HuskerMav11

I mean, Wisconsin's not even all that good, so I think that is doable. The thing to realize is that when we were in the big 8, we had some stud athletes playing for us that wouldn't pass a 3rd grade entrance exam. Times have changed. When we were in the big 12, we were lucky enough to be the only decent school in the North, even when we weren't that good. Things are quite a bit different now. Wisconsin is consistently good. Iowa is inconsistently good. From a wins perspective, we would probably be having more successful seasons having stayed in the Big 12. Nebraska just isn't what it used to be and hasn't been for a long time. The recipe for success has changed since Tom Osborne was coaching. Again, I want to reiterate that there is no reason Nebraska can't be as good as Wisconsin is now. But there is also no reason to believe that we will be any time soon. We're just a has-been program at this point until someone changes that. And who knows who and when that'll be and what it will take. If it were easy, we'd already be there...

Good news is that he can't really "tanks us" as we're already near the bottom. If Scott Frost comes to town and the program is still in the s#!tter with no sign of improvement, then that's what happens. There is really no point of having a wish-list for coaches. Same thing always happens. You want this guy, the University gets that guy, you support him, it doesn't work out. Only exception to that was Bo. I felt like a lot of people felt that Bo would bring back the blackshirts. That never happened.

We're going to have to get way better in the trenches if we're going to adopt that strategy. That's actually our biggest problem in general. Our guys up front are soft on both sides of the ball. Give any top 10 school our line, and they're hot garbage...

We are ISU. Somehow we've become worse than Iowa at football...

How do we know there aren't consequences as he describes? Serious question. I don't want to assume either way. The whole interview was just a vent session that might have some credibility if the person venting had any involvement in the situation. Also, JP basically says in this interview that him and his brother were hard on Scott Frost and he was a better football player because of it. I'm not so sure that Scott Frost would agree with that. Regardless, whether or not you like or dislike the guy, there is no "Truth" to this article. What I mean by that is that it's all just subjective remarks that may be valid arguments or remarks, but I don't think you should expect people to drink the kool-aid.

Which is exactly why I stated that Solich's firing and Bo's firing felt pretty similar. The records they produced were not that bad, but people were generally unhappy with the quality of games, and as Mavric pointed out, quality of losses. Whether or not you feel either deserved to get fired is completely subjective. However, stating that the program improved from '02 to '03 based solely on record alone(and even ranking for that matter) is kind of a hard sell. But as I've stated, that's not to say that Solich shouldn't have been fired or Bo shouldn't have been fired. Hind-sight is 20/20.

From a purely selfish reason, I miss being in the Big 12. It was much nicer to visit games in Austin, Stillwater, Norman than it is to go to East Lansing or Evanston. But it's also nice to not be surrounded by the conference drama that existed in the Big 12. That conference is ran like a high school cheer leading squad.

I don't disagree with your main point but comparing records isn't really a good metric here. In '02, Nebraska lost to 4 ranked opponents (#19 Iowa State, #7 Texas, #11 K-State, #13 Colorado), and only lost to Texas by a field goal. In '03, Nebraska only played two ranked opponents (#24 Oklahoma State, and #16 Texas), winning against OSU, but blown out by Texas. The expectation in '03 was that we'd win the conference. That didn't happen. We also had some pretty big losses that year. People had a very similar attitude as they did with Bo. It wasn't just the record, but quality of our losses. The thing that scares me is the '03 team wasn't a bad team. Mediocre at worst. I'd say slightly above average. The 2014 team wasn't a bad team either. The guys we have on the field right now. They look bad. Our O'Line is getting blown up. Our defense can't seem to create any pressure or cause any havoc for that matter. Tanner Lee makes a lot of bad decisions. Special teams is a flop. Across the board, I feel like I'm watching Appalachian State. Some might say that's more of an insult to them than it is to us.

1. It's not mutually exclusive. You can discuss the past and still blame the current situation on the current coaching staff. 2. Because we're fans and this is a discussion board. You want to have a brainstorm session, create a roadmap to success, and come up with an action plan? What's the point. The only valuable contributions we have to this program is dollars. Boil it all down, and that's all that is left. The only meaningful action we can take as fans is to appropriate our funds elsewhere. Everything else doesn't matter.

I wouldn't exactly say the Huskers played great on offense for the oregon game, nor would I say the defense played great against NIU. Especially when you considered that Oregon's D is pretty terrible and I can't even comment on NIU because who the f#*k watches MAC conference games except for the people who are paid to do it... Also to play devil's advocate, the next two games could be perfect games to expose how bad it really is, if you had any doubt in the first place...

"On November 16, 2006 the Bobcats secured their first ever Mid-American Conference East Division title and their first football championship of any sort since 1968 with a victory over the University of Akron Zips." "The Bobcats returned to the post-season in 2009, posting a 9-3 regular season record and another MAC East Championship" At least he can win their division. I'm not saying that Frank Solich is an elite coach, but I don't think the Huskers could win the MAC this year. We're at the bottom of the B1G, and there is no way in hell we'll compete in this conference. People used to joke about us "being Iowa"... We're not even Iowa anymore. A washed up program. A has-been. Like many of the posters on this board, we've peaked in the 90s.

