tie-ins they will always want that. Bowl match ups there is nothing you can really do about it. Just like in 1997 if we hadn't played such a highly ranked team i would guarantee you Nebraska would have never won a share of the national championship. I'm sure Michigan at that time would have loved to play a higher ranked opponent than Washington State. But the bowls got the match ups they wanted. You know for certain that this year's Kansas team couldn't beat Texas or Oklahoma?? Just because Oklahoma beat Missouri does not mean Oklahoma would have automatically beaten Kansas. Teams always play another team different. Also this year should have taught you that the ranking didn't really mean much either. I remember Stanford beating USC with a second string QB but that does'nt mean that they were better then them. You kind of contradict yourself saying the reason Nebraska won part of the NC in 1997 is because of playing a higher ranked team, but then disgard the fact that LSU played the number one team. Just remember if Oregon QB doesn't get injured USC doesn't even win the Pac Ten title. Georgia has a complaint but not sure how big of one since they had the same amount of loses to LSU whic won the SEC. Yes but we didn't have the BCS system in 1996 season so #1 and #2 didn't have to meet. Since now the coaches must vote a certain way doesn't mean that that is what they feel. Yes i remember Stanford beating USC but i was pointing out to say that i don't think the difference between Ohio State and Illinois is that much. You said Illinois was a weaker team to which i don't think they are compared to Ohio State. Also just remember if John David Booty doesn't get hurt they don't lose to Stanford or Oregon. In fact if USC team wasn't depleted because of injuries they would have another national championship.

USC played a weaker team and Illinois wasn't even in the top 10. It doesn't matter how much LSU beat Ohio St by they still beat the number one team. Sound like a Penn St fan in 1994 when you say that USC should be CO National champs. Just like Penn St had no claim since they beat a Oregon team that was ranked a lot lower then Miami in Miami who was number 3 at the time of the bowl game. By the way if Kansas played a tougher schedule they most likely wouldn't have only lost 1 game. USC played a weaker team?? I seem to remember Illinois BEATING Ohio State, so Illinois couldn't have been weaker. USC, LSU, Georiga all practically played home games. LSU was the only team who had the most difficult time putting their opponent away. I not only said USC but also said Georgia. You also forget that since a lot of bowls have traditional tie-ins they will always want that. Bowl match ups there is nothing you can really do about it. Just like in 1997 if we hadn't played such a highly ranked team i would guarantee you Nebraska would have never won a share of the national championship. I'm sure Michigan at that time would have loved to play a higher ranked opponent than Washington State. But the bowls got the match ups they wanted. You know for certain that this year's Kansas team couldn't beat Texas or Oklahoma?? Just because Oklahoma beat Missouri does not mean Oklahoma would have automatically beaten Kansas. Teams always play another team different. Also this year should have taught you that the ranking didn't really mean much either.

I am just amazed how poorly LSU you played. Yes after they scored 24 they were gonna win but they let OSU hang around. I am only dissing LSU this much because this game was essentially a home game. I mean at least Georgia and USC there was no doubt who was gonna win which also played "home" games. Right now all i feel is that: 1. USC would've beaten LSU 2. Georgia would've beaten LSU Should at least be a split nationtal championship with either USC or Georgia but i don't think LSU can be the overwhelming #1 favorite even though that is how it turned out. This season is probably the most fraudulant national champion crowned since the BCS started. Too bad that Kansas didn't play a tougher non-conference schedule or they might have been playing OSU lol.

I wish Nebraska went to a BCS bowl almost every year like Oklahoma does. They are used to winning and want something more. Plus it also shows how special the 2000 championship they won is. Perhaps they would like the times before Stoops came to Oklahoma?? Like when they had losing seasons. This stuff happens all the time. Look at Nebraska fans now. I mean most of us can't handle losing seasons and have expectations of having winning seasons every year. Even though Nebraska was getting blown out still watched. To be fair, bowl games are like season opening games, you really can't expect the same thing a team does the whole season. Teams tend to play different in bowl games and do more trick plays. that is why in some bowl games they are blow outs. Plus he did have receivers getting hurt in the game. I don't think Stoops is overrated just have had bad luck.

4 turnovers by Michigan and Florida can't win. Shame on them. Biggest bowl upset so far.

Even though i don't care that much for Texas Longhorns, I do hope the Big 12 goes 8-0 in bowl games this season.

Maybe it's just me, but I think it's getting blown way out of proportion with how bad us Husker fans are about this whole situation. To be honest, I haven't seen any assaults on Bo hardly at all. Fans are mad, including myself, that we can't hold on to recruits. Are we supposed to be happy that our recruiting class is being chopped in half including ALL of the top recruits being gone now? I'm not going to flame much, but I think we have reason to worry about the staff if this many guys jump ship. Sure, it comes with a new coach being hired, but like I've said before..Callahan didn't have any problems at all like Bo is having. I don't know if it's because they have not been contacting them enough or what, but if thats the case, then I won't be happy at all. I wouldn't be too worried about this years recruiting class because of all the changes husker football went through. I am sure after a year or so when Pelini has husker football on the map again recruits will want to come here to win a championship. I mean that is why so many texas recruits go to Oklahoma because every year they are in the hunt for the national title. Besides i rather have team chemistry than top notch recruits who can't play together. i mean for once in 4 years we will have a coach that knows how to play D. He will get our guys fired up and ready to play and start seeing the Blackshirts kick some ass. Callahan was a sellout to begin with. hell do you think most of his recruits will be playing in the NFL? Because his system was so incosistent like Cos's D they won't be valued much.

I hate to say it but USC's uniforms are butt ugly. As well as UCLA. I know they are trying to retain old uniforms for certain reasons but at least update the colors to look a little better. They put stripes pants to make them look fast, they are not there for aesthetical reasons.

While sounds good there is one problem though. You can't ask people to make multiple road trips because a lot of students won't make it. I mean one bowl game probably is tough to make but going to 2 or more would be a tough sell. In Division 2 and 3 all the higher seeds they have home games. The only neutral site is the championship game. That is how it would have to be.

It is a tragedy that he ONLY got 23 months when it should've been 5 years. I don't think he will get back into the NFL simply because of Roger Goodell. Given the way he has handled things it would probably be another year after out of jail to get reinstated into the NFL. The only good thing is his legs will be fresh and probably be a running back or wide receiver, it will be too late for him to play qb since he couldn't throw the ball that good anyways. I'm not sure even fast food restaurants will hire him. lol.

Please even Bill Callahan could've won with the players the Cowboys had. Plus that is only one head coach that has worked out compared to many many failures. Jimmy Johnson - Miami Bill Walsh - Stanford there's two right off my head. Point was that there is more failures than there are successes. I would also argue about Jimmy Johnson too. He was the coach at Miami Dolphins and didn't do crap and infact left and recommended Dave Wandstedt take over which was disaterous.

Please even Bill Callahan could've won with the players the Cowboys had. Plus that is only one head coach that has worked out compared to many many failures.

How many times does it take for the NFL to quit taking stupid pills? There is a reason why long time college coaches stay in college because that is where they belong. http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=750227

From wiki: Baylor has won two NCAA titles. In 2004, the men's tennis team defeated UCLA in the championship game. In 2005, the Baylor Lady Bears basketball team beat Michigan State in the championship game. Yes and those programs are bringing in the sacagewea's right?