AllNRed

Why should this be a knock on him. That makes no sense. I agree with your point and stats provided, but because he is a big part of their production doesn't make him any less great than a RB whom has other weapons around him. I would think that if a RB is the only weapon, then defenses will line up to take him out of the game, thus limiting the rest of the offense. Yet, he was still able to have a great career. Again you are still throwing out these "what ifs" that didn't manifest physically to prove your point. Yes, Mike had great athletes around him which took away from his production a bit. Yes, he had one less year. But the fact is, by the time he left NU, he accomplished almost the same things that Ron did, excluding a couple awards and 1500 yards & 21 TDs.............Normally around 10 RBs gain 1500 yards in a season in college football and maybe 5 RBs will cross the goal line more than 20 times. Meaning he had one extra great year than Rozier was able to have. Why is that a fault? I get it, Rozier is a better back, I don't necessarily disagree with that. But my original point is that Dayne's career was better. Is that because of an extra year, maybe so, but it was still a better a career.

You provide stats and I'll provide a highlight reel Highlights are just that.......highlights. No one highlights faults or less than desirable plays, even if their are few. Stats are what has happened. The conclusion. Turnovers are in stats, so are penalties..... So, you providing a highlight reel will do nothing but entertain me as I love watching Rozier running over the Big 8, but it doesn't effect this conversation.

Maybe it's just me but I don't see Wisconsin's season as progression at all. A loss is a loss and they had 6 of them. They only made it to the CCG because the top two teams in their division were ineligible. Only thing they can tip their hat on was their performance in the CCG due to so many doubting them and counting them out accompanied with NU's lack of depth and athleticism on defense accompanied with crucial injuries in the trenches. 2011 Wisconsin went 10-2 in the regular season 1-1 in the post season 2010 Wisconsin went 11-1 in the regular season 0-1 in the post season (no CCG that year in the B1G) 2012 Wisconsin went 7-5 in the regular season 1-1 in the post season (undefeated OSU & 8-4 PSU was ineligible) I don't care how many times you play a team close, if NU finished this past season with 6 losses, I'm not sure the fan base would be too happy or optimistic as they are about the future with him.

If it wasn't for OSU and PSU being in the position they were in, Wisconsin would have ended their season 7-6 with no CCG or Rose Bowl appearance. NU earned everything they accomplished last season, regardless of the blowout losses.

Congrats Tommie

Why do I have to be offended to disagree with you? I think Ron Dayne was a fine college running back. But you seem to be talking about Rozier as if you never saw him play. I watched both, and there's simply no way I can agree that Dayne was better than Rozier. It's not even close. Sorry that's just a little phrase, I say often when I don't understand why a debate is raised over a small comment as if it has no merit......I apologize....on the other board, they know I mean nothing by.....I have to remember I'm a newbie on this board. When I look at Rozier, I think of a Barry Sanders caliber talent, amazing in everyway regardless of what system/team you would put him on. When I think of Dayne, I think of Emmit Smith, great back, great athlete, but don't necessarily think he would have accomplished as much without the team around, mainly talking about his Oline. But I'm specifically just talking about careers, what they accomplished before leaving their programs. Emmit Smith finished in front of Barry Sanders, but Barry, IMO, is the better back hands down and had his career went longer I can't imagine Emmit finishing on top statistically, but that's a "what if" argument. Emmit had a better career. Rozier finished his career a year shorter than Dayne, had a higher ypc average, but he left Lincoln without gaining as many yards as Dayne. And Dayne won every award that Rozier won also. So at the very least, I can say that they were equal, but Dayne has 1500 more yards on his career with 21 more TDs. He's by far, no slouch. I hate discussions like this because it seems as though I'm discrediting a valued Husker, which in no way am I trying to do that. Especially not one whom I'm spoke with multiple times and respected as he played for us.

