Guy Chamberlin

This is how I recall the situation in 1994 as well... Are you sure you guys aren't talking about 1995? Yes, there was a lot of discussion who should end up starting in 1995 because Brook played so well in 1994, but Frazier was FIRMLY ENTRENCHED as the starting QB heading into 1994. Fair enough. I was definitely worried when Tommie went down in '94. Berringer had to earn the faith, which he did. Still, from the very beginning we were told Brooke was a genuine pro-style quarterback, and at the very least we were intrigued by the additional weapon that might provide. I don't remember Tommie ever not being the man, just that our secondary option at QB was better than Husker average.

New York, California and Washington return a hugely disproportionate amount of income to the U.S. economy. New York as a global financial center, and California & Washington as global patent holders, tech giants and VC incubators. The venture capital in Silicon Valley alone is bigger than most countries. Conservative messaging has tried to divide America into makers and takers. Turns out blue states do more of the making. Red states do more of the taking. It's not entirely that simple, of course, but a small-government, pro-business America built on the Kansas or Wisconsin model creates the very opposite of growth.

I think every team will be concerned about our offense I think every team sees a way to exploit our defense. No game we can't win. No game we can't lose.

I'm not saying that, in fact I don't think the problem with America is even racial. I think the real problem is a disintegration of the family unit, and an over-abundance of self-interest in society, but that is another matter. My point is that the goal of the "movement" that MRI and others take part in, or their proposed solution, is a monetary one, that awards blacks for no other reason than their skin color. It also seeks power by discrediting the moral authority of white people, and demanding affirmative action measures. All measures ignore past reparations, and their consequences. I do appreciate the social capital the movement has generated, the unity of a culture for a cause, but I regret that the cause is so...left-wing. The methodology used in these anthem protests is white guilt. If they can subconsciously convince enough whites that they have a direct role in the suffering of black person X, they gain the political power to enact the solutions they want. And regrettably I think it is working. It is true, they have a right to protest, but the message is very strategic and manipulative and false. Don't get me wrong, MRI is probably a great guy but I think his effort is misguided. Well I'd hoped you reflect more on my second sentence: The fact that the most vocal/visible activists use manipulative tactics to garner attention and influence doesn't eliminate the fact that the minority in question has a legitimate grievance, as dictated by America's founding documents themselves. You're suggesting the solution they want is reparations. Massive reparations dating back to slavery. Some do. They're not gonna get it. We all know that. Even Shelby Steele knows that. I think the solution most are looking for is to not get shot in the back by police. And to not have white people keep acting like this -- and a litany of everyday racial inequities -- isn't a problem. I really hope you try to step out of the Leftwing Marxist mindset, maybe delete the BLM "movement" all-together, and trust that millions of people who don't fit either category are in no way being strategic, manipulative or false in their actions and motives.

Yep...they sure have that angry old white male vote locked up. I always find it interesting how the deep blue states remain the economic driver of American free-enterprise.

Seriously. Take everything Donald Trump said or did up until last Friday. If you didn't disavow him then, you are far too late to be offended. This is political cover for a disaster 18 months in the making. But I'm far too depressed to gloat. It will always be shocking how many votes Donald Trump receives this November.

Funny. In Trump's final meltdown, he's speaking a lot of truth. I wouldn't want the Republican Leadership in my foxhole, either. They have been cowardly blame-shifters for several years now, and it was their vision-free obstructionism that led voters to an outsider like Trump. They've jumped on and off the ship too many times. These more "sensible" Republicans are not my allies in opposing Trump. They deserve to go down with the ship. And for Trump's information, he's been unshackled this whole time. Unshackled is what got him here, for better or worse. The only victory he can claim is the total cowing and subservience of the RNC, which is actually a pretty impressive show of power. Trump's also probably right that McCain has the dirtiest mouth in the Senate. I don't much care about the naughty words politicians utter in private. There were so many good reasons to oppose Trump before the tape came out that "grab em by the pu&&y" should be a mere coda instead of a death blow. Or at least a rap mashup, which I'm certain has already happened.

Frazier was the better college quarterback and history bore that out, but Knapp's still right. Brooke stepped in and lead the team to an undefeated season. It was by no means a no-brainer that a healthy Tommie could step back in any time he wanted. Team chemistry and a different QB skillset were in play, and there was reasonable concern that Tommie would never be fully healthy. There was certainly a healthy fan debate on the subject, though very few would have opted for Brooke straight up after Tommie delivered that first NC. But knowing Brooke Berringer was on the sidelines if Tommie went down? That was a luxury. Big 10 Network's documentary on Berringer goes through all this.

