AllNRed

What about a game full of big plays for one of our beloved backs.

Wasn't it a play or two before when Eric was almost decapitated by the defender from a facemask but no flag was thrown...... That's makes this play even sweeter. That was against Kansas State and no I'm starting to think AllNRed is Huskerfaninwi. My mistake. Still a great play.

Wasn't it a play or two before when Eric was almost decapitated by the defender from a facemask but no flag was thrown...... That's makes this play even sweeter.

Normally, schools that get a great deal of early commits, are gaining them from kids from a relatively short distance from the program (within a 300-500 mile radius). These kids have normally been by the campus either for unofficials or a game before their senior year. That's where the location advantage comes to play for programs like Bama/Florida/USC/OSU/Michigan/Texas/etc......the talent in their back yard is the talent that programs across the nation are recruiting. Those programs have to wait to get official visits (which the school pays for) until their senior year. Only a talented kid staying in Tallahasee, FL/Austin, TX/ Baton Rouge, LA will visit Lincoln, NE before his senior year is if his parents have the funds to get him here. While waiting to get that opportunity, they are a hop/skip/jump away from other big name programs (UF/FSU/UT/USC/UCLA/etc.) or lower tier programs (FAU/Lousiana Lafeyette/Nevada) that may give them the opportunity to play early and still not be too far from family and friends attending his games. NU, historically recruits nationally due to the pool of talent that we have to pull out of versus the programs we are trying to compete against, because of that disadvantage early in the recruiting cycle. Now with more and more kids being recruited at young and younger ages (read somewhere that an 8th grader was offered), I wouldn't be surprise to see the NCAA allowing official visits earlier in the process. At least up to after their the previous class official signing day.

I can pretty much guess what Ohio State thinks of it. Considering Ohio St bought themselves rings to commemorate their "championship", I think that speaks for itself. Did they actually do that. I thought it was a rumor........that's pretty funny. http://www.huskerboa...-banned-season/ Wow... And that's an entertaining thread......love the pics.

I can pretty much guess what Ohio State thinks of it. Considering Ohio St bought themselves rings to commemorate their "championship", I think that speaks for itself. Did they actually do that. I thought it was a rumor........that's pretty funny.

I'm down. Let's do it....

I can pretty much guess what Ohio State thinks of it.

Yes. We never won our division, while we also got our ass handed to us by Colorado. After that loss, I never thought we deserved to be there, whether we would have beat Miami or not. If we had beaten Miami in 2001 everyone associated with college football, from media to fans, would be talking about how that championship should have an asterisk. They'd be saying it whenever that game was brought up. Only because we aren't in the SEC. Bama did it and it's almost never mentioned when discussing their current run.

Right here is EXACTLY what I was thinking! There are a couple people who voted Wisconsin's way, when I have heard them say that they think we never deserved to play in the MNC in 2001, which I strongly agree with. Just imagine how it would have been if we would have been in that situation and won... "Yeah we won, but we were 4-4 in conference play, 8-6 all together, we should have never even been there. Do you really count this as an accomplishment?" Why one would say that we back doored our way into MNC in 2001, not take any credit for it, but would love for us to be in Wisconsin's place in 2012, with the 5th best record in the BIG? I would much rather actually WIN our division, play in the CCG, because we deserve it, rather than it be handed to us. Only difference is we didn't get there by "default". Yes we lost to CU for the conference championship but we were still a top 5 program going into the game. That situation could be compared to Bama getting to the title game a couple years ago to rematch the division rival who beat them on their home field keeping them from even playing in the CCG.

This is all I've been saying. No need to place STATISTICAL before career, because a career is stats. I know it's what you have been saying. I was trying to help you clarify to those who still didn't get it. Yes, I know. I agree with you. I should have put +1 in front of my response. K Oh, god.......not the "K" response....

This is all I've been saying. No need to place STATISTICAL before career, because a career is stats. I know it's what you have been saying. I was trying to help you clarify to those who still didn't get it. Yes, I know. I agree with you. I should have put +1 in front of my response.