You know who disagrees? Dayne averaged 5.24 ypc and Rozier averaged 7.15 ypc. Rozier only had 668 carries in his career vs. Dayne's 1220. I know who I'm picking. Braylon Heard 6.0 ypc Ameer Abdullah 4.8 ypc What's your point? Ron Dayne went first round in the NFL draft.............Mike Rozier went to the USFL before getting a crack at the big league a year later. You know who you are picking.....Well, that's good for you. Personally, you won't do bad with either and I don't want to sound like I'm discrediting anything MR did here, but Dayne just had a better career. Does it offend you when someone suggest that someone else had a better career than a husker great? How many data points on this one? Do you think this is a valid comparison given the # of carries? As for the 2nd bolded, nope. I just don't think highly of Dayne at all. Most people don't other than Wisky faithful. Maybe I should have used Ameer/Rex or Braylon/Imani...........but my point is that the ypc is good to look at but the amount of yards is much more important. No one gets an award for having a bigger ypc average, but total yards could get you some recognition. And I'm not saying you have to think highly of the guy, I don't know him personally, but his career was amazing and he was one of the best at his position. I didn't mean to turn this into a Rozier vs Dayne thread. I was just stating that it's not insulting to have him headline a HOF class as his career was just as respectable as Roziers and none of us would complain if he highlighted a HOF class.

That's not a better career, those are higher stats. Huge difference there. Rozier played during the Scoring Explosion years and had to share the ball with Turner Gill and Irving Fryar. Gill and Fryar ate up some of Rozier's stats - Gill was a Heisman finalist in his own right - not to mention the fact that Rozier sat in most of the second halfs of the games he played in. Dayne played four years for Wisconsin while Rozier played three for Nebraska. Give Rozier another year and another 200 carries and he easily eclipses Dayne's stats. Stats is a representation of a players career. I'm suppose to ignore 1500+ more yards more than Rozier's CAREER ENDING RESULTS. So what he played for 3 years and Dayne played for years. There's nothing in the rules that says each player has to be compared only to players who played the same amount of time. Who's to say that if Rozier played another year after his last he wouldn't have ended up getting injured? I believe he left the Orange Bowl in the 3rd quarter due to an injury didn't he. The fact he had to share the ball with Gill and Fryar doesn't change the facts. Was Dayne the only talent when he played for Wisconsin? It's a team sport, so what. Fact is, from the time Rozier step on the field as a Husker to the time he walked off the field for the last time as a husker, he didn't cover as much ground as when Dayne first step on the field and the time he stepped off as a Badger for the last time.......Being that the both were RBs and rushing is what they are primarily asked to do, I would think that this fact weighs heavy on how the career is looked at. Do we have to look at the hardware taken home by each individual by the time they left their respectable schools........I mean wow........if all you are going to argue is a "What if" to support the ypc argument, they we can be hear all day.

That's not a better career, those are higher stats. Huge difference there. Rozier played during the Scoring Explosion years and had to share the ball with Turner Gill and Irving Fryar. Gill and Fryar ate up some of Rozier's stats - Gill was a Heisman finalist in his own right - not to mention the fact that Rozier sat in most of the second halfs of the games he played in. Dayne played four years for Wisconsin while Rozier played three for Nebraska. Give Rozier another year and another 200 carries and he easily eclipses Dayne's stats. Stats is a representation of a players career. I'm suppose to ignore 1500+ more yards more than Rozier's CAREER ENDING RESULTS. So what he played for 3 years and Dayne played for years. There's nothing in the rules that says each player has to be compared only to players who played the same amount of time. Who's to say that if Rozier played another year after his last he wouldn't have ended up getting injured? I believe he left the Orange Bowl in the 3rd quarter due to an injury didn't he. The fact he had to share the ball with Gill and Fryar doesn't change the facts. Was Dayne the only talent when he played for Wisconsin? It's a team sport, so what. Fact is, from the time Rozier step on the field as a Husker to the time he walked off the field for the last time as a husker, he didn't cover as much ground as when Dayne first step on the field and the time he stepped off as a Badger for the last time.......Being that the both were RBs and rushing is what they are primarily asked to do, I would think that this fact weighs heavy on how the career is looked at. Do we have to look at the hardware taken home by each individual by the time they left their respectable schools........I mean wow........if all you are going to argue is a "What if" to support the ypc argument, they we can be hear all day.

You know who disagrees? Dayne averaged 5.24 ypc and Rozier averaged 7.15 ypc. Rozier only had 668 carries in his career vs. Dayne's 1220. I know who I'm picking. Braylon Heard 6.0 ypc Ameer Abdullah 4.8 ypc What's your point? Ron Dayne went first round in the NFL draft.............Mike Rozier went to the USFL before getting a crack at the big league a year later. You know who you are picking.....Well, that's good for you. Personally, you won't do bad with either and I don't want to sound like I'm discrediting anything MR did here, but Dayne just had a better career. Does it offend you when someone suggest that someone else had a better career than a husker great?

