teachercd

I totally get your thoughts! It is kind of weird because I look at the schedule and think that 10 wins is basically built in...then I think about Coach Riley coaching the team and I start thinking that he manages to make the impossible possible and the possible impossible. Why in the world would you think with our current talent level that 10 wins are built in? Pure delusion. I doubt Osborne would go 10-2 with our current roster vs Oregon, at Ohio State, at Wisconsin, at Iowa, at NW and others. We need a better roster before there are 10 built in wins on any schedule we'll see. We're still starting guys like Dzuris. I hear what you are saying but for one Dzuris should not be starting, that is sad, I agree. Two, the fact that Husker fans think that Iowa and NW are some tough teams is a big problem, sadly. NU will be favored in all about 2 games this year. Think about that.

I am optimistic about this year, but I agree with you on the strength of schedule. I don't understand how people can think this is an easy schedule. It isn't murderers' row, but it sure isn't patty cake either. I guess if 10 was the hardest schedule and 1 was the easiest...I would say this years schedule is like a 4.5?4.5 to me is too low, that sits on the easier side of the scale. To me trips to UW, I@wa, and tOSU is pretty tough plus Oregon at home. NW is away and they are a solid team as well. I would say a 6. Yeah, I get what you are saying...I just think Iowa should NOT be a "tough game" even though it probably will be. Maybe since they play 12 games we should say the scale is 1-12 with 1 being the easiest and for each "sure win" you subtract starting at 12. Sure wins: Fresno, Wyoming, Illinois, Purdue, Maryland...good lord how far has Nebraska fallen when I am not even sure if Purdue is a sure win anymore. Never mind!

I am optimistic about this year, but I agree with you on the strength of schedule. I don't understand how people can think this is an easy schedule. It isn't murderers' row, but it sure isn't patty cake either. I guess if 10 was the hardest schedule and 1 was the easiest...I would say this years schedule is like a 4.5?

I totally get your thoughts! It is kind of weird because I look at the schedule and think that 10 wins is basically built in...then I think about Coach Riley coaching the team and I start thinking that he manages to make the impossible possible and the possible impossible.

Because he has a degree I would think that he might be more willing to leave. Maybe hook up with an NBA team or D-league or possibly overseas. He has little to accomplish here.

While I think NU goes 10-2...I still am a bit surprised to see it at 9.5 I was thinking 8.5 but hey...what do I know?

Did they play together? I can't remember if they overlapped at all.

I'd almost put NW as a loss more than a toss up. We've shown no signs of being able to stop them since we joined in the Big Ten, IMO. We've done a pretty good job of stopping them. We've just done a better job of shooting ourselves in the foot too often. Years ago I heard an interview that Kirk Herbstreet was doing and the host (I think it was Rome) asked how the Illini could beat the Buckeyes that weekend...Herbie said something like "Well, they can hope that since it is an 11am game and at Illinois that the Buckeyes will be tired and sleepy and hopefully the skies will be gray and gloomy, then they might have a chance" I feel like that was how it "felt" for last years NW game...only Nebraska was the sleepy team.

My guess is that Hank Hughes never bought into the new coaching regime. Plus, he left the cupboard bare for Parella. To this day and until I die I LOVE that Hughes lived in the dorms. I still can't get over how funny that must have been and I still want to know if some freshmen on his floor would knock on the door and be like "Hank, we are heading down to eat, you coming?" or "Dude, Hanky, I guess there is a sweet party at 27th and Vine tomorrow, 5 dollars for a cup, you in?"

He quit on his teammates and didn't want to compete for a starting job here. Not sure why you'd want more of guys like that. Okay, I have to ask this...did Riley quit on his team at OSU and wanted to go to a place where he would be better off and have a better chance at winning? I personally think you do what is best for you, period. But the way you frame it, well, sounds like Williams and Riley are both quitters.

Wait...so we want to know about their sex life but not their net worth, gender or place of birth?

