knapplc

Not only that, but it's also the most commonly recognize example. Everyone knows who Tommie Frazier is and what he accomplished. If we compared him to Dave Humm half of the people wouldn't get the frame of reference.

Tommie didn't start a game until Missouri in 1992, halfway through his Freshman season. Other than that, you're right - he was very up-and-down, and had several mistakes. And he had the respect of the team that year inasmuch as Mike Grant didn't have it - or at least, the team didn't think Grant could lead them where they wanted to go as much as Frazier could. Again, I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing that we're comparing Martinez to Frazier. Tommie was one of the two or three greatest QBs in Husker history. If Marty makes it into the top ten, he'll be damned good.

No, you don't get to cover your nonsense with loosely-veiled threats. For several months now religions threads have whizzed by without a peep from me. Certainly I haven't posted any, and we're not talking about religion here in the first place. I haven't been spending that time posting up fliers around catholic neighborhoods, either, so your attempt to pull the teeth on what you actually said still fails. You and I both know that I have neither persecuted nor been persecuted on this board. To my knowledge no one has. Certainly no one I've heard claim it for him or herself with evidence substantiating it. All we have is you saying so. You, of all people. Interesting. Me pointing out your admitted inability or unwillingness to differentiate between attacking ideas and attacking persons does not an insult make. But given your long, storied history of misreading my––but not limited to my––intentions means I'm not surprised. I would remind you that it was your call alone in derailing the actual discussion by dredging up history (or your misconstrued version of it). My only interest here was the topic of parody in argument. Clearly this was a mistake. I thought you were actually capable of having a discussion where it didn't wind up being some kind of half baked Dr. Phil episode. If it were the first time, I might actually be interested, but you've succeeded in boring the hell out of me. I don't know what your deal is, bro, and I won't venture a guess, but whatever it is should be worrying to you. It's not just me you have issues with. It's not just me that has issues with you, either. And of the two of us, I'm not the one on thin ice. Bro. This will be, by the way, the last post on this subject. If you feel the need to continue this conversation, you're welcome to PM me.

Same could be said Cam Newton except for better results. That's a good point. A good QB on an already good team, if they gel, can be downright scary. Newton being the best example, and most recent. Masoli is another, and it'll be interesting to see which guy Wilson emulates. @bigg10, I'm not sure what you meant about me not thinking the O Line was related to Stanzi's and Tolzien's success. I'm a huge proponent of offensive line importance, so I'm not sure what I said to give you the impression I'm minimizing that. The "pipeline" they have at Wiscy is probably the single biggest reason Wilson might succeed. I'm not impressed with his passing targets, but the Wiscy run game could be even better with a more mobile QB at the helm than Tolzien.

This is what I find odd about the fact that you claim to work for the Big Ten Network. I would imagine that a person working for an operation like the BTN would know that Nebraska hasn't played Wisconsin in 35 years and Ohio State in over 50 years. Asking what kinds of memories we have about these games is fishing in a pretty small barrel. I would guess there are less than 20 members of HuskerBoard who were old enough to have any kind of lasting memory of Nebraska's last game against Wisconsin (in 1974), and I doubt there are any members who remember our last game against OSU (in 1956). In fact, if you can find anyone who was old enough in 1956 to have a clear memory of that game, I'd be shocked. The game was played in Columbus, and I would imagine there weren't 2,000 Husker fans there. How does the BTN not know these things? How can you think you'll get any kind of information about any of these matchups aside from our series against PSU? I'm old enough to remember the home-and-home we played against Penn State in 2001/2002, and the five games from the late 70s to the early 80s, but there won't be many of us who can remember those games. Like I said before, it's OK if you're not really with the Big Ten Network. You're not asking questions that are untoward or that would bother anyone.... it's just that it seems awfully weird that you'd do research like this.

Your conveniently self-serving and narrow definition does not encompass all forms of persecution. You do not have to cast a person to the lions to persecute them. It can be as simple as posting bills around the neighborhood that are anti-_______ religion. Persecution encompasses the manner, frequency, nature and intent of the action. Words alone can persecute. You may attempt to insult me all you want by claiming I don't know the difference between "You're stupid" and "Your beliefs are stupid." It's not the first time you've stooped to such things, and I doubt it will be the last. I have been exceedingly lenient with you in these kinds of conversations, but as you are aware my patience has limits. I would counsel you not to explore those limits.

The thing is, his running ability is vastly overrated. Against ACC defenses weak against the run he only averaged 2.98 YPC. That's hardly impressive. Take a true dual-threat guy like Josh Freeman from KSU for a comparator. Freeman ran for 3.8 YPC his senior year and threw for 3,000 yards and 20 TDs. All comparable or better stats than Wilson. But Freeman had been in a system he understood for three years, while Wilson is moving to a new offense (despite the feel-good quote in the paper). It's just not going to be that easy for him, I think.

There have been 11 bids on the Husker banner and only five for the CU banner.

Oh my goodness. Is your memory so short? Have you forgotten past conversations?