I'm pretty well-versed on Shelby Steele. He always brings up a few interesting points, then drowns them in his own strange brew of artificial victimhood. The holes in his argument are many. The fact that the most vocal/visible activists use manipulative tactics to garner attention and influence doesn't eliminate the fact that the minority in question has a legitimate grievance, as dictated by America's founding documents themselves. It's quite a stretch to declare that white guilt is the problem with America right now.

Tommy has missed a game or more every season so far, so it's a good question. The answer remains Ryker Fyfe.

A) It wouldn't be a heartbreaking loss. B) It's possible to think we'll struggle in this game, or that we could lose, without it being attributed to PTSD from past Husker teams. C) It's fine that you're not impressed by them. Let's compare their numbers to Nebraska's: Indiana • @ Florida International 2-4 (Beat FAU and UTEP) - Indiana won 34-13 • Ball State 4-2 (Beat FAU, NIU, Georgia St and e. Kentucky) - Indiana won 30-20 • Wake Forest 5-1 (Beat Duke, Syracuse, Indiana, Delaware St and Tulane) - Indiana Lost 28-33 • Michigan State 2-3 (Beat Furman and Notre Dame) - Indiana Won 24-21 @ Ohio State 5-0 (Beat BGSU, Tulsa, OU, Rutgers and Indiana) - Indiana lost 38-17 PPG - 26.6 (81st) PAPG - 25 (55th) Opponent's Combined Record - 18-10 Strength of Schedule - 57th Nebraska • Fresno State 1-5 (Beat Sacramento State) - Nebraska won 43-10 • Wyoming 4-2 (Beat Illinois State and Colorado State) - Nebraska won 52-17 • Oregon 2-4 (Beat California-Davis and Virginia) - Nebraska won 35-32 • Northwestern 2-3 (Beat Duke and Iowa) - Nebraska won 24-13 • Illinois 1-4 (Beat Murray State) - Nebraska won 31-16 PPG - 37 (33rd) PAPG - 17.6 (17th) Opponent's Combined Record - 10-15 Strength of Schedule - 82nd We are definitely a better team on paper. Nobody is disputing that. But the amount that we're better is open to some interpretation, and doesn't have any super compelling evidence either way. Given that this is a sport (aka something where you don't know what will happen), that it's the B1G, that they played OSU tough, and that we have hardly played anyone with a pulse to test the true merit of our own team, it's not unreasonable to expect this game to be a dogfight. A) Losing to Indiana would break my heart, theres just no reason for it. B) We have struggled at one time or another in every game thus far, it's not unexpected. Their body of work is only impressive because they kind of hung with Ohio State for a while, the game was over by the 4th quarter. If we emulate the Buckeye gameplan a bit we should be fine, 4th quarter is our best quarter. It's not going to be a cakewalk, but I don't expect a dogfight either. Wait a minute. You didn't mention that Nebraska beat Wyoming which beat Air Force which beat Navy which beat #6 Houston.

I think lazy pollsters also saw Michigan State and Iowa drop out of contention and kept a slot open for a Big 10 team.

So, basically, this season's South Park storyline? Pretty much. If only they had brought back that talking turd.

Also, evangelical Christians who lined up for Trump — including Ralph Reed — just lost the right to question anyone else's moral character. Moral character no longer matters, and the latest tape should never have been the deciding factor. Go ahead and vote for pro-life candidates and be honest about it. But you can't talk about moral character in elections anymore. Was it worth it?

Whatever you might think about Michael Moore, the theories he puts forth below have been circulating among insiders from the very beginning. It makes more sense than most conspiracy theories. Especially since it's not a conspiracy as much as an out-of-control trajectory: http://michaelmoore.com/TrumpSabotage/

Has anyone here seen the old movie "A Face In the Crowd?" The ending always seemed a bit over-the-top for the sake of cinematic drama. Now it's looking more like a documentary.

One game at a time. There is absolutely no reason not to be concerned about Indiana.

It shows that when the running game is working, the running game works. And the running game doesn't work as well without a legitimate passing threat, something Langsdorf and pretty much every coach understands better than the guys who can't stop using the phrase "pass happy." Did you watch the Illinois game? At the end of the 3rd quarter Nebraska had 89 yards rushing. Would you say that's going good? Because we stuck with it we were able to put them away. Spin it however you want. The numbers don't lie. I was thrilled to watch our offensive line come together and Terrell Newby step up and have Nebraska power its way to a fourth quarter win. But it's not like we didn't run the ball in the first half. It's that we ran it better. Either wearing Illinois down or countering their defensive adjustments or both. There will be games where the defense does better against our running game. Langsdorf will have to adjust and you'll freak out. Remember, some folks scream when three consecutive rushing plays don't get that crucial first down. That fumble hurts just as much as an interception. Or to look at it another way, Nebraska scored 52 points in its most pass-happy game against Wyoming. The most points of the season. Using your logic, Langsdorf should have stayed pass happy because that's what works. See? Numbers do lie. All the time. Do you understand that a big reason we lost 7 games last year was mostly due to the fact that we abandoned the running game? We are also 4-0 this year because we have actually stuck with it. Is a coincidence that we are killing teams in the 4th quarter? Keep deluding yourself into thinking that passing the ball is going to take us to the promised land but I'll point out we've had 3 losing seasons in 5 years in your preferred offense. I'm not sure you really read my post.

