Enhance

Illinois proved their inadequacies when they played Ohio State. As of right now, they are a bottom feeder in the Big 10, which isn't saying a lot because even the best teams in the Big 10 aren't that good compared to the best teams in other conferences. Regardless, if Illinois will single-handedly give credence to your non-con, then why are so many downplaying VaTech, when we can all clearly agree that VaTech is a much better team than Illinois. Unless Illinois finishes with 9 wins and surprises a good team (which is what VaTech will do at the least), than I will give very little credit to MU for taking them out. And on us not winning because we won't be bigger and faster, I must ask again where in the hell are you getting this gem from? Do you have any facts to support your claim or are you just speculating, because after watching 3 of 4 MU games and all of the NU games, it is clearly obvious that NU is bigger and faster on the lines of scrimmage. Have you seen how often the pocket breaks down and Gabbert has to roll out to avoid a hit?

Facts? Something to base your opinion off of? Come on MU fans, if you are going to come to Huskerboard and start talking football with us, you gotta realize that we aren't going to nod our heads in agreement at everything you say. A lot of us, myself included, spend time to look up information to come back with honest factual retorts. Since you haven't, here are mine. This is CBS sports, rating the toughest non-con schedules in the Big 12. The closer your number is to 1, the tougher your schedule is. As you will notice, Missouri played one of the weakest non-conference schedules. LINK Also from CBS Sports, your strength of schedule is 105th. Nebraska's, is 73. Again, here is the LINK And I'm not even going to get into how ridiculous the notion is that the teams MU beat are better than the ones NU beat. I believe knapplc has already debunked this conundrum one million times over. That makes no sense. Your SOS is tougher because you played VT, not because the other teams were better. But you lost. I supplied ample evidence our wins were better. What doesn't make any sense is trying to downplay VaTech to make our team look worse, when in reality this is the biggest reason that Husker fans feel confident about Columbia. You played crappy teams and were only able to snake by a couple. 3 of 4 teams we played were crappy and dominated them. Our less to VaTech should have been our win, but I digress. Lets just say for one second that your SOS slightly, and only just, harder. That still doesn't negate the fact that you played what every other college football fan (other than Missouri fans) would say is a "cupcake" non con schedule, and you weren't able to put your foot in your opponent's mouth.

Facts? Something to base your opinion off of? Come on MU fans, if you are going to come to Huskerboard and start talking football with us, you gotta realize that we aren't going to nod our heads in agreement at everything you say. A lot of us, myself included, spend time to look up information to come back with honest factual retorts. Since you haven't, here are mine. This is CBS sports, rating the toughest non-con schedules in the Big 12. The closer your number is to 1, the tougher your schedule is. As you will notice, Missouri played one of the weakest non-conference schedules. LINK Also from CBS Sports, your strength of schedule is 105th. Nebraska's, is 73. Again, here is the LINK And I'm not even going to get into how ridiculous the notion is that the teams MU beat are better than the ones NU beat. I believe knapplc has already debunked this conundrum one million times over.

Meh, writers are entitled to their opinions. Stirring the pot gets people talking. I don't think it's a big deal to overlook us. To me, it will just make things that much grander if we end up beating them and beating them handily.

Actually, no. Being youthful fully explains how and why they struggled to put away bad teams like Bowling Green and Nevada. But it also bears repeating that Missouri didn't struggle to beat either Bowling Green or Nevada - they had each game well in hand. It also bears repeating that Bowling Green and Nevada are good teams. They played other, tougher competition recently and were lagging a bit because of it. Ignore their combined 1-6 record. This is irrelevant. Sometimes good teams show they are good by losing. A lot. So they didn't struggle while struggling to put away good bad teams. See? Makes perfect sense. Thanks for clarifying knapplc

I don't think we needed him, but he had an excellent game. He rushed for well over 100 yards in that game, had a great screen catch in the back field for a touchdown, and made the Florida Gators look like a pop warner team on an early second quarter run for 40 some odd yards. We had plenty of depth at the RB position and enough of it to win, but he was a big part of that game in setting the pace early.

But that just proves how great Nevada is. If they were really bad they would have lost eleventy billion to nothing. Nevada is a good team. And Missouri trounced them unmercifully in a hailstorm of Gabberts and Tigers that lasted from the opening kickoff through the final gun. Seriously. No, really. That's how it all happened. Just out of curiosity and correct me if I'm wrong, isn't it a BAD thing that MU is younger than NU?

When ranking a team I look at it this way: can we honestly say that if Nebraska played 119 other schools, there are only 5 they would lose to/not be favored in? Cause I can think of more than five teams that would probably beat Nebraska right now. Same reason I said that the CFN rankings after Week 4 were atrocious. USC at 18? Can you really say that there are 17 teams that are better than USC? No way in hell.

Two completely different offenses will yield two completely different game plans. We had to play our cards safe with Taylor because of the running threat he poses. If you move in on him from the inside he is taking it outside, and if you move in on him from the outside he runs up the middle for a nice gain. Gabbert might be mobile in the pocket, but he is a pocket passer through and through with running ability nothing like Tyrod Taylor. And he won't be chucking the ball up for dreams in this game. Lobbed deep throws into double coverage and throwing across his body may have worked against the less athletic defenses of Nevada, Furman, et al, but that won't work against Nebraska.