Not to you. But I would like to know how we address them. Mr. or Mrs. or Ms. For some reason, I don't think you would ever be in the position to meet the President in a face-to-face sit down. So, it shouldn't matter to you either... Being respectful always matters. But, if gender doesn't matter would you be okay with voting for a woman who turned out to be a man or vice-versa? Says the poster who has repeatedly called Hillary Clinton a man in this forum. Because we don't know! Just like I don't know Trumps net worth! Nor do I know if Trump is a man like he claims. WE NEED TO KNOW

Exactly, I couldn't see it last year and I can't see it this year. But, since it happened, logic indicates it could, and maybe even likely would, happen again. I'd feel better about our chances if the top 3 or 5 priorities weren't such a question mark. 1-QB play. Which Tommy will we see? 2-Defense. Have lost some key personnel and will Banker make some adjustments? 3- Line play. I think there are legitimate questions if our OL and DL's will be up to the task. If we don't control the LOS better, 7 wins may be the ceiling. 4- Establishing a run game and offensive play calling. Langs and Riley are saying the right things but I need to see them not constantly revert to being air happy, especially if it's the same old TA. 5- Clock management and logic defying bad luck. If they can address the 4 prior issues then this concern gets greatly mitigated. I hate to sound so pessimistic but it is reality until they prove otherwise on the field. However, I am very hopeful at least 2 of these issue see vast improvement and that may be all it takes to put a few more in the win column this year. I think that pretty much sums it up and I am happy you don't have anything about toxic culture and buy in... The games they "should win" they better win this year...Fresno, Wyoming, Purdue, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois, Minny and Northwestern. Lose any of those and I will start losing faith.

Kid has had some big issues off the court. Hopefully he can get things worked out.

Jesus...what is this kids GPA...8.6?

Again, why do we want another team's cast offs? If they got kicked off the team there was a reason, academically or behavior ... If they are good at being DT's I really don't care if they did poorly in Econ 101. And you're a teacher? Nope Ah, that explains the screen name then (not). Sorry, I assumed. Honest question, not trolling - is there anyone that has been kicked off the Nebraska team in the last few years that you think, "yeah, that would be a good pick up"? Who was the dude that always showed his dong? Moss? I think he was pretty good. LeRoy Alexander was good I suppose that RG sort of could have been kicked off and he would have been a good pick up. I can't really think of other guys that have been kicked off that I really would have wanted.

I just can't see how they would only win 7 games. The schedule is very nice. I just can't see a 7-5 season. But I couldn't imagine a 5-7 season last year.

Again, why do we want another team's cast offs? If they got kicked off the team there was a reason, academically or behavior ... If they are good at being DT's I really don't care if they did poorly in Econ 101. And you're a teacher? Nope

Again, why do we want another team's cast offs? If they got kicked off the team there was a reason, academically or behavior ... If they are good at being DT's I really don't care if they did poorly in Econ 101.

Maybe NU can get the two DT's that MSU kicked off the team.

Lol we were 5-7 last year. You don't KNOW that the Huksers will be favored in all of two games. Stop drinking so early. As of right now they are favored in all but two. Ohio State and Wisconsin are the two. We know they will be favored vs: Fresno, Wyoming, Oregon (NU is favored right now -2), Minny, Purdue and Illini, Maryland and Indiana. Iowa could be a pickem