It shows that when the running game is working, the running game works. And the running game doesn't work as well without a legitimate passing threat, something Langsdorf and pretty much every coach understands better than the guys who can't stop using the phrase "pass happy." Did you watch the Illinois game? At the end of the 3rd quarter Nebraska had 89 yards rushing. Would you say that's going good? Because we stuck with it we were able to put them away. Spin it however you want. The numbers don't lie. I was thrilled to watch our offensive line come together and Terrell Newby step up and have Nebraska power its way to a fourth quarter win. But it's not like we didn't run the ball in the first half. It's that we ran it better. Either wearing Illinois down or countering their defensive adjustments or both. There will be games where the defense does better against our running game. Langsdorf will have to adjust and you'll freak out. Remember, some folks scream when three consecutive rushing plays don't get that crucial first down. That fumble hurts just as much as an interception. Or to look at it another way, Nebraska scored 52 points in its most pass-happy game against Wyoming. The most points of the season. Using your logic, Langsdorf should have stayed pass happy because that's what works. See? Numbers do lie. All the time.

It shows that when the running game is working, the running game works. And the running game doesn't work as well without a legitimate passing threat, something Langsdorf and pretty much every coach understands better than the guys who can't stop using the phrase "pass happy."

And that's the problem. White people don't know what it's like to be black and the day-to-day hardships they face. There may be some instances where being black is an advantage, but they are very few and very far between. Read this and get back to me: http://www.deanza.edu/faculty/lewisjulie/White%20Priviledge%20Unpacking%20the%20Invisible%20Knapsack.pdf I agree that white people don't know what it's like to be black. However, black people don't know what it's like to be Hispanic. Neither know what it's like to be white. We can play this game all day long. What this really boils down to is intolerance. We here in Nebraska have a prime example around the Lexington area. There are three different minority groups that work within the slaughter house. These three different minority groups are extremely intolerant of one another which has caused quite a few problems. The gang activity and such is a little rough especially for a town as small as 10,000 people. Whether I live long enough to see the day or not, we are currently undergoing a massive change in culture. It's expected by 2060 that nearly one third of the U.S. population will be Hispanic. According to the Pew Research Center, blacks and Hispanics have large differences on core issues. The majority of blacks believe there is a bias against them while most Hispanics reject the idea that blacks frequently face discrimination. Roughly only half of the Hispanic population says they get along with blacks while roughly 30% of Hispanics say they don't get along at all. To put into perspective, this is a larger percentage than whites saying they don't get along with blacks. Time may very well heal most wounds, but I'm not sure here in the U.S. with our diverse population that it will ever happen. I think if you had more unity of core values you would obtain more social capital Blacks and HIspanics and lower-income whites share stronger Christian values and church-going habits that the average American. But we all share the same desire to feel morally and socially superior to some poor bastard out there, and it's always a bit easier when their skin is color-coded.

Jamal Lord may have been a baller, but the one-dimensional system he operated didn't help him or the team. As a Senior, Lord completed 48% of his passes and averaged 4.4 yards a carry on a team that averaged 24 points a game. That was back when our defense could still keep us in a lot of games. But offensively, our best play that year was often a broken play where Lord was forced to scramble. He was good at that. Made him a baller. But not a good QB. And yeah, Jamal Lord by himself didn't get Frank fired. But those 2003 - 2004 seasons featured some pretty homely football. Fairly or not, it made a case that Nebraska wasn't geared for 21st Century football.

Slippery slope!

As it currently stands, any business that denigrates a former employee to a prospective employer is subject to legal action by said employee. They might be a perfectly decent person. Or a train wreck you'd be morally obliged to warn against. But if someone calls HR asking about an employee, HR is instructed to only divulge the dates of employment.

Gotta admit I'm wary of people attempting the "help me understand" approach when they don't seem to mean it. Despite or because of your super politeness, Joe, I'm getting that vibe from you. Please don't pretend people misinterpreted Post #868 & #870. You're laying out some very pass-aggressive sh#t.