There is a difference between being #1 in reality and being #1 in your heart. Being #1 in your heart does not mean they are #1 in reality. Rankings don't mean jack sh*t anyways. It's all speculation and what people think. Yes, there is some math involved, but that doesn't stop people in power from doing what they want to do with the polls.

Then our game last week vs. ULL doesn't count, I guess? We had second teamers in for most of the third quarter, and all second and third teamers for the fourth. Still preserved a shut out. If ULL and Furman played, you're probably looking at a win by a touchdown or so either way. MU will be ready, just as Nebraska will be ready. Hopefully, it's a good clean game and nobody says that Nebraska is "the dirtiest team I've ever played".

1. Actually it's supposed to be between the y & a. Good attempt though. Also, I stated nothing about the placement of the quotations or apostrophes, but was rather saying that it was incorrect use of the word you're...should have been your. BIG DIFFERENCE. 2. I think we all know where the boogers come from: www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEW8_KVhDFE Way to stick it to those MU fans. And as a response to some other post, the fact that we treat Tom Osborne as an God is no joke. If you had a National Championship, you would understand. But, seeing as you don't, it's just something we can't relate to you.

Aren't there something like 10 threads that talk about what we could have done better in the VaTech game? Well anyways, to fulfill your desires Twodocs, we would have won the VT game if the D-line had closed in on Taylor quicker on their touchdown throw instead of stutter stepping and waiting to see if he'll scramble.

This is actually my key to the game, is just how effective can Nebraska be on the lines. Nebraska has proven this season that they can physically dominate both less than average lines and a Top 10 teams lines, and Suh has also proven that nothing is going to stop him no matter what tier of talent is lined up across from him. Secondly, Nebraska is going to score points. Roy Helu is arguably the best if not Top 2 or 3 back in the Big 12 right now. Lee had a tough game against VaTech, partly due to his injured non-throwing hand. While Columbia can be a harsh environment, I don't think it is going to affect this team more than a small amount. Not a knock on the fans down there by any means, but the game is played with 22 guys on the field at once and nothing else. Execution is all that matters. My other match up I"m looking at is the Nebraska secondary vs. Gabbert. The secondary has looked very good so far this off season. They have shut down the Sun Belt Pre-Season Offensive Player of the Year (big OO's and AH's..I know...) and they shut down VaTech's WR's with the exception of two plays. Gabbert and the MU receivers are going to make plays, because that's what they do. The key will be if the secondary can play as well as they have been so far this season.

We need to merge all of these Missouri posts into one giant clusterf*ck Missouri thread. Anyways, it is a rebuilding year for Missouri, and I think that even they think this game is going to be tough. Anytime you lose your best quarterback in school history, one of your best WR's, and a great TE, you are going to have rebuild in a lot of ways. Like I have said in other threads, I think we will win because of the battle in the trenches. MU's lines have struggled against their opponents, and have appeared to be not as speedy and athletic as they were in previous years. I also think that if Gabbert continues to run laterally across the field from side line making throws across his body like he has in the non-con, he is going to get picked. Those type of throws worked because lets face the truth, Nevada and Furman are not very talented and athletic in the back field. If Gabbert continues to lob those throws, Amukamara and the rest of the NU secondary is going to make that pick. I'm not saying Nebraska's back seven is leagues ahead of other teams, but they will make that pick. Gabbert is going to need protection and need to stay in the pocket to win.

I can't recall us ever doing well on a ABC/ESPN night game. Matter of fact I can't remember the last time we were not blown out in an ABC/ESPN night game. Well hopefully that all changes. Definitely think we have a lot better team this year. Wasn't the Colorado game on ABC last year? Maybe we didn't play that consistently but we still booted that 57 yarder and watched Suh return an interception for a touchdown.

Seriously, that writer said it all in his article. There is no question that 95 Nebraska was the best college football team of all time. They beat four Top 10 teams like they were nothing. Miami '01 deserves credit where credit is due, but that had two very close call games. Nebraska was scored against first only twice in 95, once by Washington State and Florida scoring first in the Championship game. Other than those few short minutes where Nebraska was down, there was never any doubt that Nebraska would win their games. 95 NU vs. 01 Miami? Easily a 45-21 Nebraska win. Doesn't matter who your defense is, Nebraska was going to score points on you regardless. Miami would have scored points, but not nearly enough to win.

Seems like that will shape up to be a good night. Nebraska has been doing well under the bright lights of Memorial Stadium since last years Missouri game

Damn, Vuren beat me to it. My post is useless now. Anyways, I'm glad you spent all the time to do this.

LMFAO

I understand your point, but even when a big team loses to a lesser team, it doesn't make sense to knock them waaay out of the rankings. Like I said about USC, even if they lost to Washington and struggled at times against Washington State University, there is now way that there are 17 teams in the nation that are better than USC. I may not like em, but they are still one of the top 4 or 5 best teams in the nation.

Go to huskers.com - 'Teams' Link - Hit 'Football' - 'Schedule/Results' Link and then go to the drop down list and go to future years. Or you could just go HERE

Didn't Vegas also pick Clemson as the favorites for the Gator Bowl?

I just don't like hangin my wang out there for everybody to see. Isn't it a waste of water too to have those things going all the time?