I doubt that. I think you all stick with what works. All that changes is in passing plays, he can scramble, then throw or hold onto it and make positive yards. Running game will be the same as always, pound pound pound. Cant wait to see you all in Indy. We want the Heartland back!! Stick with what works for whom, though. That's the question. Do you stick with what works for your OC or your returning starters, or do you stick with what works for your incoming mercenary? It'll be interesting to see which they go with. So does this mean you're a Badger fan?

Poor Colorado. It's like the Buffs are walking around under a perpetual raincloud - at least as far as their relationship with Nebraska goes. The latest iteration of Buffy angst comes from their divestiture of all things Big XII - and the cash grab associated with that divestiture. In an effort to raise funds for their moribund athletic department, the Buffs have decided to auction off memorabilia from their Big XII days. The current auction, which closes in about 23 minutes, has two items - the Nebraska Banner that hung in the Coors Events Center during Colorado's time in the conference, and Colorado's own banner. At this moment, on CU's website, the Colorado Buffaloes banner can be yours for the bargain price of $225. But if you want the Nebraska banner, it's going to cost you $625. That's right - on CU's own website, the Nebraska memorabilia is worth more than Colorado's. That's kinda sad. Nebraska Banner: Colorado Banner:

This Tommie Frazier was a great qb. Great guy? No. The team respected him though. Well, Frazier didn't have to worry about getting instant "respect" from the whole team as a freshman. Frazier didn't have to deal with bored message board posters, either.

You may repeat until you are blue in the face. Your problem is that you fail to empathize with those you persecute. You're so intent on denouncing their beliefs based on YOUR past that you fail to even try to put yourself in their position. Their experiences likely weren't yours, and they may never change their beliefs like you. That doesn't make them wrong or bad or in any way mean your tone needs to be aggressive or attacking when you speak to them. But too often it is. You are all stick and no carrot. Try being more carrot.

If you are unable to answer this question it's clear that you are not nearly as good at satire as you seem to think. btw, for the record, it was The Dude who stated the "sky fairy" phrase. Not me. We've all agreed to blame you anyway.

Yes he does! John Stewart is the shizzle. Absolutely. Cracking on someone's religion is the same as "you'll burn in hell." Wrong is wrong, no matter which side of the debate you're on. Far too often it seems like people have no interest in actually debating something, they just want to bash the other guy over the head with their point of view. I think it's often cathartic in nature, and the guy on the receiving end is largely irrelevant - they're just there to serve as the receptacle for all the derp the angry person wants to spew. That can be couched in whatever descriptor we want (educating, saving, satirizing), but the reality is it's often just one person venting their spleen at another. Nobody ever wins in these kinds of "debates."

I've breezed through Bourdain's books at the bookstore and I think they're probably worth the read, but I'm such a cheap bastard that I hate paying hardback prices for them. I can't make myself spend $20 for a book. He spoke at the Holland Center in Omaha last September and made for a very fun night. Should I bite the bullet and just buy one of his books?

Here's a classic:

It's not my idea of the perfect thread, but I'm encouraged to see that the overwhelming majority of respondents have said they have zero problem with this. It's a subject that is likely to come up in college athletics sooner rather than later. While the premise of any of us "being OK" with a gay college athlete is a little silly (who are we to say it's OK or not OK?), the response is, at least, encouraging.

If you are unable to answer this question it's clear that you are not nearly as good at satire as you seem to think.

Really... Not top 20? He'd have been the best QB in the ACC, hands down. I'd like to see the list of quarterbacks that, in your opinion, are better... I mean, obviously Martinez would be #1, but who else? Wilson was rated #64 or 67 in the nation in Pass Efficiency last year. T-Mart was #37 or so. Tolzien, the guy who Wilson is replacing in Madison, was #6. Wilson throws for a lot of yards and had like 28 TDs last year, but he threw 14 or so picks and if I remember correctly his YPA was lower than T-Mart's, who has been roundly criticized as a bad passer.

I love John Stewart. But John Stewart is a professional comedian, and his writers are among the best satirists in the business. Joe Schmoe on the internet can't compare, and frankly shouldn't try any more than I should try tight-rope walking from skyscraper to skyscraper because I saw it on TV. Satire by amateurs typically ends in disaster. The key phrase you used was "got me thinking." Do you really think trying to back someone in a corner on their beliefs is the best method to make them think about your words? What's more likely - that the person in "trapped animal" mode will calmly and rationally think about what you're saying, or that they'll devolve into "fight or flight?" There's a thread around here talking about this, and in my experience it's true that for 99.999% of Internet conversations and arguments, the more belligerent the conversation the more entrenched the discussion, and the less likely people are to consider another point of view.

Amen. They couldn't have illustrated our reasons for leaving any better.

The link is to the article where you'll find a video of the BTN "Welcome To Nebraska Weekend" promo. LINK

I have Versus. I didn't know I should be looking! Thanks!

From the Daily Press, Newport News, VA: