knapplc

You do realize that we own televisions in Nebraska, yes? You do realize that most of us watched the Illinois game, the Bowling Green game and the Nevada game, yes? If you don't, you may want to adjust your thinking. I know you're looking at the teams you've faced through Tiger-colored glasses. That's understandable, especially after the way you've throttled us four of the last six years, and the last two running. But you do not know football as well as you think if you looked at your games against Illinois and Nevada and thought your team looked good. You saw two opponents more detrimental to their own aims than most anything Missouri could have devised, yet despite this, the Tigers looked barely adequate to the task. This isn't Bill Callahan's Husker team. This isn't even Bo Pelini's 2008 hangover from the Callahan Era team. This is a very different Husker team than you've faced the last few years. On the other side of the ball, this isn't the same Tigers team we've faced the last few years with your brace of crazy-good tight ends, a future NFL QB and Maclin, who for my money was better than any WR in the league the last several years (and yes, I'm talking to YOU, Michael Crabtree). Maybe you'll get what we've been saying next Thursday if you don't grasp that now. The beauty of college football is that graduation mandates change every few years. Graduation and recruiting have had their way with Nebraska and Missouri, as has Pelini's better coaching, and this will be a very different game than you've seen the last two years, I guarantee it. The Tigers may still win (I doubt this, but it's very possible), but it will not be like 2007 and 2008. Not even close.

From FAU, AR State and ULL? Very little, as you well know. We learned they can whoop up on lesser talented squads and when they get their dander up they can shut out a team that's played an already difficult schedule. That and $5.99 will get you a crappy bottle of alcohol free "wine" at the local Hy-Vee. And if you're like me, you'll want your money back after tasting that swill. But I digress. The real thing we learned this year is, against weaker opponents, this Husker team can put the hammer down. And do it well. They throttled three Sunbelt opponents, as they should, and let them score a combined 12 points. At the same time, they racked up a boatload of meaningless yards and points, and generally worked the kinks out of their game left over from practice. But the good news is, we didn't just play a non-con that gave us an SOS averaging somewhere near 100. We also sprinkled in a salty, experienced, well-coached team on their home turf, whose specialty is defense and special teams. We went to their house, stood toe to toe with them for four quarters, and left the game knowing that we should have won. That confidence is invaluable. It overshadows every other non-con game we played like Everest overshadows a molehill. It showed particularly when we played a Spread offense the very next week after suffering a crushing defeat and throttled them without mercy. That's where Nebraska and Missouri differ. Missouri's first stern test will be when Nebraska comes to town. They'll learn who they are and what they can become from that game. They'll find out the mettle of their team like no other opponent has allowed them to discover. But Nebraska has already had that "come to Jesus" moment. They already know who they are, and what their potential is. They know what they can do, what they can't, and what they can get away with in between. That knowledge alone is an advantage that Missouri cannot boast, no matter how much you or the team or the coaches wish to insist that Illinois was a "defining" game. That is where I draw my confidence - that and the knowledge that Missouri's defense is not close to as good as VT's, yet we moved the ball handily on the Hokies, and that Missouri's offense is statistically marginally better than those we faced from the Sunbelt who earned a total of a dozen points over three games. You can pretend those non-con games meant nothing. I hope you and Mr. Pinkel and the Tigers in general think this. Because it's an errant conclusion to draw from what we've seen, and such ideas can only help the Huskers come October 8th.

Homeslice, I have yet to see you roll up your sleeves and seriously discuss football. Then ins and outs of the game, the intricacies of interacting offenses and defenses - these are all lacking from your posts. Sure, you'll chat about the vino and I for one appreciate that, but the bottom line is, you do a lot more smack chit-chat than actual factual football discussion, and because of this, you're hardly in a position to judge here. You want to talk about wasting breath, fine. Yours is an unqualified opinion at this point. Doc is willing to dig deep and discuss the game. Pretend I'm from Missouri and Show Me that you're willing to do the same. Until then, these diatribes you're launching against Husker Fan ring hollow. Speaking of vino and hollow, let's imagine for a second you watched some reasonably competent show on FoodNetwork or A&E or wherever it was, and you got a hankering to try that somewhat new non-alcoholic wine, Fre, because you saw how it was made and it seemed intriguing. Let me save you the trouble - no matter how much time it's spent in an oak barrel, no matter what alchemy they do to remove the alcohol, at the end of the day it's just grape juice. Don't waste your time.

