huskerswrkhavoc

NSide needs baseball. I wouldn't expect it to happen anytime soon.

Pierce sounded like he threw the ball decently tonight. Was on an inning limit, but didn't give up any runs and only 2 hits in those 3...

11-5 home stand. Not bad, Won 2 vs KSU and 2 vs Cal, otherwise it woulda been spot on.. The UNK game does NOT count towards our record outside of our own counting..

I will completely agree that it was embarrassing and from a media standpoint, definitely a setback. However, in the grand scheme of things, a series win is a good start and the NCAA doesn't judge our loss different than our two wins. Just because it was nationally televised doesn't change the impact on our record or RPI, just perception. As for the numbers, those weren't SoS numbers, and I wish we had played that hard of a schedule. They are the Iterative Strength Ratings from boydsworld. The SoS numbers are on there in the right column, where we are 92nd, nothing special. However, the ISR is a widely accepted way of rating the teams in college baseball from top to bottom. It isn't ever as accurate in February and March as it is in April/May, but the best way of judging numbers we have right now.

Hacker, yes it would have been fantastic to win the opening game. However, this is baseball. A game where if you win 75% of your games you are in fantastic position. For as much as you claim to understand about the game, something this simple should be very visible to you. You say you didn't categorize the loss, but you said it was as "pathetic" as it can get, that's a category last time I checked. Yes, we scored a ton of runs and lost a game, a game where we scored 3. That's not a ton of runs. Should we have scored more? Possibly. Did we? Nope, and there is no reason to sit and dwell on that game right now. We won the series and move on to the next one. Just because YOU gave this team unreasonable expectations at the beginning of the year does not mean that anyone else here did. Many realized that this is the first year with a first-year coach. There are going to be growing pains. I care more about these numbers.... Rank Rating W L W L SoS Team 5 125.0 16 4 16 4 31 Purdue 13 120.7 16 6 16 6 30 Gonzaga 37 113.7 16 9 17 9 92 Nebraska 56 111.2 11 9 11 9 27 Illinois 57 111.0 13 9 13 9 60 California 67 109.6 13 7 13 7 152 Michigan State 81 107.8 13 10 13 10 104 Kansas State http://boydsworld.com/baseball/isr/currentisr.html

Gumbercules just calls it as he sees it and there is nothing to disrespect about that.

God dang you're a great predictor.

13-4 Nebraska. Farmer has a 2 - RBI sac fly with the bases loaded.. Kash to 2nd... Burleson pops out for 3rd out.

Illinois gets one back on 2 hits in the 3rd... 11-4 huskers going to bottom of 3

The truth is that you were overly optimistic for reasons that weren't there. There was no reason given what we were returning from last season to have all the optimism you had. However, the attitude instilled in this team has made it better than it ever could have been last year, and they are only growing. Sac Fly scores Farmer and it's 11-3.

2 run single for Burleson, and Farmer also smoves to third bad throw back to the pitcher (?) .. 10-3 Huskers.. All 10 in the 2nd, only 1 out.

8-3 no one out.. And just for good measure, let's see how Hacker felt a month ago..... Bucky, you and the rest of the Wisconsinites (is that a word?) are welcome to join Husker Nation in rooting for the Big Red in Big 10 baseball... Not suggesting you jump on the husker bandwagon in sports the Wisconsin Red games in but lets be honest, Red is Red and by any definition, hard to ignore. So.. come on Whisky red, join the Husker red baseball bandwagon!! As for the husker baseball season. When I reflect back on the optimism that existed at the start of last season I find myself asking why their should be less this season. The truth as I see it, the sker's are better conditioned with a better pitching coach, a returning former sker's defensive stud now coaching his philosophies to our young studs and a head coach that can light a fire under the seat of even the strongest of skeptics. I see the sker's winning no less then 44 games this year. I see Erstad as being the Big's coach of the year. I see Silva staying for 3 years at most as the sker's program is his final stepping stone to a head coaching position and before his departure, I see him as becoming the biggest factor in rejuvenating a pitching staff that has talent but lacked confidence. I dare anyone to tell me why my projections are to high. Why? Given the schedule Erstad inherited (one that he isn't at all happy with) the new attitude that is rather obvious through interviews the media has shared the leaving it all on the field competition that has chased a couple players (ex: Logan) the coaching staff's records at every location they've coached and finally, this years motto "back to the ballpark" I am totally amped for the season and find myself begging for more media insight. Seriously can't understand why the media hasn't taken this opportunity to gain more readers, viewers, followers? Huskers will rule 2012 and our former sker's (now coaches, all of them) homecoming will be a huge success.

LMAO. 7-3 Huskers. No one out bottom of 2. Hey Hacker, do us all a favor and NEVER come back.