You're getting nice and frothy about this, awesome! Bowl game stats were not included in the official numbers until 2002, so Dayne's stats never reflected 2000 yards during any one season. If those numbers were inlcuded, Rozier would be even closer to Dayne when you account for his entire college career. Rozier would have had an amazing 2300 yeard season in 1983 if that were the case, even surrounded by as much talent as he was. If you figure in Rozier's JUCO numbers(1157) and bowl games (340), his career total yards would amount to 6277 on a hell of a lot fewer carries than it took Dayne to reach 7125. (Note: Found different JUCO numebrs for Rozier on different sites. Anywhere between 1157 or 1316. I went with 1157 just to be safe.) That really doesn't change anything in your whole argument, but it shrinks the gap between their numbers, and the 1500 yards difference you keep crowing about is quite false. If you are going to attach unofficial numbers to your boy without doing the same for Rozier, I guess he will look that much better. Why not add in receiving yards and kick return yards? Dayne had 304 of those. Rozier had 665. Add in bowl games, Rozier had 39 more receiving yards. Figuring in JUCO, bowl games, and all-purpose yards, Rozier gets 14 more touchdowns to his total as well. I don't know Ron Dayne's receiving numbers in bowl games or receiving touchdowns, you can look it up if you want. So now, if you are relying so heavily on numbers, Rozier's true career total will have 6942 yards and 63 touchdowns. Dayne has 7429 yards and 71 TDs (plus whatever receiving he may have had in bowl games). That narrows your gap a little doesn't it? Those numbers are reflective of their entire college careers, which you are so hung up on. Not too much difference, with a hell of a lot fewer touches for Rozier, while Rozier's teams enjoyed more success. Now you got me all worked up, dammit. But if you look at all that and still think Dayne's career was that much better, well "that's cute." Just please stop posting the same crap over and over. There are quote functions or copy and paste for that. Nice and frothy?.....yet it helped you to make a more applicable response..... You're welcome. If you are worked up over this conversation, that's you're own personal problem. I didn't beg you to read my posts, if you don't like it, don't read it. Skip over every one of my posts, or I'm not sure if this feature is available on this site, but some football forums have a "black list" so that you don't see any of a certain member's posts.......utilize that. And since you responded then lets just look at what you posted. Rozier had 5,445 total all purpose yards. 53 TDs (why should I include his JUCO #s.....his husker career is being discussed. JUCO is against lesser talent) This is including his #s from the bowl games he participated in. That still does not surpass Dayne's #s. Even if he was just 100 yards l and 2 TDs under Dayne, it still wouldn't change the fact that Dayne had a better career. Narrow that gap the best way you can. (Pretty sad argument, IMO,....you want to include JUCO #'s....) I'm glad you are starting to utilize the great creation we know today as google search. But it still doesn't change the facts. Plus, you & others bring up reasons that kept Rozier's #s from being better (talent around him, injuries, etc....) as if there's nothing that kept Dayne from having better #s than he did. I wouldn't expect you to know those reasons as you obviously didn't follow his career as closely as you did Rozier's. Bigdsrip in Post#67 helped out the board to understand that certain factors took Dayne off the field also, yet that post was ignored. Which let's me know that "ignorance is a choice". Step back and listen to the conversation and rebuttals. How do you say that Dayne's stats don't make his career better, but yet you come back with ways of making Rozier's stats better, like adding his JUCO #s...........That's laughable. P.S. Calm down, homie. Drink some water. It's just a football discussion. What else would you have me do in the offseason?

THIS

Great post and I totally agree. Depending on the experience of the fan with the Huskers, you often, subconsciously, compare everything to the great years of the past. I remember many complaining about TO's 7 bowl game losing streak before beating Miami for his first national title. What about the fact it took him 7 years to finally beat Oklahoma only to lose to them in the Orange Bowl that same year and get beat by them two more years following. Obviously our history spoils us, but we don't realize it because it being elite became the norm. NU is far from the bottom of the barrow, we are still a top 25 caliber team, but we don't value it because of our history. I feel like our program is 1-2 great players on both sides of the ball (in the same year) from being back to a top 5 program. But I still take pride in the fact that we get to the top the RIGHT WAY. None of our season wins were taken away due to violations. Not all of history's elite programs can make that same claim.

This is all I've been saying. No need to place STATISTICAL before career, because a career is stats.

+1 Kentucky lost to Louisville & Western Kentucky. Arkansas lost to ULM & Rutgers Ol Miss lost to Texas Auburn lost to Clemson LSU lost to Clemson Miss St lost to Northwestern Mizzou lost to Syracuse Florida lost to Louisville This just shows me that their conference is far from elite over the other conferences. Just because they happen to always have two of the most dominant teams nationally doesn't mean that the rest of the conference is as hard to deal with. Texas aTm showed that. One year removed from the Big XII they stepped right in and competed for the division.

So, list of all time best running backs in CFB history, ranked by quality of career, not by most talented: 1. Mike Rozier 2. Rex Burkhead 3. Marlon Lucky 4. Dan Alexander ..... 39+. Ron Dayne That's more like it. that's cute.