Well we can all stop the p***** match come next Thursday night. A big leg up on being "The Best Team in the North" will be the winner of that game. Until the horn sounds to end it, it's just jabber. It's fun to try to figure out how the game will go, but it's pretty much a useless exercise. I think we are a better team and will score with Missouri this year. On the other hand I thought that last year. I think as long as Lee and the WR and TEs can give us a balanced attack we will be fine. I don't think we can score enough points without throwing the ball well. Could be wrong. I think if we can keep Misery from hooking up for the big plays and pressure Gabbert enough with our front four to keep him in check, we'll have a great night on D. The truth is that while I bet it will be a close game this year; it could be a blow out in either direction. Ask FSU fans about how that works. Neither team has proved they are anything very special to this point. One undefeated having played weak teams. One beating weak teams and losing to the one good team they played on the road in a close game. Whoever wins Thursday next will have some braggin rights and if it is the Huskers, it should bode well for our game with TT and our chance of winning the North. One step at a time is wise. Sure, no problem. Only next time, try quoting someone who's actually starting these ridiculous conversations instead of someone who's trying to answer outrageous claims.

I think "what was the spotter doing" is a pretty natural response. Anyone who has lifted would know that if a freak accident occurred there's next to nothing the spotter could do, but it's still a natural question. It was the first thing I thought of, and I've got experience with lifting.

Let's just dispense with the notion that Illinois is in any way a good team. They're ranked below 85 (out of 120) in scoring offense, passing defense and scoring defense. So they can't stop anyone with even a competent passing game, and they can't keep their opponents out of the end zone, and they can't score much themselves. The good news is, they're mediocre at rushing defense - ranked right in the middle of the pack at 59. They are, however, #35 in the nation at their specialty, running the football.

I know. And I'm not ranting at you specifically. I don't know if you saw it but this same kind of question came up earlier today in another thread and I thought it was ridiculous. I guess I just chose to post that here rather than there. Here's the thing - I'm all for the gay dudes. More power to 'em, and frankly I wish there were more of them out there. I wish half the guys on the planet were gay and the half that are were all the good looking guys. Why? Because I'm hetero. And yeah, I'm married and I'm happy about it and I'm not in the market for any cheesecake right now... but you never know. Giant killer cacti from the 15th Dimension could attack earth any day now, and my lovely bride could become a casualty of the Glorious Battle of Human Resistance. Or she could wise up and realize she married way beneath her station and dump my butt. You never know when you might get put back in the game. So, if I'm back in the game again, it stands to reason I want my odds to be as high as possible. I want every chance at success with the ladies, you know? I want as little competition as possible when I'm gunning for the next Mrs. knapplc. I've thought this out. I suppose you could extrapolate from that that I'm anti-lesbian. The answer to that is no, but for entirely different reasons.

What do you care if some dude looks at your junk? Does the gay rub off on you somehow if he does? Do you catch the gay? Does that mean you're trapped into a life of man love if some guy checks you out? Of all the crazy weird things to be worried about. You are either gay or you're not gay. If you're not gay, going to a public bathroom to urinate isn't gay and won't make you gay, and if you've got friends who give you a raft of crap about it, get more mature friends. Be comfortable enough in your own manhood not to worry about these kinds of things. Chicks don't dig dudes who worry about their manhood. I'm just sayin'.

Alex Henery Dave Grohl _________________________________________ Jared Crick Bluto _________________________________________ Luke Lingenfelter Steve-O _________________________________________ Colin Kanne Major Frank Burns

I never really truly learned, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn the night before I signed up.

Adi Kunalic Larry the Cable Guy _____________________________ Zac Lee Jerry Seinfeld _____________________________ Kody Spano Ed Norton _____________________________ (I think I'm going to hell for this one) Dr. Tom Osborne The Total Recall Automated Cabbie _____________________________ Austin Cassidy Knox Overstreet from Dead Poets Society _____________________________ Blake Lawrence Animal

Don't mistake me. I'm a huge Cubs fan. I'm just a realist.

