hskrpwr13

They're all nice looking. I'll let someone else twist the thread in another direction.

I've gone down on Debbie, and pumped 'er full of sunshine. What does that make me?

I agree, RR. I'm a Bo-liever too. There are some advantages and disadvantages to being the coach of a big-time program. Where I guess I still get a bit of a contradiction from Bo is that he seems to agree that the program is not quite up to where it should, can, or used to be. Yet he seems to get 'annoyed' when those outside the program (fans) voice displeasure with the program not being where it should, can, or used to be (I harkin back to his response to the booing against OSU when the team was down 24-3 and had hardly shown signs of being a top25 prior to that point in the season). He has high expectations. So do many of us fans. He needs to appreciate that 'we're' going to react negatively too when the team performs under expectations. And unfortunately, like it or not, as the head coach, Bo has to act more level-headed than the fans regardless of the team's performance. IMO, Bo really needs to clean up the highlighted perception. It would probably smooth over a lot of other areas where some fans take issue.

If we didnt' give that scholly to the walk-on contributer...would he leave the program? I don't think he would. So while only 50% of recruits pan out...that's 50% more than we would have gotten if we'd give the scholly away. and your quote... ...but that walk-on wasn't going anywhere so what did we lose? Chris, heres where the argument lies...If NU's walk-on program wasn't what it is, would we ever get these walk-ons that end up panning out if there's virtually no chance of achieving the scholly reward if earned? If a guy thinks he was good enough to get a scholly, but was overlooked, and wants to walk on to prove differently, why go to NU? Why not walk on at USC, OSU, etc? I don't believe too many walk-ons come to Nebraska banking on getting a scholarhip. They are there because they are Nebraska kids who love the university. I still feel like we'd have classes similar to where we are now. It's not that they'd NEVER get a scholly...just less frequently. Again, I'm just starting a non-QB discussion so no worries...was just thinking about the numbers. Personally I feel that every university should be allow 2-3 OVER the 85 limit, specifically given to walk-ons with the condition that they have been in the program for 3 years (so a redshirt Junior). I think it would help align a university more with their region. The Nebraska football team is 50% Texas. (might be a little exageration). I'd like to see more Nebraska kids on there...but I'd like to see it not at the expense of a Texas 3*, etc. I like that idea. It'll never happen, but its a good thought.

If we didnt' give that scholly to the walk-on contributer...would he leave the program? I don't think he would. So while only 50% of recruits pan out...that's 50% more than we would have gotten if we'd give the scholly away. and your quote... ...but that walk-on wasn't going anywhere so what did we lose? Chris, heres where the argument lies...If NU's walk-on program wasn't what it is, would we ever get these walk-ons that end up panning out if there's virtually no chance of achieving the scholly reward if earned? If a guy thinks he was good enough to get a scholly, but was overlooked, and wants to walk on to prove differently, why go to NU? Why not walk on at USC, OSU, etc?

How many recruits generally show for (other) elite programs' Junior Days?

I think you present a fair premise. I'd add this question: Do we get an exhorbitant amount of walk-ons (compared nationally) because there is a believe that if a scholly is earned on the field, the coaches will appropriately reward that walk-on. I'd prefer NU reward the walk-on that's competing at the "high" level, than keep said walk-on "down" in hopes that the schollarship lands an equal or better recruit. Ultimately, I don't think doing it the way you propose would net the recruits you're hoping it will. I'd like to see NU keep their walk-on program tops in the country, by rewarding those that deserve it since you already know what you're getting out of that scholly, instead of hoping with a new recruit. I also think that keeps team unity in tact (dont want to piss-off a player performing at a 5* level because a player performing at a lesser level is getting a free ride).

bwahahah! That is hilarious...and a 0% chance it's true. Thats what I thought. ESPN just going with their old tricks. They just want to get as many eyes to watch as possible and we all know Nebraska doesn't have electricity, so they need to boost the hopes of a team that is out of it to help their ratings The sarcasm icon is fine, but I sometimes wonder if there isn't a "man bites dog" quality to some of these insider predictions.

I would say "yes" due to perception that we couldn't land a 5* even with two relatives being part of the program. Owa was a 4* with no ties. Both positions are/were a need.

What do you mean by "we are at play"? There is a false perception out there that our coaches don't recruit much in season which isn't true. We do whats allowed by NCAA bylaws. Can't find the words to really describe what I am trying to say. Cool. What da skers posted is about what I thought you might have meant.

What do you mean by "we are at play"?

Kind of what I was wondering. Why have this formal announcement then leak the decision prior?

LOL, Minnesota....

I voted for the $50 option, and even that was a bit of a stretch. Based on the linked article the event seems mostly like a glorified pep rally/program orientation. There's definitely more value in the live atmosphere. Live, I might be willing to pay half of what's currently charged. At the end of the article, McKewon sums up my biggest turn-off in paying full price for the live event, and significantly lowers what I'd pay for online: "But the stuff I think fans really want to know — sets, schemes, run/pass ratio — remains under wraps until Sept. 3. Football 202 didn't answer those questions."

Sheraton Pasadena is $151 a night with AAA, very close to the stadium, and a pretty nice hotel. I'm booked the 6th-8th. Going to San Francisco/Napa for 4 days before, then to Vegas for 3 days after! Woohoo! Can't wait!!! I haven't looked yet myself, but $150 for this game seems awfully steep. I'm guessing the game doesn't even sell out. I've got a party of 4 driving from Phx and a buddy coming down from the Sacramento area. Unless we try for primo seats, I don't think we'll have much problem landing tix around face value.

I am confused also, I thought he was a member of the Pitt staff until this past year. I know it was often talked about during televised Pitt games how he liked being able to coach and see his QB son play at the same time. I think you're thinking of the Pitt QB. Maybe they're related.

Or it could mean that Beck wants more than just two legit QB options on the active roster. If I'm not mistaken, if he ends up not playing a down, the program could then apply for the season to be considered 'red shirt'.

Gotta say that the Irish fans on that page were pretty classy about it. EDIT: Were thinking alike, kchusker.

Me too. However, I'm glad that he put something out there now instead of waiting til Feb 1.

Have to disagree with you there. Solich was great until after 2001 when the last of TO's recruits had graduated (the Crouch class).

LOL I'm gonna get crucified for this, but especially to read what outsiders think of NU, I frequent ESPN, mostly the B1G Blog. It was especially entertaining and informative on the Big12 Blog previous to this past season. The obvious problem is wading through the higher percentage of trolls than other places, but even though ESPN is ES(EC)PN, with the blog sections, I think they probably have the best overall cf coverage.

I think this article highlights issue #1 with this program: Inconsistency. A fair amount of good, and more than we'd like poor. I can't say this about Devaney or Osborne (in a good way). I can't say this about the Callahan era (in a bad way). I probably CAN say this about the Solich era.

knapp, I know this isn't the point of your post, but I'll never forget the consistent 'We're not going to try to fit round pegs in square holes' comments. The lack of intellectual respect was infuriating. I kept thinking, "Thats exactly what you're trying to do, you ass." Anyway..... Not a "dig" on Bo, but I am less impressed with 9-win seasons than I was during the TO era. The team plays more games now; parity be damned. Hopefully, we'll get back to being an 80%+ win progam soon (and hopefully not just because the schedule lightens).

No. But there is a touch of foreshadowing in it. Thanks, da skers. I'll keep my eyes open.

Is the "scathing" article we should have been awaiting? If so, I don't read anything that necessarily appears slanted. http://bigredtoday.com/article/20120107/BIGRED/701079799#shatel-nu-sky-not-falling-despite-struggles