Pretty sure Lemke was the Friday guy all along. They were simply having him late in the weekend because of his injury and inability to go deep in games early on. They didn't want to have to waste the bullpen early in the weekend and then not have it if it was needed later on in the weekend. Hopefully Hirsch get's everything strapped down on Sundays

No offense, but we are not 'on the cusp' of being ranked... hell, a poll that goes to 50 doesn't even have us there.... I wonder if the team's play in 2011 has anything to do with that? More has to do with getting swept the opening weekend.

No offense, but we are not 'on the cusp' of being ranked... hell, a poll that goes to 50 doesn't even have us there....

Easy to say that when you get called out for it. You lurked around for a couple of weeks after you created this thread while the team was winning.. Then you wait to comment again until the team gets way down on Friday. Yes, they did come back and yes, they did show some heart. They have come further this year than I had expected by this point in time. I actually am really excited for the rest of the year. I thought this would be a big rebuilding and relearning year, but the progress they've made as a team is great to see.

I go to the doctors office where my polling station is, walk in, give them my id, fill in my circles, put the ballot in the metal container thingy, and leave. #PrimaryinNebraska

lol while we're at it let's give Keller and Lemke clones of Strausberg's (healthy) arm and give Hirch and Kubat Halladay's arm... please?

Then I guess I'm confused on what you think they should do. Renda is the best middle infielder in the nation and his range seems better suited for SS.. But that's why I'm not coaching.

Not true. There is nothing signed, there is nothing forcing McCray to go to Michigan. He easily can back out of the commitment. He is not a teammate of these guys until he signs. Once he signs, they can talk all they want, but not until then. Not quite sure how you can question "freedom of speech" in this... Because if all they said was congratulations. A verbal commitment is still something of a commitment. It's the handshake before the contract. Well then I guess the fact the no one's ever backed out of a verbal committment and that they are totally sacred totally backs up your point. Wow. Try re-reading what I wrote a little more slowly, then get back to us. What he said seemed to cover my sentiment on your reply... Maybe you want to explain better? It seems you are saying that his verbal is good enough to allow contact. I can think of many kids that have backed out of their verbals, just like you can.

Then moving him to 2nd you take Peters' bat out of the lineup? He's hitting .320 on the year....

I haven't said one way or another whether it's purely genetic. That's why I voted 'other' in this pole, because I just don't know the exact correct answer. All I know is that homosexual people are vehemently against the idea that they choose to be gay, and it isn't who they are. Given they're homosexual, and I'm not, I trust their judgment to a far greater extent than a couple of homosexual critics on Huskerboard. I don't know if you're referring to me when you say "critic" but I am not trying to criticize anything, just understand this topic more. I'm sorry if I made it sound like you thought it was strictly genetic, but I meant the fact that you said gays say it is NOT a choice at all. That I just simply can't believe. It's more or less directed at shark. Choosing to believe the facts as they are is up to the individual interpreting them. You say you simply can't believe being gay isn't a choice, yet the vast majority of homosexuals claim they didn't simply make a choice to be gay. What, do people (not necessarily you) think others just wake up one morning and proclaim to the world "I choose to be gay today!"? I don't think so. Again, might I direct you to which hand you write with. How did you end up writing with this hand? Did you simply decide one day that you were going to write with a particular hand, or did you write with the hand that felt most comfortable or logic to you? I think knapplc also asks an excellent question. To me, the buck stops there. I can't choose to be gay any more than I choose to be straight - I just AM a heterosexual. I don't have emotional attachments with men like I do women, I don't find men sexually attractive. You're heterosexual - did you one day just decide to like women, or have you always just felt like women were the right thing for you? It's the exact same principle. You're not gay, so how can you possibly explain how gay people feel or why they are gay? Like I said - all I know is that the vast majority of gay people claim they didn't choose to be gay. I'm far more likely to side with them over heterosexuals who are just assuming they have the right answer. To answer both your thought and knapp's question, it's why I don't think there is one or the other that solely decides. I think there is obviously some sort of genetic difference between straight and gay individuals, but the way they are brought up and their surroundings make them 'more comfortable' with either a straight or gay lifestyle. I may have a disposition to be right handed, that may be what's 'more comfortable' to me, but if I were to have something bad happen to my right arm or hand when I was really young, or my parents were horrible and tied my right arm behind my back, then I would become more comfortable with my left hand and become 'left-handed.' So no, by no means do I think I could wake up and decide whether to be gay or straight no more than I could decide if I was left-handed or right-handed. It's something that develops over time.

Christensen played short last year. He projects as an OF at the next level and the coaches had him playing there until the injury to Pat Kelly earlier in the year. The fact that Chad was willing to come back in and help the team shows a lot to me.

It's okay. Hacker will only be here to talk after bad losses.