HuskerJen

You know, your posts could actually be good if they weren't so damn petulant. GFY.

CG = Certifiably Gay.

You know what's interesting? Before this article appeared, I said this in regards to recruiting: Imagine that, location plays a fairly large role in securing commits...who knew? Seriously though, I hope all the recruiting whiners, and they know who they are, will admit they were wrong come February after LOI's have been signed.

Sarcasm aside... A preliminary judge of what comprises a good, successful class is one that is ranked in the top 30 nationally. [sarcasm] And apparently, huskers51 thinks that: Nebraska needs to be 6 deep at every position with 4 and 5 star rated kids exclusively, and if we're not in the top 5 in recruiting, then why bother to play...we won't even have the talent to compete.[/sarcasm]

CheshireCat, My "take" on recruiting is quite simple and I've stated many times previously; however, since you've obviously missed what I said in past threads I'll reiterate it for you here and now: * If Nebraska doesn't sign player A, they'll get player B to take his place. If we lose player A, it doesn't automatically mean that player B is not as good as A. And when we do lose a player to another school, we rarely, if ever, know the real reason why. Maybe the coaches won't promise a player playing time, a starters role, a job for mommy/daddy/uncle buck, maybe the player is a trouble-maker, uncoachable, maybe they find something out about the player and tell him to look elsewhere. Or, maybe another school's coaching staff was able to promise the player what he wanted or maybe they are just better recruiters and did a more complete job of selling their school than the Nebraska coaches did. * Recruiting is a process that can make someone crazy if they get too in depth with it. These are, in most cases, 17 year old kids who are in the process of making a major decision in their life. And as such they are prone to changing their minds. * I want to see Nebraska recruit and sign the best available, but I'm realistic about the process. Nebraska, for all the history and tradition, has an uphill battle when going after the top talent. When going after the top talent there's a lot of competition and it's blatantly unrealistic to expect the Huskers to win all, or even a majority, of recruiting battles. And who should address these recruiting concerns? You? Me? Huskers51? We're just fans here. Nothing we do or say will change how this staff recruits. I will repeat myself again: If Nebraska is still sitting at 5 recruits and it's getting towards the end of October--then I will agree that's it's time to start getting at least a little bit concerned about what is going on. My guess is that now that the season is officially underway-it is game week after all, we're going to see Nebraska's commit list start to fill up. As far as class rankings go: I believe that as long as a team is consistently in the top 30 nationally-they're going to have the kind of speed and talent on their roster to compete with anybody. I don't buy into this notion that a team has to be 3 deep at every position with 4 and 5 star rated players exclusively.

Winner! The "mop" one is very good as well.

No self-respecting Husker fan would ever go against the '95 squad as the best of all time. And furthermore, to argue for, of all schools, Miami? There ought to be a law...

The record is duly noted.

I like BYU over Oklahoma...the game is in Provo.

Wow! Great stuff!

What you do in the privacy of your home is your business...

I think, and I very well could be wrong, he left the team. No J.T. is still on the team. The JUCO TE Tyson Hetzer left. Dang it, you quoted me before I had a chance to edit my post! (I really should've checked the roster before commenting.) Ah...thank you. I knew there was a TE who had left-I just couldn't remember who it was.

So Ken Dorsey won two national titles, was screwed out of the Heisman and is regularly referenced as "one of the greatest QB's to ever play college football?"

Oh I'm sorry...was I supposed to play along? I'll try and do better...

So you're worried about preseason projections? Play the games and let's see what happens. Most times those projections are wrong. oh come on. I was making a point. Since that doesn't work lets just go to how the last to OSU vs. NU games turned out, where each team has been in rankings last few years, who has beat more quality opponents, etc. Ok, now I'm starting to feel sick like I'm some OSU fan or something. I completely understand what you are saying and I'll simply counter with the following points... 1. Different years. 2. Different teams. 3. Different coaching staffs. 4. Different mentality. 5. In '08 the team clearly progressed and became better as the season went along. (Which was something you could NEVER say about Huskers under the former staff.)

