carlfense

Yikes.

Generally, fathers with shotguns seem to have no problem in that regard...

Great news!

Helu posted his fastest performance times this spring...WITH the added muscle.

Well said sir. I agree entirely. I may debate an issue in here, but at the end of the day I will try to respect everyone's right to their own opinions. Sometimes the emotional side get's the best of us all, but spirited respectful debate seems healthy. And to VA Husker2, I fully agree that private citizens do (and should!) have the right to display the CBF. My opinion of what that flag stands for is far less important than the freedom of each person to speak and act as they see fit.

I haven't heard anyone say the weight was fat...in fact everything points to it being muscle. (references to weight gained by putting in time in the weight room, etc.)

It's heritage yes, but the reason for the heritage of the Confederacy (as I see it, please don't think that I am trying to offend here) seems to be to protect their right to own slaves. And as a side note, the Emancipation Proclamation was hardly the great philosophical shift in human rights that many people believe it to be. As you probably know it only freed slaves in some of the Confederate states...and didn't mention at all the states in the Union. It was largely (and successfully!) a political tactic. (You could probably make a better argument that displaying the Confederate Battle Flag is no different than displaying the US flag by comparing the BF and slavery to the US flag and Native American policy.) Anyways, thanks for your input. Hopefully we can continue to have a civil discussion.

Are you freaking kidding me? They're not going to know you're going to have a system that you blab to the papers about? Is it going to be like our brilliant new defensive gameplan against Missouri, or how we talked about how we were going to throw a lot of quick slants against OU? Maybe I'm missing something I don't know...if you are an opposing offensive coach, what exactly does this reveal that you can prepare for? You don't know if it means bringing pressure, backing into a zone, etc. The way I see it is that it gives our opponents one more thing to worry about and attempt to prepare for. It should be all the more frustrating for them because they KNOW that we are going to be doing something different but they will have to guess at what that is. I think the advantage of forcing teams to try to prepare for something that they don't have details on outweighs the one game (or play!) benefit of springing it on someone. I just hope that Bo doesn't try to get to cute with it, a la Missouri game last year. I think he probably learned his lesson, and I fully support him trying to experiment with new schemes. GBR.

I am very VERY anxious to see what Helu does this year. I think he has the vision and athleticism to be the best back we've had in years.

It was down to Nebraska and Ohio State there for awhile. I think at some point that fall Ohio State decided they'd not take a QB that year as further enticement to get Terrell Pryor. (And if they didn't get TP they'd have had ~0 QBs after 2 graduated and 1 was asked to leave transferred.) Anyway, the feeling of the Buckeye Planet guys at the time (besides thinking there's no way they'd lose him to Nebraska ) is that he was a good QB prospect with amazing athleticism that with coaching would turn into a college QB. Good find Pete! Very interesting how they were so high on him and the posts gradually became more and more negative when it became clear that NE was leading in recruiting him. (Husker fans would never do that... )

Cliff notes: 1. Carriker - Solich recruit, excelled under Callahan. 2. Bjax - Callahan recruit, excelled under Callahan. 3. Suh - Callahan recruit, excelled under Bo. (edit: I suppose there is this as well... 4. Dillard - Callahan recruit, excelled under neither...so far...) Hopefully under Bo and co. we see a lot more of Option 2 (Bo recruit, excelled under Bo) than we did under Cally and Co.

Ah!!! Makes perfect sense now. Sorry. I thought it was directed at my post about Bjax. I can be a little slow at times...

Ummmm....Bjax was a Cally recruit. I'd say he excelled. Getting drafted in the second round as a junior seems "decent." (We could find more...but since we are dealing with a "single" freshman this should be sufficient.) So about this Suh guy. Not Bo's work - he was a Cally recruit. When he's a first round pick next year, I hope you credit Callahan and Cosgrove and the staff that recruited him. You're going to do that, right? What? Not sure where you are going with that. Suh is a clear example of this staff's ability to motivate and coach up talent. I referenced Bjax because he was both recruited and coached by the previous staff...I'm not sure what you are trying to say. And a disclaimer here: I think Cally and Co were a very bad choice to coach at NE. However some people refuse to acknowledge ANY sort of positive. It almost reminds me of politics....many agree that W. was a bad president...but some people refuse to acknowledge ANY sort of positives that came out of his administration. Unfortunately in the real world there are far more gray's than black's and white's. Anyways, I appreciate the (probably few) good things that Cally and Co gave us, but I am ecstatic that we now have Bo as the head coach. GBR.

