SkullandBones

What an awful performance by this team. After already turning in an extremely disappointing season they play like this? Watson and his entire offensive staff should be fired before they leave San Diego. Never have I seen a dumber team nor dumber coaching staff. Horrible penalties, horrible play calling, horrible motivation, horrible desire. Even Pelini has to take a good share of the blame for this embarrassment. So many outsiders have said he is like a bully and this team looks like the proverbial bully. As soon as Washington stood up to them, they crumbled. Especially on the offensive side of the ball. Just shameful to play like this in front of a national audience. Embarrassing.

Could not have put it better. Although I'd go on to say that Pelini has to take the Lion's share of the blame, this is all on him. Yeah Watson needs to go, but this team wasn't prepared at all. It's time to re-evaluate this entire staff, starting with the Head Man. This aint NU football, not by any stretch.

Skull and Bones - I gotcha. We're cool.

Wow. He may actually be the king of unflattering posters.

Curling? So because there are like eight legitimate things you can do on snow/ice and the Olympics has to stretch the very fabric of the meaning of the word "sport" to fill out an events roster, you think that somehow makes NASCAR a sport? Psssshhhhh.

 

Curling is a sport like darts is a sport, like tiddlywinks is a sport. If they had an indoor card-game Olympics, would that suddenly make Bridge a sport? There'd be octogenarian Olympians galore if they did.

 

Racing is called "the sport of Kings" but you're mistaking the use of the word sport. "Sport" in that connotation is a derivative of the word "disport," which is "To amuse oneself in a light, frolicsome manner." It is not a sport like running or jumping or... football.

 

NASCAR is not a sport. It is an activity. Sitting on your ass turning left is not a sport.

 

I have nothing against NASCAR or any form of racing, but if you're going to accuse me of being "Intolerant, insulting and ignorant" I can dress it down in no uncertain terms. Your call.

No. I certainly wasn't talking to you when I said that. I was debating the definition of sport with you, something that is so completely subjective you're never going to find any kind of consensus on it, regardless of who you talk to. Did not know the whole 'disport' thing btw, that was informative. I think - and a fairly significant number of others - think auto racing is a sport. You - and a fairly significant number of others - don't. Oh well, we disagree. Some people actually watch soccer, which I find unbelieveable. But, more power to 'em.

I was refering to foppa who said: "NAASCAR = WWE = Not a real sport. I understand why so many rednecks watch it though...the ones that can actually afford a TV (or steal one, or sell one of their 16 children to get one) appreciate that they only need to use half of the 2 braincells they have left to watch a car do circles for 9 hours straight. I think even science-experiment monkeys would get bored of this, but oh well. NASSCAR should never be on TV unless it is in the weekday noon soap opera time slot, and should NEVER be mentioned as a debate as to whether it should be on instead of College football, NFL, high school football, Canadian football, my next-door neighbor kids playing touch football, etc. It will be a travesty if the game is on in the morning because of the redneck races."

That is what I consider intolerant, insulting and ignorant. Mostly ignorant.

By that same argument anything requiring skill would then be a sport, as long as it was done with money on the line and/or a large audience watching. This would include any one of the umpteen cake-baking shows on TV these days. Tiger Woods couldn't bake any of those cakes. Making one requires tons of skill, and the process is physically demanding. But just because it involves strength, skill and a level of talent under pressure that the normal Joe doesn't have, that doesn't make it a sport.

Curling is considered a sport, an Olympic one in fact...and it looks easier than baking. I've no clue where baking stands on the list of toughest household jobs, but if I'm making the list it's well ahead of sweeping. How 'bout horse racing? It's the sport of kings right? And the twenty-four and a half pound guys on top of those half-ton horses are the very definition of 'along for the ride'. Still, it's considered a sport.

NASCAR is a sport. It's not a game, but it is a sport. Football of course is a sport, but it's a game...best one on the planet if you ask me. Not all games are sports, but by the same token not all sports are games.

And congrats to Foppa for not being a bigot! Intolerant, insulting and ignorant generalizations of a group of people is universally considered not predjudiced if you are fairly certain the people you are talking about have the same skin color as you! Well Done!

This game should be a night game especially if NU and UT are going into the matchup undefeated. The atmosphere in Memorial Stadium at night is amazing. It is hard to believe that NASCAR would have more viewers than this match up, but I may be naive with my estimate of car racing fans.