To answer your question: (Please note that I'm not referring to you in the next sentence. I wasn't on this board then, but I was on another Husker site which did have its share of Grixby bashers.) Ah Grixby...the favorite target of the uninformed, usually drunken, post-game, Husker fan rant. The problem was never Grixby. The problem was the utterly incompetent defensive coaches, specifically Cosdouche and Elmoturd, we had. Marvin Sanders has said repeatedly via interviews that have been posted, here and elsewhere, that he was absolutely shocked at just how little the DB's knew regarding technique. I mean cripes he had to teach these guys how to properly back pedal. If that doesn't illustrate the depths of incompetence of the former staff nothing does, or will. Poor coaching during the week leads to poor technique being practiced. Poor technique during the week leads to poor technique during a game. And, poor technique during a game results in poor play. Doesn't that about sum up the entire tenure of the previous staff?

No I don't know this for a fact. I'm saying, what will your excuse be when we lose him too? "Oh it's not a surprise, he wanted to join his brother, oh we saw this coming..." As if that makes it better? Wow really Jen? The football season hasn't started yet? No sh#t? I've never said the sky is falling. You're putting words in my mouth. I said our recruiting situation isn't good right now, and if, like I said, you have a reasonable argument otherwise I'd love to hear it. I've admitted that the class may turn out fine, but from where it stands right now it's not looking so hot. By the way, for someone who constantly professes not to care about recruiting and to not get excited, you still visit the recruiting section quite often. And I notice once again all you can do is reply to my posts in an effort to shoot them down... but I search the entire thread, and not once do I find an original thought by you on how the recruiting situation is. A lot easier to reply to other's posts rather than think up some of your own, isn't it? The part in red...You admit you don't know if we'll lose Gabbert and then immediately after you're proclaiming as a fact that we WILL lose Gabbert. If, and this is a HUGE if, we do lose Gabbert then I will agree that there are some rather serious issues in the way this staff recruits. However, if this class turns out to be very good, which I think it will; then you will admit that you over-reacted and will vow to take a few happy pills prior to discussing recruiting? Now the criteria for a "very good" class...hmmmm...that's a tad tougher to quantify. Is it overall class rank nationally? Is it the average number of stars per player? Which site do we use as the measuring stick? What's your definition of a very good class-cause it's probably a little-or maybe a lot, different from mine? And you may never have said actually the sky is falling, but your numerous posts regarding recruiting are certainly implying it. The part in green...I visit the recruiting section because do like to know who is all out there and I try to keep an eye on who the Huskers are targeting because it does make interesting conversation during the off-season. And finally, take a good long look at the players who have already committed to other schools and ask yourself what is the one common factor among them all? The answer is of course location. Nebraska does not have location as an advantage. Ergo, we will probably always lag behind other schools who are closer in proximity to the hotbeds of talent. That doesn't mean we can't still get great players, it just means we have to work harder and take longer to do the recruiting. If that's a problem for you...

I knew the thread was bogus because 1) the game is sold out and 2) it's available via PPV. And no network would black-out a PPV event.

Well he did have that on-air, embarrassing, petulant and absurd anti-Nebraska meltdown when they were discussing the greatest teams of all time.

Edit: Never mind...I checked the roster at huskerpedia.com and he's still listed there...

The part in red...While it's true that Nebraska did run some power I and they did run some option under TO, that was NOT Nebraska's offense exclusively. True but that isn't the purpose of the article. I know that wasn't the purpose of the article. But, one would think that a journalist would at least get his, or her, basic facts right. Tom Osborne often characterized his offense as multiple, power running with play-action passes and some option. And for someone, in this case a sports journalist, to say that Nebraska's "offense" was the power I and option is just plain lazy. Other than that...it was a pretty good piece.

So you're worried about preseason projections? Play the games and let's see what happens. Most times those projections are wrong.

I agree 100%. If Nebraska can begin beating the south teams on a regular basis recruiting won't be an issue.

The part in red...You know this for a fact? Prove it. You do realize that the ENTIRE college football season has yet to be played right? And as for the "valuable input" comment...what value is your input where you're constantly crying that the sky is falling?