knapplc

Highly unlikely, and unlikely that he'd apply. He's already earned his degree and he was close to entering the draft last year. I don't think he will have so adversely impacted his draft stock that he'd need to come back next year and "prove" that he deserves a higher ranking. Also, to get a medical I think you have to miss two years. He's already redshirted (2007) so a straight-up redshirt isn't an option.

It sucks that this had to happen since he skipped out on the draft last year to come back for his senior season. Crick earned his degree in History this summer, too.

Bo's statement:

Got it covered in the other thread.

Bo Pelini has announced that Jared Crick is out for the season with a torn pectoral.

The volleyball team is self-sustaining most years lately. Note, most years. Yes, the football program keeps the rest of the sports programs running but it also help keeps the University running. Unlike being able to use tuition for athletics, you can use athletics for academics. So, while you are correct partially, the football program can and does help keep the University running. Texas football makes a ton of money as we all know, but yet the University was having trouble keeping and paying professors. The academic side of UT is not happy about the athletic side because they will not give much of the money to help them. I saw a piece on T.V. about it a year or so ago. It was pretty interesting. I actually made that point in this post.

The volleyball team is self-sustaining most years lately. Note, most years.

Two plays from the Ohio State game are on the poll for Top Play of the Week, Rex's game-winning score and Lavonte's strip of Braxton Miller. VOTE

I think the fact that we are even asking this question gives us the answer. He was killing us. Maybe the defense had already turned the corner, but it would have been terribly difficult to shut them down entirely the second half. Like Coqui said, even if they don't score, with Miller they have a far better chance to kill clock. We could have done it, but it would have been tough. Maybe OT?

'Tis what I meant. Was a little tired when I posted that tidbit. They hadn't allowed more than 24 in 4 quarters, and we did it in a half. Yeah. How impressive was the offense in that second half? Much better blocking, better decision-making, better play-calling.... man. Where the heck was that in the first half? That inconsistency is what we can expect with a new Offensive Coordinator, a QB and an overall offense that's still pretty young, and a bunch of new formations/schemes. But the future looks very bright here. We put this all together and do this for four quarters, we'll be a handful for any team in the country to stop.

Maybe at some schools. I'm pretty sure that not only is the NU athletic department self-funded, they endow the university a bit on the side.

I'd vote for that, too, but there's no way that would happen. West Stadium is sacred. The Old Money donors would revolt.

It's a neat city, but it's built on the poverty of the people. Estimates range between 2.8% and 15.8% on the percentage of people living below the poverty level in China. And it's important to note that, because China isn't a "fully developed country," their standards for poverty are vastly lower than ours. For many estimates, "absolute poverty" in China is defined as someone living on 85$ (US) per year, or less. Shanghai will always be a beautiful city because it's the capitol, so they'll throw tons of money at it to keep it impressive. But there's a cost to that.

7-10 days before the game, usually not sooner. That's pretty standard protocol for this kind of thing.

That "trampling" thing is a VERY bad idea. Someone is going to blow out a knee doing this one day, like the kid in front of me did when they opened the gates for Fan Day. I had to stop and go get the medics for him while his mom tried to calm him down. Bad injury, and it's going to happen again with the way they run things. Students should be closer, they should have assigned seating, and they shouldn't have to sprint down that ramp to get to their seats. I'll agree with all those points.

And now I'll flip-flop from the post I just made. How does the tuition check today's students pay trump the tuition check paid by the grads in the stands who have not only fully paid their tuition, but are now boosters, athletic dept. contributors and season-ticket holders for the past X Number of years? Being a student today doesn't mean squat to me when I've not only paid tuition but more besides. Should my greater contribution give me a greater voice? That's not a good argument, is it?

Ehhh........ I'm willing to defer to Dr. Tom in a lot of ways, but I'm not going to agree with him on everything. This happens to be an area where I don't agree. There has to be a better way to utilize the energy the students bring than we're doing now.

Minnesota = W - A little concerned about Marquies Gray, but they're not a good team overall. Michigan State = ? - Cousins is an immobile pocket passer, which bodes well for our defense. But he is a quick, accurate passer, and they have a solid run game and a solid defense. This will be our hardest remaining game. Northwestern = W - Persa is another immobile pocket passer, but he also can sling the ball around to a talented WR corps. They haven't played a difficult schedule to date and have lost three games, though. The blueprint to beat them is there. Penn State = W - Their defense looks a lot like OSU's. Unfortunately, they don't have the offense (and specifically Braxton Miller) to make us pay for being slowed by their defense. Should be a win. Michigan = ? - This game depends entirely on how we defend DRob. Contain him and we win. We will move the ball on their DEF with smart play-calling. We just have to be smart about this. Iowa = W - Those conversations with Iowa Fan about how "Vandenberg is better than Stanzi" still make me chuckle. Remember last year's Colorado game? Yep. Same result. At worst we finish 4-2. At best 6-0, but likely we'll have a hiccup and finish 5-1, with the loss being to either Michigan team.