You know who disagrees? For some reason the pic won't appear on my work computer, so feel free to explain to me why a man finishing with 4,780 yards and 49 TDs (Mike Rozier) is a better career than a man who finished with 7,125 yards and 71 TDs (Ron Dayne). Yea, Mike had more yards per carry but he still finished with over 1500 yards less than Dayne. That's a better career, obviously no knock on Rozier, but my point is Dayne was a great back and has accomplished as much if not more than one of our all time greats, so it's not insulting to say he "headlines" this years class.

There's certain guys I wouldn't give them on of my 12 votes even if they were only 10 players to choose from. But the obvious for me would be Orlando Pace, Tommie Frazier, Trev Alberts, Tony Boselli, Ron Dayne, & William Fuller.....everyone else I would have to give more thought to due to lack of knowledge of their career or not thinking their career is all that great.

It was also the same crew who officiated the Texas game that year, and the ISU game, where all 3 we had an abnormal amount of penalties, while our opponent had far below average. I knew a few of them officiated the ISU game, but wasn't sure if it was the whole crew......had no idea they were the crew for the Texas game that year also....... Wow. Big XII gave us an expensive going away present....And the B1G through a nice welcoming party.

Ron Dayne was a beast of a man when in Madison. Almost 6400 total yards for a college career, Heisman and two Rose Bowl MVP, amongst many other awards he took in '99. I'm not sure why it's so insulting. He had a better college career than Mike Rozier, one of our all time greats.

Same here with the A&M. We had no chance in that game playing the refs. Didn't we get like 12 penalties in that game. That sucked for sure. We probably averaged 12 penalties a game that year. All calls against us were valid except one. If you want to complain about the lack of holding on A&M, then you have a point. It's not like we made it too hard for the refs to screw us. That's pretty much the point bean. When one team has 16 penalties and the other only has 2(?), it's pretty obvious it was biased officiating. Think it was like 18-2 when you include the flags that got refused. ATM was heavily penalized before that game, funny how they were suddenly so clean. We had problems with this crew even before that season. It was no coincidence we got stuck with those crooked bastards repeatedly. In their last chance to mess with us and in their own back yard that crew was out to screw us hard. I believe it was the exact same crew that officiated the CCG game the previous year who granted Texas the .01

Same here with the A&M. We had no chance in that game playing the refs. Didn't we get like 12 penalties in that game. That sucked for sure. We probably averaged 12 penalties a game that year. All calls against us were valid except one. If you want to complain about the lack of holding on A&M, then you have a point. It's not like we made it too hard for the refs to screw us. Huh? Did you watch that game..... There was a bunch of questionable calls in that game and a bunch of times the refs held on to a flag when they should have toss it, not just on holding.. One of the ones was the late hit on the aTm QB ( can't remember which DB it was called on). That was complete BS. I'm not going to relive the game in this post, but there are a bunch of examples of how that game was obviously called one side. I had two friends who were on aTm's roster (as walk-ons, they didn't play) whom admitted that they would have been pissed had they been on the other sideline. Obviously NU could have done some things differently to protect themselves from so many penalties, but to seriously make it seem like we were "THAT" undisciplined compared to the other team was downright ignorant. Not saying there was a conspiracy between NU and Big XII, but it wasn't like everyone was happy about NU's moving to the B1G the following season. And it was that way from the opening kick off vs KSU. Not to mention we had the only player to be suspended for a hit (block) that didn't even warrant a flag in the game. (Eric Martin on special teams vs Okie Lite)

Elite talent and egos normally come in the same package.

Not really. I worded the question very poorly in the OP, as QMany pointed out earlier. Basically, just answer any way you want. It's a rather worthless poll, anyway. No poll is worthless.......even if it is to get the attention of a bunch of fans waiting on Fall Camp to come around, it still has a purpose.

The defense occasionally decided to do their job, sure, but I don't think there's any denying the offense carried the team the vast majority of the time last year. This is a disrespect to the effort and a slap in the face to the kids who suit up ever Saturday and sweat blood for the scarlet and cream. It may seem like nothing to you but quotes like that happen too often and quite frankly, they are not true. Many of the players read these quotes. You don't think it has some effect on them if they are hearing it repeatedly. If you are putting your all into what you are doing only for someone who isn't able to walk a mile in your shoes to tell you that you lack the effort consistently, it will take an effect on you eventually. Nothing's wrong with discussing likes/dislikes/issues/etc... on a message board, everyone is open to their opinion, I just think some things said have no factual roots but they keep getting repeated thus causing others to eventually take it as "law".