First of all I totally agree, this should be a night game, and as both a Husker fan and a NASCAR fan, I'd watch the Nebraska game without even thinking twice. It's going to be hard to watch the race anyway since I'll be at the game. But nationaly man, there isn't a regular season football game in the country that could get close to the same advertising revenue numbers a cup race puts up. I have no idea for sure but my guess is that the revenue from a college football game probably wouldn't even cover a network's production costs for a race weekend, but their advertising from that weekend does. Look at this way; When a network/s cover a NASCAR "race" they have coverage of up to three different races that weekend, qualifying for those three races, and practices, plus pre/post race productions for all. So you're looking at around twenty or more hours of live coverage on a given weekend...and I can guarantee you over half of that coverage is advertising. So, my guess is they won't bump the Cup race, but I've been wrong before.

3rd and ten with a couple of minutes to go, down by 2 deep inside your own end and you call a bomb down the middle. Definately boo worthy.

I guess when you really think about it..

 

Having Larry play OU is sorta like having a Zoo in Africa.

Possibly the funniest thing I've read today.

I'm kind of interested in checking out the online betting thing. I wouldnt bet the house, only small stuff. A few games each year I think the Huskers will lose for sure... if the point spread is right, why not.

Like anything else it can be fun in moderation. A friend of mine and I do it every year, we put a certain amount in an on-line account - ususally like 100 dollars - and see who has the most at the end of the year. We put a 10 dollar cap on each game (well, 11 actually but you see my point)

To the question, yes, sort of. I've bet NU against the spread. If I think NU will win, but not necessarily win by 30 points for example, I don't really consider that betting 'against' them. And if they do happen to cover some ungodly point spread, so much the better.

 

Terrell Davis= 6th round- 196th overall

Olandis Gary= 4th round- 120th overall

Mike Anderson= 6th round- 189th overall

Clinton Portis=- 2nd round- 51st overall

 

It's not like these were first round guys, they picked Ruben Drougns off the free agent market and turned him into a 1000 yard rusher. The same line techniques that Denver used found their way to Atlanta, and the results have been the same since.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, they had a great line back when they were a running back factory..not everyone in the NFL was in love with some of their blocking techniques but that's another argument for another day. I guess my only point is had you asked the Packers in 97 who they'd rather face in the Denver's backfield for the Superbowl Vaughn Hebron or Terell Davis, they'd probably have opted for Hebron, even though he played behind the same line. That's it. Also during that time Denver had guys like Elway, Smith, Sharpe and McCaffrey for def coords to worry about too. If a team's number one guy is out, you hope you can take advantage. But, as someone else pointed out, the real threat with VT is Taylor. He needs to be contained.

The health of the offensive line has a far greater impact on a team's running game than which RB totes the rock-usually.

 

Huh? An average back behind an outstanding line looks like an average back. An outstanding back behind an average line looks like an outstanding back. Yes, a steady O line is a big part of any running game, but to say that because you have a good line a coach can put anyone with cleats on back there and get the same results as his number one guy is just wrong.

 

There is this team in the NFL called the Denver Broncos under Shanahan, you should look up some of their RB that no one had heard of that ran for 1000 yards b/c they had the best OL in football.

 

The OL is absolutely the most important thing, hands down. You can be as great as you want, if there aren't any holes to run through what the hell are you going to do?

Yeah, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson..Portis.. no talent there to be sure.

The health of the offensive line has a far greater impact on a team's running game than which RB totes the rock-usually.

 

Huh? An average back behind an outstanding line looks like an average back. An outstanding back behind an average line looks like an outstanding back. Yes, a steady O line is a big part of any running game, but to say that because you have a good line a coach can put anyone with cleats on back there and get the same results as his number one guy is just wrong.

 

I took it to mean, "If you have a crap O-line, it doesn't matter much who you have back there. If there are no holes, there are no holes. If you get lit up in the backfield, chances are you're usually not going to get away. If you have a great O-line, you'll obviously do even better with a great RB, but you can have a middle of the pack RB and still maintain something of a running game behind a great O-line."

 

 

 

Obviously if you put the towelboy in, you're not going to get much in the way of results no matter what. But let's face it, most I-A RB's are not towelboys.

 

The part in blue is exactly what I meant.

 

And, Virginia Tech does pretty much reload along the OL.

Fair enough, I get what you're saying. I still think though that average is average. Every RB at Va Tech lines up behind the same O line, there's a reason one of em was at the top of the depth chart, my guess he's better than the other guys. Take him out and it's an advantage to whoever they're playing. Probably not a game changer, but who kows. Going into that stadium we'll take whatever edge we can get.

The health of the offensive line has a far greater impact on a team's running game than which RB totes the rock-usually.

