HuskerGBR

He is a little over the top for me. He sometimes has good points, but...well to each their own. I will say this though, there are plenty of times when I hear Severe rant about nonsence that makes no sence and I wish I could pop him in his mouth. That guys is a total tool bag. This is why I think Fro Daddy is THE best fan out there. He even makes me want to cheer for good old mizzou with that much class. You're my boy Fro!!

I would like to go to this game, but I figured out long ago that I am bad luck at the game. The last one I went to was the Big XII championship against Oklahoma and I can't go to anymore. I have figured out that I am better off to the team if I don't go. I also would love to wear red, but my lucky shirt is green. Many times last season I started with red and had to switch to green and then bam...we turned it on. It sucks, but I would gladly take one for the team and not go if I am bad luck.

I simply pointed out where your premise is flawed (grievously so). Don't get all hurt and start whining about it. If you don't want to have people point out flaws in your logic, then don't post. It's pretty simple. Thing is my premise wasn't flawed...you just read it wrong. And not whining just trying to help you not be an ass your whole life. Quite simply I think you can take your opinions on my opinion and stick em up your ass. You might like that too much though.

Your premise that these kids are "maxed out" coming out of High School is flat wrong. The country is littered with Texas players who continue to improve in college. Second, Osborne's Option attack was no less complicated than the West Coast. It was flexible, stealthy, and relied on finesse as much as power. Don't get sucked in to the false conception that it was just "line 'em up and punch 'em in the mouth" as most national talking heads would have you believe. I think we could be successful running the Option attack, or the Nebraska Coast offense, or a pure West Coast, or the Spread... doesn't really matter what the offense is. What matters is personnel and execution. We get the right personnel and we could run any offense we want and be successful. I never said they still couldn't improve. What I meant is their potential is pretty much maxed out. They are more polished and developed. That means that they can come in and start right away since in that warmer weather they have more experience playing since they can play longer. What I was saying was that a lot of these kids from "colder" states haven't even come close to reaching their full potential like the guys from warmer states. That's why you see a lot of kids with 2 or 3 stars doing much more in the NFL. Everybody has a max potential...it is the kids from Texas, California, Florida, etc that reach their potential sooner. They stand out in high school and that is why they have the 5 stars, but college is a different thing and they get surpassed by the kids that reach their max potential in college. To put it more simply...people mature at different times. Some mature in high school and they were the better athletes then the rest at that time. Some people mature in college and come out of no where and they surpass the athlete that was good in high school. It happens all the time. Also I do believe you need to scheme somewhat with the type of people you have in your state. You can pull the skill positions from other states that is fine...but you also need to know what you have to work with in your state which, for the most part, will fuel your personnel. That should determine some of the plays you run. Another thing is this is my opinion. I have seen a lot of this go on all the time so this is my perspective. To say it is flat wrong is pretty ignorant Knappy. That would be like me telling you that we couldn't run the west coast or the spread and your opinion on that matter is wrong. Maybe we could run it...maybe we couldn't. We really haven't had a lot of success running the west coast so far and if Michigan sucks again then I will have more reason to believe you can't just run any offense you want. You have to scheme around where you are located in the country. Anyways this is what I THINK...you can disagree with me all you want Knappy. Oh and quit being an a-hole that thinks you are always right...rkhufu is just giving his opinion too.

Haha...awesome. Are the two teams going to go out and do a dance off too? Be a pretty sweet football game. Wham?..Rickrolled? How'd this turn into a KSU discussion? 9ild8w0rHQU God I love Seinfeld...the show about nothing. Anyways I love your signature with the penguin knocking the other one down...I haven't laughed that hard since I was a little school girl. Lol good times.

