knapplc

Coach-speak. Same with the "nobody's been hired yet" line he gave Sipple this morning. Same with the "I'm not leaving Nebraska" line Raymond gave us. This stuff gets out before it's ripe, so they have to say something to keep the hounds at bay.

Afraid so. Busted.

If only he was from Youngstown........I kid I kid. That is a concern. However: LINK Jon Nyatawa in on this story nine months ago. Kudos to the kid from the OWH!

You may be right, and that's no knock on his skills when you've got guys like Burkhead, Green and Abdullah back there.

So, he's a good recruiter, he has history with Bo at LSU, he has connections to Louisiana where we would like to target, and he's Mickey Joseph's cousin. That's a reasonably good set of connections.

Sam McKewon tweeted that Joseph was a Grad Asst. under Pelini at LSU, and he "knows Louisiana."

Hold the phone..... Translation - the ink isn't dry on the new-hire docs yet, so we can't say anything official.

There is, but I'm not sure how to use it since the Board software switched. Having Mod duties I really can't block anyone. Errr.... except for matthew. Yeah. I've blocked him. That's the ticket.

Nebraska WBB ‏ @HuskersWBB @HuskersWBB lead Northwestern 83-55 with 2:28 left at #B1GTourney. 5 freshmen on floor for NU. Frosh 44 pts, 19 reb. #huskers #B1G Nebraska Huskers ‏ @Huskers .@HuskersWBB defeats Northwestern 88-56 in first ever #B1GTourney game. Next up is a game vs. Iowa at ~1 p.m. (CT) tomorrow. GBR! #Huskers

Sean Callahan ‏ @Sean_Callahan Just looking at Joseph's background, Rivals.com ranked him as on of the top 5 non-BCS recruiters in 2009.

Pete Roussel ‏ @coachingsearch I have learned that Tennessee defensive backs coach Terry Joseph will join the Nebraska staff under Bo Pelini. bit.ly/sbcB2K Retweeted by Steven M. Sipple

BRACKET It's a PDF. First Round: #7 Michigan #10 Illinois #6 Nebraska #11 Northwestern #8 Minnesota #9 Wisconsin #5 Michigan State #12 Indiana Second Round: #2 Ohio State #7 Michigan (won) #3 Iowa #6 Nebraska (presumptive winner) #1 Penn State (winner #8/#9 game) #4 Purdue (winner #5/#12 game)

Already was address, Knapplc: My bad - I should have written that it wasn't considered by someone who isn't on my Blocked User list. Sorry about that.

They do appear to have the talent to beat just about anyone, they're just young. If they can keep it together throughout the tournament they'll be a tough out, but if they have another swoon like they did over the past seven games, even for one half, they'll get bounced. At this point we're just killing time until Northwestern is officially outed from the tourney. Every Husker has played and scored a point at this point in the game.

LINK

LINK

I believe this is the official definition of a beatdown. 33-point lead right now. Nothing going right for the Wildcats.

I think we were making them at the same time. Great minds thinking alike once again. Kinda eerie that our threads were so similar. We're not secretly twins, are we? Halftime score, Huskers clinging to a near-30-point lead, 54-25.

We join the tournament already in progress. As of 7:48 to go in the first half, the Huskers lead 36-10 thanks in large part to a 28-3 run. Jordan Hooper has passed the 1,000-career point mark, making her the first Husker Sophomore ever to surpass the 1,000 point mark. EDIT - today's victim is Northwestern, who defeated Nebraska 63-51 at the Bob two weeks ago today. This seems a little like a "you shouldn't have beaten us last game" game.

I find myself in the uncomfortable position of being more likely to vote for Uncle Bob than any other candidate. The lesser of two evils, as it were.

This is better than that word salad you had before. WTH was that supposed to be? It hurt my eyes.

$300,000 But it's still a dumb number. It says nothing about the marginal value of attending college for someone that should actually think hard about that decision. $900,000 for a BS, $1.2 million for a Masters, from a different study.

You request a courtesy that you do not extend. You ask for logic beyond that of a child's game, yet offer none yourself. I'm not going to pretend to be any kind of knowledgeable military strategist, but I have the ability to discuss my opinion, and I'm willing to discuss it openly and honestly, and provide support for that opinion when asked. You do not reciprocate; rather, you make statements which you cannot or will not support, then when they are challenged your responses vary between 1) ignoring the other person's point, 2) changing the subject, 3) implying that the other person doesn't understand (often with a side order of "go reread the post/thread), or 4) implying that the person to whom you're directing your comments is uneducated/uninformed/not smart/any combination of those three. Your presumptions are often baseless, or the product of unsupportable opinions. To wit: North Korea has once already attacked South Korea, with the express purpose of absorbing them into a unified Korea. That purpose has not ended simply becuase 60 years have passed. It is only the presence of a militarily (if not numerically) superior force across the DMZ that prevents them from doing it again. Pretending that North Korea, a known exporter of arms and information to terrorist organizations, is some benign entity set upon by belligerent American & South Korean interests is to ignore their history, both recent and past. Iran is also a known supporter of terrorist organizations, and has been for decades. Pretending that, again, they are some persecuted, peace-loving nation beset by the Americans is to ignore their past behavior. Your insinuations that America is the aggressor in either of these situations is based on false presumptions or erroneous conclusions, and to get there you're guilty of either ignoring or obfuscating facts. America's military presence in the region occupied by Iran has been thoroughly explained to you, yet here you are bringing them up again. North Korea's situation is quite obvious, yet here you are arguing that they are the ones persecuted. Let's try a simple, not-intended-to-be-1:1 analogy. You have two neighborhoods. Neighborhood A has a high crime rate, Neighborhood B has a low crime rate. Which neighborhood would you be MOST LIKELY to see a strong police presence in? I'll give you a hint - it's not Neighborhood B.

Just saw this on CNN. Never heard of the guy until a few threads cropped up here, but figured it might interest some. EDIT: From his website: LINK