You said it way better than I could have.

Ummmm....Bjax was a Cally recruit. I'd say he excelled. Getting drafted in the second round as a junior seems "decent." (We could find more...but since we are dealing with a "single" freshman this should be sufficient.)

And probably Peterson and Potter.

I don't buy the notion that Dilliard was over-hyped. I think he was more a victim of circumstance(s) than anything else. After all, really none of the Nebraska players ever really blossomed or excelled under the previous coaching staff. A little dramatic. Name some players then... Adam Carriker, Dane Todd, Cory Ross, Brandon Jackson, Zac Taylor... There are probably many that I'm neglecting. I think each of these excelled...but I guess that's just my opinion. None of those guys you listed "blossomed" under the previous staff. Their respective athletic ability is what enabled them to do what they did. Adam Carriker...stud despite the previous coaching staff. Cory Ross...was already a player under Solich. Brandon Jackson....couldn't become the #1 guy and struggled for playing time. Zac Taylor...was a jc guy so he doesn't really fit. Over all, I'll give you Zac Taylor even though he was a jc guy. Still, that's a .25, 1 of 4, based on the names you've given, success rate... In the final analysis of the previous coaching regime they were utter failures at everything. It's not that they recruited "bad" talent; it is just that they couldn't develop that talent. In other words, the previous staff would recruit great players out of high school and through their staggering incompetence the players would actually regress. I disagree. I am glad that BC and Co. are gone and that Bo is here, but to say that they accomplished nothing disparages both the players and the team. We could argue this for days, but I don't think either of us would budge. Therefore, I'm going to let it go. GBR.

I don't buy the notion that Dilliard was over-hyped. I think he was more a victim of circumstance(s) than anything else. After all, really none of the Nebraska players ever really blossomed or excelled under the previous coaching staff. A little dramatic. Name some players then... Adam Carriker, Dane Todd, Cory Ross, Brandon Jackson, Zac Taylor... There are probably many that I'm neglecting. I think each of these excelled...but I guess that's just my opinion.

I tried them! Tasty. Thanks for the recipe.

I suspect you really enjoy stirring the pot. Weren't you really high on Cody Green? Now a LB who hasn't played QB since high school is going to challenge him?? Hmmmm. Probably doesn't matter either way. Lee's got a few years left.

See Kitty Genovese.

So do you feel that by having the Confederate Battle Flag on statehouse grounds at a Civil War memorial makes us a racist state? I know this isn't directed at me, but if I can add my 2 cents . . . I don't think that it does. As long as it's kept in the historical context, particularly when it's at a Civil War memorial, it is appropriate and perhaps even commendable. Now if it were still flown over the State Capital...that would be a different story in my eyes. I think that hukertim might have just been referring to shirts and tatoos, etc. etc. I don't have a problem with those per se (although it sure might affect my initial impression of that person!) so long as it's not displayed in some state or governmental capacity.

Also, I agree with the sentiment that many times those people are just trying to stir the pot. Much like the gothic crowd who like to express individuality by dressing exactly like their friends.

Well said. As much as it's possible to simply convey on a message board, what is your take on the causes of the Civil War? Mine is that slavery was the root cause, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it was a war fought over racism. Quite the contrary actually, both sides were almost equally racist. It was more a war over the economic impact of slavery, and the disastrous consequence for the south if it were abolished. Granted, the average young and poor Johnny Reb thought that he was fighting for his rights (and he owned no slaves) but the people with power appear far more concerned about preserving the economic boon provided by slave labor than some intangible idea of states rights. Wow. I apologize for the detour. Somehow a traffic stop ends up in a discussion about the causes of the civil war...interesting. Glad to find some fellow history buffs on here.

Hopefully he will be back soon Absolutely. We need the depth!