knapplc

2nd

Kick Returner: 1) RB wanna-be - When no opening is created, a Kick Returner normally tries to plow through the opposing special team members head on to try to gain some extra yards. Therefore, the ideal HuskerBoard KR has Running Back capabilities. You might want to consult the description of RB (not afraid to take hits, consistent, competitive, reliable) in order to best make a nomination/vote. 2) High top speed – Josh Davis was the prototypical KR. He could run straight from his own goal line and reach a very high speed by the time he got to the 20. By this time, the defense has hit the wedge and he could either find the seam to take it to the house or blast through the best hole he could find to get some yardage. A poster who really gets on a roll with their posts and can find that bit of extra info that someone opened up for him would be a great KR. 3) Dangerous - He may not be on the field a lot, but when he is, look out! A threat to take it all the way.

*** Nominations are Closed ***

2nd

*** Voting is Closed *** Congratulations to epocSoN, our new Kicker!

*** Voting is Closed *** Congratulations to TuffTiger, our new Punter!

Happy Birthday, folks.

Mizzou good...? I guess they did beat Iowa State. 9/05 vs. Illinois 1-0 (0-0) W 37-9 9/12 Bowling Green 2-0 (0-0) W 27-20 9/19 Furman 3-0 (0-0) W 52-12 9/25 @ Nevada 4-0 (0-0) W 31-21 10/08 No. 21 Nebraska 4-1 (0-1) L 27-12 - Quarterback injured 10/17 @ No. 16 Oklahoma State 4-2 (0-2) L 33-17 10/24 No. 3 Texas 4-3 (0-3) L 41-7 10/31 @ Colorado 5-3 (1-3) W 36-17 11/07 Baylor 5-4 (1-4) L 40-32 11/14 @ Kansas State 6-4 (2-4) W 38-12 11/21 Iowa State 7-4 (3-4) W 34-24 11/28 vs. Kansas 8-4 (4-4) W 41-39 12/31 vs. Navy 8-5 (4-4) L 35-13 Let's not discount the impact of Gabbert's injury on that team.

I would make sure your browsers are upgraded to the latest version on each computer.

While all of that is true, the larger point I'm trying to make is that there are varying degrees of "championship caliber" teams. We can still be a contender without an Owa Odighizuwa as long as we have enough Jared Cricks around. Nobody is going to deny that it would be MUCH easier with a guy like Odighizuwa on the team, or several, but it's not a deal-breaker that we don't have them. It's just harder. I'm hypothesizing that, without at least three true difference makers, your chance of playing in the national title game is very close to zero. You could make it with three, and you could make it with ten, but with less than three, your chances are really, really slim (think '84 BYU). With a good group of talent and great coaches, you can consistently win 9-10 games and compete for the conference (think Osborne's first decade), but until you get that handful of difference makers, you aren't going to make that final step. It took Rozier, Gill and Fryar to put Osborne in position, and it took LP, Donta Jones and Ed Stewart (plus Frazier in the Orange Bowl) to finally make it happen. Again, while all of that is true, why should the lack of those players suddenly make us 7th in the conference in recruiting? That's why I'm saying I think we're being judged not on what we have, but on what we don't have, and that's a poor way to judge.

While all of that is true, the larger point I'm trying to make is that there are varying degrees of "championship caliber" teams. We can still be a contender without an Owa Odighizuwa as long as we have enough Jared Cricks around. Nobody is going to deny that it would be MUCH easier with a guy like Odighizuwa on the team, or several, but it's not a deal-breaker that we don't have them. It's just harder.

I wonder if Tim Griffin has watched tape on Quincy Enunwa. And I wonder if he's looking at the fact that we offered something like 30 WRs and landed just one. It just seems to me that he's grading us too much on what we lost rather than what we gained. People made the same mistake about Missouri last year. Yeah, losing Maclin and Daniel and the others hurt - it has to - but they were still a good team without them.

Sort of. The question we want to ask ourselves is, do we want to be the 1995 Huskers, or would the 1997 Huskers be OK? There's no question that 95 team was special in a way that very few other teams have come close to. That was a team that was stacked with (or should have been stacked with if the rankings were accurate) five star players at several positions. There's no denying the 1997 team took a step back from that 1995 plateau. But the bottom line is, the 1997 team still won the championship, and would have trounced Michigan had they had the guts to play us. I disagree with the notion that the only way to win a championship is with a loaded team. It can be done with a very good team - just ask 2007 LSU.

I wish I could cite specific games, but I remember him throwing the long ball a few times last year. I hated it, too, because he always threw off his back foot and put WAY too much air under the ball. He consistently underthrew his receivers and I was amazed more of his passes weren't picked off. Of course it's possible that his injury messed up his mechanics. I guess we'll find out this Fall. A lot of questions about Lee will be answered in the first couple of games, I think.

Me. I suppose it didn't help that I requested 5 seats together in a row.... It's a cheap way to take the wife and three boys to a game. I have four seats together. Of course, I was at the ticket office standing in line 90 minutes before they opened, too. I don't trust their website, and I don't want to sit there calling over and over and over to get an open line to one of the desks there. We stood around talking football, talking about Owa Odighizuwa, the women's basketball team... all kinds of stuff. It's fun. But they need more seats.

It might have something to do with the Reputation feature. I'm guessing that since you're in the negative you can't post new topics either, is that true? The reputation feature is being looked at. If it's causing too much trouble for people to use the site, it's possible it will be modified or eliminated. Thanks for the heads-up.

You could call Iowa State since they ended up with a bunch of extra ones during the NU/ISU game last year... Sorry...couldn't resist.

I see nothing wrong with or childish about getting to know something about your fellow members. Don't take it personal Knap. It's a joke....I always forget the emoticon and it never ceases to amaze me how someone will always say something. If you're frequently getting mistaken, it's possible that sarcasm as a form of humor isn't your thing.

knapplc was my handle when I joined AOL way back in the dark ages of the Internet. Back then the wife and I just had the one email, so it was: KNAPP - our last name L - my initial C - my wife's initial I've been knapplc pretty much everywhere ever since. I own knapplc@ email addresses across the webz, and I'm knapplc on a number of forums.

I see nothing wrong with or childish about getting to know something about your fellow members.

Ain't that the truth!! And to the ladies on Huskerboard: Don't be shy! My mom knows more about football than most people on this board. Dad is from Chicago, so when he came to Nebraska he was all about the Big 10 and the Illini. Mom set him straight, then educated me in Husker lore. My mom = one heck of a Husker fan :thumbs

Not a member.

Yep, so did I. She's in front right now, 33% to 18%. Here's her bio, from that site:

There are several, actually, but for the most part it's guys. Not surprising, since football primarily caters to dudes. But be welcome. Gender isn't an indicator of football knowledge or passion.

I really thought TuffTiger would walk away with this. Good to see a "regular" member is hanging tough. Of course, I'm unbiased either way. Just sayin'.