To be honest with myself, it's complete hindsight and obviously somewhat of a foolish statement. I think Frank was showing signs of improvement and was let go too early. I agree

20 years ago, Tom Osborne retires and he names Frank Solich as his successor. That never should have been allowed. I understand that loyalty was something that was important to TO, but Nebraska had the ability to go out and land any coach we wanted. Nick Saban comes to mind. And we've never been able to recover since. The program fires Frank after a 9-3 season which set precedence for the next 15 years. No one in their right mind would want to coach a program with an expectation of never-ending pure-perfection. The good news is: We no longer have the expectations. If we can find a coach that could get us to the B1G CCG, it'll be a success. It's the somewhat sad reality, but it's actually a good thing. We've been taken down a few pegs. So time to right the ship. First order a business is getting rid of that Ass clown Sean Eichorst. Next, Riley's tenure is up after this season. Then we go out and find a head coach that will promise conference dominance. Until then, stay warm next to this dumpster fire.

Leave no doubt. Let the coach and his staff completely sh#t the bed. That's the only way we're going to see some change around here. And this all falls on the AD. He needs to be shinning up the shart stains off this resume, because his ass should be gone. Nebraska football doesn't go 1-2. This is unacceptable. If you're a donor or a booster, drop your funding. Let the University sweat some bullets and maybe they'll actually take some action. This is a total knee-jerk reaction, but god damn, how could this not piss you off as a Husker fan?

I'm not sure why people always resort to comparing Mike Riley to Tom Osborne. They're different people who coached football in different eras and honestly, there is isn't really any conclusion you can draw from any comparison of the two. I personally think it's a bit early to fire the guy, but at the same time, I never really understood the hire. To elaborate: 1. It's too early to fire him, but up to this point, his only major accomplishment is barely upsetting Michigan State(6th) in his first season. 2. The hire was kind of strange. He didn''t really turn the Oregon State program around. He took a mediocre program, showed them slightly above mediocre years, but I would consider his last couple of years there to be subpar. So with that said, I can understand why people want him gone. People that never understood why he was hired in the first place, and/or people who feel his grace period is up. But let's be honest, outside of complete catastrophe, Riley will continue to be the head coach. So unless he decides to find a way to lose 5 to 6 more games this season, I'm pretty sure we should all learn to deal with it.

What do you expect him to say? "Well, our guys... They're completely inadequate. I'm also completely inadequate. This programs f'd, we might as well give up now. Peace!" *mic drop*

It'd be more enjoyable if his troll posts were clever, but I don't think anyone really cares that we aren't receiving votes in pointless polls after week 2. I've already chalked this season up as a loss. The only thing we can hope for is to win the games we should and maybe pull off an upset. But that's been the reality for husker football for the last 20 years. I think I'm finally starting to come to that realization. But UT is sitting in the same boat we are. Blue chip program that is currently completely irrelevant. It's kind of sad for them considering they don't have near the challenge of recruiting that we have in BFE.

To be fair, it's catching on.

It's kind of sad how much your life revolves around Husker football, don't you think? I love Husker football as much as the next guy, but I'm not going to wallow in negativity because I honestly have no control over the situation. The only thing you can do, as a fan, is to stop supporting the team. That is the only power you have.

There's a lot going on in this thread, so I'll just start with the original topic: Ed stepping down. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I could not stand Ed Cunningham. And it wasn't just because I'm a Nebraska fan. I'm a B1G fan. I watch a lot of Big Ten football. Ed pulled the same sh#t in every game he commentated. And it's not just interjecting his opinion on whether a play was dirty, or dangerous, or whatever his view was. It's the fact that he didn't let that sh#t go. He'd make a comment about it every other play for the rest of the game, and would probably bring it up again the next game he casted. As for youths playing football. Again, I feel like everyone is entitled to their opinions. If you don't think it's right for kids to play full-contact football prior to a certain age, more power to you. Feel free to ensure your kids follow those guidelines. But if you don't have kids, or you're specifically referring to someone else's children, you should realize that unless you can get a general consensus to agree with you, your opinion doesn't matter. I played full-contact football at age 9. Prior to that, I played a lot of full-contact back-yard football with my neighbors. I helped coach it throughout high school and college. So I have a lot of experience with it. But the truth is, the amount of injuries at that level is extremely low during games. Kids typically get injured in practice due to dumbass coaches setting up ridiculous drills where they have kids run at eachother full speed for head-on collisions. That's not what happens during youth games and I've personally got in the face of a coach who setup such a drill just because he got off to seeing kids hit eachother. That's not what youth football is about. It's about fullfilling kids love for the game and teaching them the fundamentals early so they are prepared. As for reducing the number of players on the field, I'd advocate the opposite if you want to reduce injuries. The more kids on the field, the harder it is for them to pick up speed for those big collisions.

I understand the connection people are making, but holy sh#t. Act like your from the Midwest and quit being so sensitive over a college football ad. We're the Cornhuskers. Our state is mostly cornfields*. It's a good ad. I'm more embarrassed about the university making a stink about it than I am the actual ad. I live in Omaha. My city is surrounded by cornfields and even has a few littered throughout the middle of it. If you have a problem with people thinking we don't have running water and we just recently got electricity, I suggest you get the f#*k over it. Since when has anyone from the Midwest gave a sh#t about what people from other regions think? * Cornfields referring to any sort of field, whether it's corn, beans, hay, wheat, pasture, etc.

Social media really is the worst. Yeah, sure, the kid packed more drama than TNT, but he's a 17 year old kid. If you're a 25+ year old man talking trash at a 17 year old kid over a decision that has zero effect on your life and completely dictates his, you need to step back and re-read what I just said. If you still think that is OK, god help you.

I always felt like a 3-4 defense does a better job of stopping the run. It does require a big guy at nose and some OLBs that are quick, but I think it's an easier scheme to understand. It'll be interesting to see how it works out.

Well since we're so Nastalgic, I'd thought I'd leave this here: I was 7 years old and I remember watching this game in my parents living room.