The reason I keep hearing that TG and TS need to use bathrooms of the gender they aren't is so they are more comfortable. Are they uncomfortable because of a modesty issue or because they fear being assaulted? If it is the former then you have protected the modesty of .2% of the population while making uncomfortable probably half or more of the total female population. If it is the later then "well we got some laws against that". I don't know how long it has been since you were in high school or been around high school boys but if you think some will not push the envelope to find a way to successfully spend time in the girls locker room and bathrooms and come away with pics/video, then your head is a long way up your keester. How is the law making half or more of the female population uncomfortable? Does this law mean every man will suddenly start using the women's restroom? I imagine this will be a very rare occurrence. As for actual transgendered women, I don't think that many women would be bothered by it. To the last bolded, that already happens. In fact, trying to take video of girls locker rooms/bathrooms would probably be harder when attempting it in such an obvious way. I am not saying that every man would start using women's bathrooms. There is a small % of men who would delight in making a woman uncomfortable by following her into a bathroom. And even of that small % very few of those would even be molesters. Can you honestly say you would be comfy if a 6'2 200 lb man followed you into the public bathroom and while not saying anything didn't go into a stall to use the facility? Not saying he was peeping or even near your stall. He might be checking for spinach in his teeth or combing his hair. Would you open the stall door and nonchalantly walk to the sink and wash if he was between you and the exit door? If you say you wouldn't give it another thought you are unlike the 12-15 women I have asked a similar question to over the last few weeks. Given that all the respondents were here in conservative central Nebraska and I would guess at least half of women nationwide do/would not feel comfortable with a man in the same bathroom. Who is standing up for those women? Why do they have to "get over themselves and their insecurities"? After all that I'm saying I don't see why we as a nation need to cross this bridge for .2% of the population. If the feds are that serious about this then let them fund the cost of either private single stall/either sex bathrooms or make TG/TS only bathrooms. I'm also NOT saying I think TG individuals are now or would be a major problem with being offensive. I would feel uncomfortable, but not more uncomfortable than I already feel just by being in a public restroom. I don't care if it's a man woman or child in there with me, I don't like public restrooms. I've had little kids peeking under the stall to look at me while I was peeing before. Damn kids. I think what would make women far more uncomfortable than the possibility of some kind of assault happening is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises." Why do you think those kids peeked? Because kids are kids, damn kids. Most little kids watch their parents (or at least their moms) go to the bathroom, and apparently some of them want to watch everyone go to the bathroom. That cracks me up!

Pfffft fantasy. Everyone knows girls don't fart. Physical imposssibility. I just got sick

The reason I keep hearing that TG and TS need to use bathrooms of the gender they aren't is so they are more comfortable. Are they uncomfortable because of a modesty issue or because they fear being assaulted? If it is the former then you have protected the modesty of .2% of the population while making uncomfortable probably half or more of the total female population. If it is the later then "well we got some laws against that". I don't know how long it has been since you were in high school or been around high school boys but if you think some will not push the envelope to find a way to successfully spend time in the girls locker room and bathrooms and come away with pics/video, then your head is a long way up your keester. How is the law making half or more of the female population uncomfortable? Does this law mean every man will suddenly start using the women's restroom? I imagine this will be a very rare occurrence. As for actual transgendered women, I don't think that many women would be bothered by it. To the last bolded, that already happens. In fact, trying to take video of girls locker rooms/bathrooms would probably be harder when attempting it in such an obvious way. I am not saying that every man would start using women's bathrooms. There is a small % of men who would delight in making a woman uncomfortable by following her into a bathroom. And even of that small % very few of those would even be molesters. Can you honestly say you would be comfy if a 6'2 200 lb man followed you into the public bathroom and while not saying anything didn't go into a stall to use the facility? Not saying he was peeping or even near your stall. He might be checking for spinach in his teeth or combing his hair. Would you open the stall door and nonchalantly walk to the sink and wash if he was between you and the exit door? If you say you wouldn't give it another thought you are unlike the 12-15 women I have asked a similar question to over the last few weeks. Given that all the respondents were here in conservative central Nebraska and I would guess at least half of women nationwide do/would not feel comfortable with a man in the same bathroom. Who is standing up for those women? Why do they have to "get over themselves and their insecurities"? After all that I'm saying I don't see why we as a nation need to cross this bridge for .2% of the population. If the feds are that serious about this then let them fund the cost of either private single stall/either sex bathrooms or make TG/TS only bathrooms. I'm also NOT saying I think TG individuals are now or would be a major problem with being offensive. I would feel uncomfortable, but not more uncomfortable than I already feel just by being in a public restroom. I don't care if it's a man woman or child in there with me, I don't like public restrooms. I've had little kids peeking under the stall to look at me while I was peeing before. Damn kids. I think what would make women far more uncomfortable than the possibility of some kind of assault happening is the chance that a man might hear them making "bathroom noises." Why do you think those kids peeked?

This thread is getting better and worse...