307husker

Simple and Easy are not necessarily synonymous terms.

I really hate to see these types of things. Hope he heals and rehabs well and still gets a shot to fulfill his dreams.

That's pretty spot on. I think Riley is a great guy, and I want him to succeed, but I just don't see him ever being super successful at NU. Don't believe everything you think, or type. Especially this load of BS.

From my uneducated point of view, it's more difficult to discuss the Offensive Line vs the skill positions because it's a unit, rather than an individual. Ideally, the line unit is greater than the sum of its parts but that is a difficult concept to predict when looking at the parts. The Offensive Line seems to have a lot of intangibles involved that only become visible when the unit is running full speed under the stress of game conditions. I couldn't begin to predict the performance of a unit like that, but feel like I can at least make a sort of educated guess on the performance of skilled individuals who perform individually.

I've been meaning to start this thread on "Cord Cutting Husker Fans". We dropped cable in January of this year and the ONLY thing I miss, is live sports and the upcoming Husker football season has me considering my options. I'm not very techy, and would appreciate advice from those who are good at this game. Thanks in advance!!!

We almost had a Heisman winner from the defensive side of the ball in Suh. We know how to play that game and win it this time...

That's really well stated Sgt Red.

I was once an expert on parenting, with brilliant clarity on all topics... ...and then I had children. I seem to know very little about parenting now that I'm experiencing it.

bullsh#t. To all of this. Says someone who isn't a parent. I've never had a girlfriend. I guess I could understand dragging a girl down 3 flights of stairs by the hair. Especially if it was done by a star football player. Boys will be boys. I'm not Victor, but I think he was trying to make a comment from a parents point of view. Of course, you have to chime in with your opinion, and slamming Victor's opinion. I know you are entitled to your thoughts, but I just think it's lame when someone who has no idea what it's like to be a parent to give advice on how to be a parent. I'm not defending what Ajman Green has done, but I can understand where it can be extremely difficult to deal with a kid who is being a sh#t. You have no idea what I know and don't know. I would never hit a kid. I've been around enough to know that. I've babysat 4 pre-teens at the same time, for 8 hours a day, 4 months straight, 2 years in a row. I babysit my niece and nephew all the time. Telling me I can't have an opinion on this is idiotic. Btw, I have 3 future kids. They just didn't come out of my body. Of course you can have an opinion, but those of us with kids also understand that it's an uninformed opinion. Violence against kids isn't acceptable but there is a lot of grey area in the area of physical contact and that's why this subject is argued ad infinitum.

Maybe this is a good thing for the team. Sounds like we will still benefit from his knowledge and wisdom but have a younger, likely more energetic coach on the field.

QB 1, whichever Husker fills this role, I expect/hope there will be a big improvement in QB play this year.

Besides screwing the kid over... It's also a terrible look to recruits. You only do this if it's your last option and Patrick is begging the coaches. The other side of that coin is that you may be saying to our current older players, "sorry guys, the future is more important than the present but thanks for everything". While unlikely, playing in the CCG is still possible and a pretty good bowl game. Let's take care of the bird in the hand rather than putting all of our chips down on what might be lurking in the bush.

^^^I completely agree.

Think AJ Bush is regretting his decision to leave?

And how do they determine if he's symptomatic? Um, they ask him... There is an objective component and a subjective component to the process. I'm certain that they've done the best they can to design a process that eliminates subjectivity but it's not possible to eliminate it completely. Dx in brain situations is nuanced, not black and white.

As I posted in your status update, there's no way you can do that as a coach. If TA can play he starts. If he can't start he doesn't play. Why? Because if he can't start it means he can't play. There's no gray area in concussions. Either you are cleared or you aren't. I understand if he's cleared he can play. But, if he is just skating past the line to play they may consider letting him sit unless actually needed to get the win. Why risk longer term injury against Minnesota if we don't have to? Maybe he's cleared, but he isn't playing well enough to start yet from some lingering effects. It's just not that black and white. Actually, concussion protocol is pretty black and white. Either he's cleared to play or he's not. The point being made is that even if he passes the protocol - there could be reason to still hold him out, unless they decide they need him for the win at some point during the game. If he passes the protocol he starts. I see no reason to even contemplate sitting him "unless needed". What would that reason be? If he has some lingering fatigue or vertigo/dizzyness. If he isn't cleared before he can practice at all, how do they know what his actual status is? Or say he gets cleared tomorrow, then during practice it's clear he isn't all there yet. This just isn't how the concussion protocol works. He will not have any symptoms if he is cleared through the protocol. I don't know why people aren't listening or reading the link from Sam McKewon's tweet. If he is cleared, he is good to go 100%. There is no other way to do it in concussion protocol. I don't know how much clearer the multiple posters in this thread can make this. "If he is cleared, he is good to go 100%."This statement is somewhat naive. Yes, the protocol is binary, pass or fail. However, the symptomatic data used to arrive at that binary decision, is subjective and relies upon the report of symptoms by an extremely competitive individual in a culture that values toughness. See where the problem may lie? Think a patient/player may lie in order to get past the protocol? It's not like it's hard to figure out what the "right" answers are to their questions. Determining pass/fail takes a bit more interpretation than you seem to understand. I'll trust the doctors to make the best decision that they can, with the information that they have. Thank you ^ Actually you are somewhat wrong. I've gone through the concussion protocol used by many schools. Not only is it subjective and symptom free reporting but there are multiple cognitive baseline tests that must be passed as well. Some are physical examination but the majority are a computer program. The key phrase was "symptomatic data". I doubt that he would even be practicing if he weren't able to pass the objective cognitive portions of the evaluation.