Huh? An average back behind an outstanding line looks like an average back. An outstanding back behind an average line looks like an outstanding back. Yes, a steady O line is a big part of any running game, but to say that because you have a good line a coach can put anyone with cleats on back there and get the same results as his number one guy is just wrong.

 

Just one question - how many minutes per side does one grill owl?

Great Vince, now we're gonna have those PETA a$$ h*&es all over us.

He's a condom!!!! NOT cool!

Amen.

I don't have a problem finishing second to a service academy, as far as venue goes. As great of a tradition as we have here, you compare it to the history of the US Army, Navy, Marines or Air Force...eh, we're probably second. And that's what the academies celebrate, is their history....our history.

It was a good read, and yeah, every little bit helps. The part about them having trouble picking up pressure was interesting, that's got to be one of the hardest skills for a young or inexperienced back to get good at, heck even the really good ones hardly ever master it.

Except that wasn't how it was last year. Almost. But neither Thenarse/O'Hanlon were blackshirts.

You know what I meant. O'Hanlon will have a blackshirt when the season starts. Thenarse starts opposite of Asante and will have a blackshirt.

It's hard to imagine a scenario where Suh doesn't have his before the season starts.

No, it's not. I really doubt Bo would give 11 players blackshirts for the awesomeness of 1 player. Until that 11th player can earn it, nobody has a blackshirt.

Wrong. If you are a defensive starter, you are a f..ing black shirt. Do You understand the tradition General? The first team defense.....blackshirts. This is Husker 101.

We will know who the Blackshirts are after fall camp.

I think Zac and his receivers will hit their strides as the season progresses, until then a powerful running game takes some pressure off and let's not forget about the TEs. McNeill and Young will be huge safety valves while Lee settles in. If Cotton gets the O-line straitened out - which he will - I don't think there's much, if any, drop-off.

I understand the point. And still disagree. I just don't want us to start sounding and acting like Missouri - focusing on one team and then tanking the others. Ya dig?

 

I know exactly what the point is, though. And, then I will throw it for a loop and claim that the road actually goes through CU. KU/MU/NU all go TO Boulder this year.

 

 

God, is it football season YET???!! Enough talk, let's see some action!

OK. Fair enough.

Obviously. The point being that should everything play out the way expected - and yes, there are no guarantees here in the first week of August, but - the road to Dallas goes through Lawrence this year.

We talk about this at work everyday and my reply every single time.... "it's still Baylor". As much as I want to see them get into bowls and 8+ win season, it won't happen. With them being in the south and having to play OU, OSU, and UT every year, it's going to be another rough ride down in Waco.

 

 

Good point.

 

OU and Texas are untouchable --- no one in the north has a hope against them in the foreseeable future.

 

The way that A&M is recruiting, in due course they will be very, very competitive --- likely better than any team in the North (currently no... but within a year or two almost certainly). Oklahoma State and Texas Tech are better than any team in the North too. so...

 

Baylor is up against it. They are the last program in the B12 South. They will finish last in the South. Now ... if Baylor were in the B12 North, they would be legitimate contenders for the title... or, at the very least, outside shots. They are comparable to NU and MU now (maybe not quite there, but close enough to be in the same category) and just a hair below the level of Kansas.

 

I think that any team in the B12 North from this next year would end up 5th or 6th in the B12 South. The disparity is huge.

 

Because Baylor is in the B12 South, their record will not reflect how good they are. They are a solid program now. Not far behind NU.

So, should we just pack it in now seeings as how there's no real point in trying to compete against the mighty South?

this is a great thread right now b/c this is the arguably most important game on both teams schedules. like the poster above, i tend to think NU's ball control style and ability to run the ball will decide this game. i see it being VERY close though and one mistake from either team could end up being the real reason why one loses.....

Now that I can agree with.

NU didn't beat KU last year b/c Joe outplayed Todd. NU won b/c our defense was better then KUs (which will be the same this year) and we dominated the line of scrimmage (which will be the same this year). Todd Reesing is everything to that team...Joe was a piece of the puzzle just like Lee will be this year. Switch Joe with Todd and KU wins 2 less games (MU and the huge comeback vs. ISU) last year and NU probably wins 2 more games (Va Tech - take away that early pick....and Texas Tech - take that late pick away).

Oh yeah, I forgot about the big comeback against perenial powerhouse Iowa State. Way to get it done Todd.

OK, that little joke being made, I'll still take Ganz. Not sure how you assume Reesing doesn't throw those picks seeings as how he threw more than Ganz did in '08. Also Ganz's efficiency rating was higher and completion percentage was nearly identical. Yes, Reesing's was better 66.5 v. 65.1. I'll take Ganz.