What good would that do us if we crap down our leg like we did the last time? It would be kind of neat for a few weeks, other than that, I got nothing. With the young players, it would do a lot of for their mental state going into Ann Arbor ranked pretty high and undefeated rather than worrying about holding it together and being the reason the team loses another opportunity to get to a BCS bowl. I'm sure they will hear all the pundits and fans throughout the whole year, doubt they would take any significant step forward due to their youth. We all know that the offense will be the strong unit for the team. We know that the defense will be faster. So if they can be more sound and consistent in tackling, that would be a huge step forward from last year.

The defense occasionally decided to do their job, sure, but I don't think there's any denying the offense carried the team the vast majority of the time last year. This is a disrespect to the effort and a slap in the face to the kids who suit up ever Saturday and sweat blood for the scarlet and cream. How do you know when they "decide to do their job" and when they don't feel like doing it. Are you suggesting that if they really wanted to go undefeated, they would have and that losses this year are a result of them "not feeling like doing what is asked of them everyday in practice". Everyone knows that weren't overwhelmed with athleticism on the defensive side of the ball, so I'm not sure why the high expectations were there for the unit, but those kids did all they could week in and week out in the action of entertaining hundreds of thousands of fans every Saturday. Every bad performance is not a lack of effort, as much as it is one player's ability vs another's. A 6 game win streak accompanied with a few 2nd half come from behind victories tell me effort was not the issue that held back the defense.

So the real question that's being asked in this poll is which player do you like better, personally? Why would anyone vote Rex to be a victor over Suh in a head to head match up unless at the line of scrimmage unless they don't like Suh for whatever reason? I love Rex as much as the next Husker fan but regardless of his juking and elusive ability, how many times has he been face to face with a talent such as Suh, let alone at the line of scrimmage in a gap 2-3 yards from the goal line? I've had less than likeable experiences around Suh while in Lincoln but if you create a situation on the field with him being head to head with 95% of the RBs in history, my pick would go to him regardless. SUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHH

Pelini hasn't shown he can run an effective defense that doesn't have top level NFL talent. LSU, Oklahoma, and here all his top defenses had multiple first round talent. Pelini so far has shown he's an average defensive coach, that only excels with top talent. This year will be a test as how good of a d-coach he is. Though Bo's most recent unit wasn't dominant it still was 2nd nationally in pass defense. This is with a defensive unit that had only 1 player drafted and that was in the last round. The defense was still #55 overall out of 125 programs. That says that he is able to still get his defense to function and be effective. No coach in the nation is getting their defense to dominate week in and week out with out top level NFL talent. And before anyone suggest Bowling Green or Rutgers or any other non AQ conference team did it, look at the offenses and opponents they put the numbers up on. And even those programs have "all conference" players throughout their defenses which allows them to be at least a step ahead of their conference foes. You are a complete optimist. I like that. Nebraska had 4 really bad defensive games which they lost. The other games the defense wasn't all that bad. But, the loses are all that anyone remembers. I don't expect a huge turn around in defense for next year. Nebraska is not going to have a top 10 defense next year. How bout a top 30 defense. If NU can knock 75 yards of rushing and a touchdown off the total defense for next year that will be a great improvement in my eyes. That's a fair assessment and I agree for the most part. I wouldn't count the Georgia game as a bad defensive game simply because, IMO, they over acheived being that they weren't facing a offense much more talented than the over defense and was still able to keep it together and not have a repeat of the previous game. and you are right, I don't expect a top 10 defense next year, though I think it is highly possible if the little things are corrected (tackling issues & bone head penalties). We don't exact have a schedule full of offensive juggernuats. I pointed out the accomplishments and rankings of the defense to point out that though we don't like the overall showing of the unit especially in at least 3-4 games, they still aren't as bad as some may think being that we are still #55 best out of 125 FBS programs. Plenty of room to get better, but can obviously be a lot worse..........I can never forget '07.

Honest question - how many coaches excel with bad talent? 0

After four years - welcome! I had to go back in my email to find out what my password was.....