As I posted in your status update, there's no way you can do that as a coach. If TA can play he starts. If he can't start he doesn't play. Why? Because if he can't start it means he can't play. There's no gray area in concussions. Either you are cleared or you aren't. I understand if he's cleared he can play. But, if he is just skating past the line to play they may consider letting him sit unless actually needed to get the win. Why risk longer term injury against Minnesota if we don't have to? Maybe he's cleared, but he isn't playing well enough to start yet from some lingering effects. It's just not that black and white. Actually, concussion protocol is pretty black and white. Either he's cleared to play or he's not. The point being made is that even if he passes the protocol - there could be reason to still hold him out, unless they decide they need him for the win at some point during the game. If he passes the protocol he starts. I see no reason to even contemplate sitting him "unless needed". What would that reason be? If he has some lingering fatigue or vertigo/dizzyness. If he isn't cleared before he can practice at all, how do they know what his actual status is? Or say he gets cleared tomorrow, then during practice it's clear he isn't all there yet. This just isn't how the concussion protocol works. He will not have any symptoms if he is cleared through the protocol. I don't know why people aren't listening or reading the link from Sam McKewon's tweet. If he is cleared, he is good to go 100%. There is no other way to do it in concussion protocol. I don't know how much clearer the multiple posters in this thread can make this. "If he is cleared, he is good to go 100%." This statement is somewhat naive. Yes, the protocol is binary, pass or fail. However, the symptomatic data used to arrive at that binary decision, is subjective and relies upon the report of symptoms by an extremely competitive individual in a culture that values toughness. See where the problem may lie? Think a patient/player may lie in order to get past the protocol? It's not like it's hard to figure out what the "right" answers are to their questions. Determining pass/fail takes a bit more interpretation than you seem to understand. I'll trust the doctors to make the best decision that they can, with the information that they have.

If they hadn't set a certain precedent with Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, this might be a decent point. I thought the NFL should stay out of those situations also. We have a legal system for legal things. Seems a bit of an overreach for the NFL to be investigating and punishing their employees beyond the legal system when the crimes do not affect their jobs directly. I do understand the fan reaction/PR/marketing dilemma of these situations though so I'm not sure there is an easy answer.

Not sure why the NFL is responsible for his personal life.

"Recovery" is subjective. Are there objective tests for "recovery"? I can't think of any. It's sort of an amorphous term, based largely, IMO, on emotional/mental factors. Cryotherapy, to reduce blood flow via vasoconstriction, for a defined injury, is a more measurable and objective entity. Based on a very brief look, WBC only cools the skin, rather than the deeper tissues (muscles, tendon, ligament, etc.) which would be the more significant target of cryotherapy in its traditional form, ie ice packs applied to specific areas.

Icing an injury is different than icing for recovery. I don't think they have a great deal to do with each other...

2-3 minutes in cold air, a very poor conductor, is not likely having a significant effect on any tissues deeper than skin, and thus the CNS. Cryotherapy in training, I would agree, is possibly reducing long term adaptation, which is increasingly believed to be reliant upon inflammatory markers. IOW, suppressing inflammation reduces the training effect of the exercise. However, in season, the goal is not to adapt to exercise, but to "feel better" and be ready to play again ASAP. "Slowing recovery" is just as unlikely as "speeding recovery" in a tissue sense (both unlikely IMO though I have not reviewed the literature extensively), other than the effects to the CNS, and the belief of the individual receiving the "therapy". We, humans, are not robots. Our emotions and beliefs are likely one of the biggest factors in our performance. Elite athletes do all sorts of weird crap (see US Olympic swimmers and their cupping "hickeys") and believe that it helps their performance. I am of the opinion that if they believe it helps, it probably does, the human mind is a very powerful thing, (though easily tricked and confused to believe all sorts of hooey.)

"No evidence to support" does not mean that it isn't useful for individuals. If the kid feels like it helps, it probably does, maybe only because of that belief.

All sorts of NCAA sports do training trips. I spent a couple of weeks in Hawaii that way. It didn't suck.

I would prefer a standing broad jump, more posterior chain focus, rather than VJ but either one helps to test neural speed and strength/weight ratio. Both of which are valid measures of power production. Do Husker football players squat high or low bar? Interesting question, significant difference, I have no idea what they actually do.