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?

i think the NFL is actually becoming less popular because it's really not a fan's game anymore, atleast the super bowl isn't anymore. Getting tired of seeing crap monday and sunday night games. Making teams have caps has done nothing but hurt the NFL. No longer have true division rivalries because so many players switch teams too much. If a small market fan base doesn't want to support their team then they shouldn't deserve one. The only real reason i am watching this season is because of New England. Yeah sorry to be a downer.

Well you also forget that Rutgers has a whole state to recruit and pretty much started football. Texas is pretty much longhorn country with Aggies coming in a very distant 2nd. Vanderbilt has recently been to bowl game/games. But i think a lot of them give them a pass because they play in the SEC and they are in Tennessee. Stanford hasn't always been bad when ty willingham was there they were good. Plus Jim Harbaugh is gonna turn them around if he stays long enough. Baylor has only been to 3 bowl games. There is a difference between being a team that is at the bottom and every once in a while have a good season than a team that is always at the bottom. Look Iowa State they had decent recent years and actually been to a couple of bowl games. While the Big 12 doesn't suffer from an image problem there is no reason why the Big 12 couldn't get stronger. If Baylor had more consistent clost to .500 seasons that is different but when they wildly have a close .500 season and then tank the next season that's not improvment.

If you know MY feelings about the Big 12, we can add 3 other Texas teams to that as well...... Yes i do know your feelings of reading some of your posts. Baylor is just dead weight hanging on and we need to cut it off. Hell, at least replace Baylor with another team. I'm sure a TCU, Louisiana Tech or some other team would love to come to the Big 12. At least those teams have been to bowls. lol.

Seriously the Big 12 should be thinking about kicking Baylor out of the conference. They haven't done in anything in football since the Big 12 formed and have been nothing but bottom dwellers. At least Iowa State has had some ok seasons anything better than what Baylor has ever had in the Big 12. Yet here they are receiving money from bowls they never go to and continue to have poor seasons year in and year out. If we get rid of Baylor good things will happen. The Big 12 would be a much stronger conference, wouldn't have to have a championship game with only 11 members which means every team plays everyone year in and year out, everyone could be happy that everyone's rivalry keeps intact. Look at the Big East they kicked out Temple because they sucked every year and the Big East got better. We should be thinking about doing the same with Baylor because being in a mid-major conference would benefit them more than sucking in the Big 12. Yes i know the Big 12 CCG brings in money but I don't think it is nowhere near as the bowl money that the whole conference gets. Plus they also suck at basketball, i mean is there any sport Baylor has won in the Big 12? Baylor needs to go!!!

Holy sh#t this is a bad idea!! Why would Nebraska want to join an inferior conference? I could say that for a number of years the Big 12 was an inferior conference. The Big 10 has a lot of pull as they were the ones that started instant replay. Nebraska has been in the crappy North division and until i see missouri, kansas, kansas state, colorado start having good seasons year in year out then the South division will always be stronger. Seriously since all the voters like the Big 10 conference and if we beat the teams like Michigan and Ohio State we would get more respect from them. Think about since espn and such sports like Big 10 and SEC football so much why not join them?

and end up playing Michigan for the FCS. http://www.onlineseats.com/upload/sports/8...laware-Blue.jpg

It's not but it also doesn't look good when the best player in college(if a senior) is a flop in the NFL because then the credibility of the trophy comes into play also who is selected to go to NYC and how the selection process is. Yes while the college and NFL are different games but now that most good college players make it in the NFL some may wonder just how good they are.

It's probably the media with "their sources" and i am glad they have been wrong. But you gotta admit that making Herbstreit looking dumb was awesome. lol.

Brennan is a better passer because of the system he runs and does run a NFL type offense. He throws about 45-60 passes per game if not more. Tebow is a question mark simply because he likes to run even though he may be a great passer i have a feeling he will be a tailback in the NFL than QB. Same problem with Vince Young, he was great in college but in the NFL, everybody is a lot faster and when he goes down with a leg injury you severly hamper what he does because he is a runner first then passer. Colt Brennan is a passer first and can move around in the pocket. Basically when Tebow is out of the game the gators are a different team just like when any other running qb goes out. I bet gator fans are starting to appreciate more about Chris Leak.

lol. no he won't. He has to spend time to get his staff together which must be done now and recruiting. Looks like Husker_fan needs to insert foot into mouth... http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/10512028 Too bad you didn't have the balls to post before it came out plus it only shows that T.O. is the only AD in the country to get it. That makes no sense. How can I predict the future and know he's going to coach or not and that an article is going to come out and prove you wrong? It looks like your attempt of predicting the future went wrong, . I was just showing you a story that proved your "lol, no he won't...." comment was wrong and that at the time you seemed to think who ever was arguing otherwise was an idiot. Well sir, you are the idiot. Oh man, i will lay it out for you: 1. when a coordinator is hired as a head coach for another job they more than often don't go back to their old team for the bowl game. 2. this post had been up at least a day and a half and you did not post so when you also had the same view or none and when you did post to stick it to me. 3. Yes Bo will now be the D coordinator on the sidelines but the article also hinted at that if nothing comes up. 4. No i don't think they are an idiot it's just that they had no other reason why he would be back other than saying he would be back on the sidelines and i wanted to know why they thought differently. 5. don't take internet forums too seriously. Oh, i'm not taking it seriously, I was laughing, hence the . The funny thing is when someone stated that Bo might be on the sidelines for the NC game you said,"lol, No he won't...." when you really had no idea but you speculated he needed to get a staff together. I don't care what your assumptions were the fact that you laughed at someone for thinking different was why I posted my comment. And then I point out that you were wrong in your assumption and the LOL, no he won't comment that you were adamant about was wrong. I have observed the thread and had the same thought as topekahusker so why should I repost something and beat the dead horse? And you also laughed at someone for suggesting he might coach the NC when you were wrong. Now as Drowning in the sea of red put it so well... Have a nice day. except topekahusker only stated he may coach on the NC and didn't give a reason why. I was never adamant only going on what has happened in the past and in the past they haven't coached in the bowl games when they left. Well maybe you could've explained further on why he was going to coach in the NC. Don't make statements if you can't further explain, hell at least I gave a reason why he wouldn't be instead of making random comments.