He had a 2000 yard season and his teams were National Champioship contenders every year he was on campus. Those were things Dayne cannot claim. To be fair, Ron Dayne's overall durability and the career rushing record are things that Rozier can't claim, and Dayne lifted his team to higher rankings each consecutive year. It's almost a wash, really, but everyone's opinions have been stated. Why keep repeating yourself over and over? 2109 is what he rushed in 1996 (as a freshman). 2034 is what he rushed for in 1999 (his Heisman Sr. Year). It's not hard to at least google information before responding so that you at least sound like you know what you were talking about. And the fact that Nebraska contended for national titles each of the three years Rozier was hear only proves he had a better team. In case you haven't been paying attention, everyone pointed out how much talent he had around him which took away from his production. And even though they contended for national titles each of the 3 seasons, how many national championships did they win......being there doesn't automatically make you better than the next RB. Adrian Peterson was the best RB in the NFL this year and yet Ray Rice was on the team team that WON the Super Bowl. And I didn't even factor in Dayne's durability. I keep repeating myself because I continuously notice ignorant statements repeat by a different poster, regardless of how many times it was stated before that poster joined the conversation. I would have to repeat a thing if comprehension didn't lack as much in this conversation.

If they played on opposite teams, Bo would have at least 2 Conf Championships. Martinez wouldn't have been the starting QB on Tommie's team. He'd of been back up to Berringer just off the mental aspect alone, not counting his talent at putting the ball on the ground. Honestly, I think he probably would have been playing WR. I LOL trying to picture Martinez blocking as a WR in Osborne's offense! He probably would have been a DB. If he can't block, he definitely won't tackle....

The numbers are for the career (accomplishments on the field). Personally, I never said that Ron Dayne was a better back than Rozier, I simply stated he had a better career. Some don't know, or understand the difference. Others don't want to understand the difference because unless I say Rozier is the greatest back ever and his career surpasses all who has played before and after him, then I am disrespecting....... So because Rozier's career was shorter, it wasn't as good? Ahman Green only became the premier starter after LP got suspended. So the ball happened to bounce his way otherwise he backs up LP for a whole season. Still don't understand why some stats give Dayne a better career. You have to look at the whole picture. What the hell? Are you serious? Did I say his career wasn't good? And Ahman Green became the permier starter after the 4 backs in front of him on the depth chart were either supsended or injured. As a true freshman, Green was 5th on the depth chart during the first kickoff. Both what does that have to do with what I said........ You don't understand why Dayne's career is better because you don't want to understand it. Let me dumb it down once again. Rozier & Dayne won the same awards by the time they left their programs, with Dayne winning a few more, 2 awards didn't exist when Rozier was playing. Rozier & Dayne both were consensus All Americans Rozier & Dayne were both the #1 RB in the NFL draft their final seasons, though Rozier went USFL first. Only thing separating their career is 1500 yards and 21 TDs. If Rozier scored 21 more TDs than he did, would you say his career is even better. If he ran for 1500 more yards would you say his career was even better. Yes you would. So why is it so much energy is being spent trying to make it seem like another RB who accomplished the same things that Rozier accomplished but ran for more yards and TDs is not a better career. I know this argument would have went this long if Ron Dayne's name was replaced with Rex Burkhead or Marlon Lucky, or Dan Alexander or some other RB who played for NU. No one wants to admit that another back at another school could have had a better career than a Husker who had the best year of all Husker RBs.......I'm not saying he's not a great back. I'm not saying Dayne is a better back.......I simply stated that his career was better and that he deserved to highlight the HOF class as much as anyone else who has.

I wonder how each would've done if the teams were reversed---if T-Mart played on the 90s teams and Tommie was playing today? We might be speaking of Martinez in a different light. If they played on opposite teams, Bo would have at least 2 Conf Championships. Martinez wouldn't have been the starting QB on Tommie's team. He'd of been back up to Berringer just off the mental aspect alone, not counting his talent at putting the ball on the ground. Honestly, I think he probably would have been playing WR.

What did Rozier accomplish that Dayne did not. They both recieved the same national awards. They both are the best backs in their school history. Only thing different from their careers is the amount of yards and TDs. Martinez & Frazier is a bit of a reach. Frazier accomplished so many things that Martinez has not. All Martinez has is stats. No championship, no All American status, no national awards. No comparison.

Monte Ball score 77 TDs Ron Dayne scored 71 TDs............not as much of a disctance than Mike Roziers 49 TDs Mike Rozier also had 4780 total yards Monte Ball had 5140 total yards Ron Dayne had 7125 total yards That would make him 3rd best again of those three. Dayne never rushed for under 1400 yards a season. Rozier's first year didn't eclipse 1000. This is just the CAREERS they both put together. I'm not saying that Daynes a better back, just saying he had a better career.