I still can't believe that kid turned down the MLB to play football for Nevada. I mean, I guess the opportunity to play baseball will still be there, but I wouldn't risk losing potentially millions of dollars to play football in college, when you know your career will be in baseball, not football. But I guess the kid's passionate about it, so Which part of "Chicago Cubs" confuses you here?

skers, you should dye your hair blue for a game, then spend half your time yelling at the students to stand up. That'd show 'em.

This is a good thing to worry about. We should take pride in our reputation, and work hard at maintaining it, not for bragging rights, but because it's the right thing to do.

And you know that because....? I'm not about to say Zac Lee is a throwback to our old Option QBs, but he can run, and run well when asked. In terms of a runner, I'm feel assured in saying it. I've seen Lee play; I've seen Kapernick play. It's not a slam against Lee. He's a better all around QB, but Kapernick is great with this legs. Fair enough. You've probably seen Kaepernick play more often than I have, so I'll take your word for it.

And you know that because....? I'm not about to say Zac Lee is a throwback to our old Option QBs, but he can run, and run well when asked.

IBTL

Lee is a decent runner, and was listed as a dual-threat QB during recruiting. He ran for six TDs in 11 games in Jr. College. The kid has wheels. Maybe keeping that a secret is part of the plan?

This doesn't make any sense. Missouri was porous on run defense against Nevada because Colin Kaepernick posed a threat? A threat passing or running? Because neither "threat" is as much of a threat from Kaepernick. The dude just isn't that good. Through four games, playing bad defenses, Kaepernick's stats are: Colin Kaepernick YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT 2009 54 89 546 60.7 6.14 32 2 4 6 110.64 Zac Lee's stats: Zac Lee YEAR CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT 2009 68 105 927 64.8 8.83 51 7 3 3 155.21 Maybe you're talking rushing yards, where Kaepernick leads Lee by about a hundred yards on the season, but even still, Lee can run - he just hasn't been asked to yet. If Missouri was keying on Kaepernick to shut him down and sacrificing the run to do it (which seems silly, since Nevada is a run-first team), they're going to have to rethink their philosophy against the Huskers.

.....and Mizzou outgained them in the air 414-146. I should certainly hope so - Nevada is 118th out of 120 teams vs. the pass. This is nothing to brag about; Colorado could have done this. Just making sure you list ALL the facts, man....ALL the facts. You're going to get a full dose of facts here in a while. Just keep your pants on.

.....and Mizzou outgained them in the air 414-146. I should certainly hope so - Nevada is 118th out of 120 teams vs. the pass. This is nothing to brag about; Colorado could have done this.

There is no way Missouri is quicker without Coffman and Maclin. This is a pipe dream, man. Nebraska is much faster at WR after graduating the tough but slow Pederson and Swift, and replacing them with Gilleylen and Holt. Helu has greater football speed this year compared to last, and Burkhead is WAY faster than Castille. I'm not sure where you're coming up with this idea that your passing game is superior to Nebraska's. Nebraska has the same completion percentage (66%) and the same yards per catch (13) as Missouri. Missouri throws more so you have more yards per game, but you need to throw more - you have no rushing attack whatsoever. I can't recall a single prediction where people thought Nebraska should be favored by as many as two TDs last year. Most everyone was pretty realistic about what we had, and how long our road would be rebuilding.

I'm not knocking your scheduling. Look at Nebraska's 2010 schedule and see if I have any room to boast (here's a hint - I don't). You play the hand you're dealt and that's that. It's what you do with what you have that matters. When you have patsies on your schedule, you destroy them. When you have tough teams, you minimize their impact while trying to maximize yours. Watching all of Missouri's games except Furman, I do not agree that Missouri didn't struggle with these opponents. Missouri wasn't comfortably ahead in any of these games until late, with the exception of Illinois. Nevada was within one score in the fourth quarter until fumbling at the goal. You can gloss that over all you like, but the fact of the matter is that an 0-3 team at the bottom of the charts in scoring offense and defense took your team into the fourth quarter, and out-rushed you by a 3:1 ratio.

Yea... being undefeated sucks. Playing the schedule you've played, you had better hope you're undefeated. The problem Missouri has is, they haven't beaten a quality team yet, and the weak teams they've played they've struggled against.