Has this story created anything by way of buzz around the college football world? I recall some comments when it came out, but it seems as if it's been pretty quickly dismissed. Yesterday's news the day it was released, that sort of thing. I think Beebe's had his 15 minutes. This was his parting shot, his attempt to put one second back on the clock. Only this time, the field goal sailed wide right.

We've had this debate before, about who does more for the university, students or ticket-holders. Both students and ticket-holders are crucial for this program, so to give to one you have to take away from the other. You have to balance what you give to both equably. The students shouldn't be stuck in a corner, stretched all the way up to the back of the stadium like they are now. They stand for the whole game, so if you put them closer, anyone behind them will similarly have to stand all game long, and that's a problem for some. So where should we put the students? How could we best utilize their energy? How do we make their habits less intrusive to the other folks in the stands?

The voting public will believe whatever story is presented to them in the best manner at the moment they vote. There's no memory, no sense of history, in the mass of voters. Come election time all that will be left of the campaign and the debates will be vague impressions of like/didn't like. That's why this strategy the GOP is using will work, and why similar strategies have worked for both parties in past elections. It's why terms like "sheeple" crop up to describe the masses. The key will be the endgame storylines that each candidate can sell. Certainly the article I just linked to will be long forgotten, but the fact that *I* don't have a job will be fresh in their minds. It all depends on who can best label that lack of job. Who can pin it on the other guy the best. In that scenario, I think Obama has the best chance. Nobody I've seen from the GOP is showing the ability to better characterize the moment than Obama.

I don't think there was any magical progression involved. This is what Taylor has been all along. He just (quote)needs to make better decisions(unquote). That, and his coaches need to put him in a better position to succeed. Done and done as far as OSU is concerned, Beck's playcalling in the Ohio State game helped him make better decisions. Now they just need to keep doing it (obviously easier said than done). He's still the same guy with the trbl passing mechanics. And he probably won't be able to stand in the pocket and pick apart secondaries anytime ever. But we don't need him to. If the coaches acknowledge what his weaknesses are and let him do what he does best, then he can be as dangerous as any QB in the nation. This is all true about Beck's playcalling. Taylor started out 10/10 passing, and he didn't throw a pass more than 15 yards downfield. It only took us, what? 17 games into his career to figure out that we shouldn't have him pushing the ball downfield umpteen times a game? The kid isn't a long-ball passer. He's no Jammal Lord. He's got the mechanics of a short-throw passer, and we finally utilized those mechanics properly. Not only did Taylor grow this game (making several check-downs and exhibiting more patience in the pocket) but our OC also showed improvement. Both need to continue to grow, though. This is no time for back-patting. That's the fans' job. One thing Taylor still has to get a handle on (no pun intended) is his ball security. I think he put it on the carpet a couple more times last week. Both were after the whistle blew, but it's gotta stop. All in all he's progressing. He's still a sophomore, still learning a new(ish) system. I am cautiously optimistic about the future with him. And for all of you eating crow, don't take too much yet. There's a lot of football yet to play, and we haven't completely turned the corner with Taylor yet. We're peeking around that corner, though. Baby steps.

Refs totally blew that call. That's a personal foul - leading with the forehead bone-plate. Dude shoulda gotten 15 yards after that. Stupid zebras.

I'm not convinced. I'm thoroughly unimpressed by the GOP field but the economy might very well end in an Obama reelection defeat. The longer the recovery takes the better the GOP candidates chances are. I can say one thing for certain . . . I don't like when one political party has an incentive to stall the recovery. Here's the problem with that Republican strategy: Obama can very easily pin the lack of recovery on the GOP candidate - and the party - as well. There won't be anything resembling a sincere effort to fix the economy by the GOP in the next 12 months, and it will be very obvious. No legislation, no jobs bills, nothing. How do the Republicans explain that away? Why do I vote for them when they've held my lack of employment hostage for a year? I think the economy is going to end up a zero-sum game for both parties. It's not Obama's issue, and it's not the GOP's issue - they share it jointly. EDIT - and, case in point, the GOP's own actions are going to be used against them: LINK Gotta protect those poor millionaires from those awful taxes.