That only means that they are almost maxed at their potential in my book. I still think some of the farmboys around here would knock the crap out of anybody else in the country. Nebraska kids can improve themselves much more than a kid from Texas who is already almost maxed out, just takes less work and they could start right away (the texas kids). That's part of the reason our walk-on program is so successful. You get these kids no one knows about and they drive the team. Bottomline you need to have a system for where you are in the country. Take Michigan...they will never be good again running their new offense. We will probably never be really good with the west coast offense, because we have a different breed of guys here compared to Texas or California. We can pull from there all we like, but we still have to rely on Nebraska boys to keep the program going. West coast offense blows...we need to get back to smashmouth and just hit someone on the field. Personally simple is better...less chances to mess it up.

Haha...awesome. Are the two teams going to go out and do a dance off too? Be a pretty sweet football game.

Yeah shut this baby down. It's only going to get uglier. I have to wonder though...you guys think steroids might have caused a lot of problems for these schools in the 90's? I mean you have to think that a lot of college players were taking things around these times. So that could be why there was more violent situations. Also I look at the whole of the program and like someone else said...we have a lot of good people come out of our university. It was spoiled in some people's eyes by a few bad people. It is funny how people call Nebraska fans hypocrites when those people are hypocrites themselves. I say get over it and if you can't then you can stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

I am still not sold on Watson myself. You guys can give me all the grief you want for saying this...but I just don't like his playcalls. I hate using a 3 back system the way he uses it. To me it seemed like last year we would get something working and then move away from it...at least wait until they finally stop it and then mix it up. What I loved about our old offense is that it was genius. We set things up and it felt like Tom was in a chess match. We could all see that Helu was the better runner then Lucky last year (I still love Lucky, but he didn't have it last year) and we still used Lucky more. I also don't think we called plays that used Lucky to his strengths. And did anyone else notice that Watson seems to panic a little when we get down? He would go straight to passing once we were down, even when it was just 7 points. I don't know if this is on Watson either, but we need to be able to finish more in the redzone. I am more waiting to see how the offense does this year and then I can really decide on Watson. For now I just don't know. He is a good coach, but I think we will be just fine if he leaves. I hope he does well, but I need to see a few things before I can say that we really need Watson to stick around.

WOW...did that dude get fired for being stupid or what? He should and if I were you guys...I would have just taken the safety anyways. Fro daddy wins this one with that story in my opinion. I don't even have any words to say how sorry I am that you guys had to go through something like that.

I think its different when talking just about lawerence phillips and when people are talking about the 90's huskers problems. You are right that people make a bigger deal out of the issues with the huskers then they do and the issues in Iowa City the past few years. Thats because the Huskers won, alot. And I will agree that issues happened/happen with many team across the country. And maybe its a regional thing. as far asnowledge. But I lost respect for TO because of some of those things. Maybe that is just me, but from an outsider who knows and hears the things that he says, then watched his actions, it turned me off. And like you said, NE could have won without LP. Back on track though, to answer your question. I associate those players in that situation with the huskers and TO. However, I see LP as a waste of talent and time. He recieved how many chances not only from TO and Dick Vermil, but I would imagine from a number of people in his life. He was too stupid to realize if he listened he could have had a pretty good life, instead he ended up in the place they all desperately tried to keep him out of. BTW - my opinion on that doesnt take away anything, in my mind from what NE did. Even if NE did sit LP, Greene was still there. NE was stacked. TO's non-action or half arsed actions (IMO ofcourse. obviously others feel different) effected my personally feeling for a man, not the talent and achievements of his teams. Oh...and I dont rush the field. Although I dont really care if people do. It doesnt happen often in FB anyway. Trust me things were just as bad in Bob Devaney's time. This is football where egos and testosterone runs pretty high. So yeah it is tough to control some of these guys. Plus there isn't a whole heck of a lot to do in Nebraska so there are lots of opportunities to get into trouble. That's no excuse I am making for their actions...just some reasons why it happens. But to say TO just swept things under the rug is a pretty ignorant statement. He took care of the problems and listened to the circumstances of the situation. He knows more about the situation then any of us and I am sure there were discussions between him and the player involved. I am sure TO probably felt he could help those guys by keeping them around...they might wise up and follow his example or someone else's example. He is a man of faith and so were a lot of players/coaches on the team. What would you rather have him do? Cut them loose into the world? At least TO gave them a chance to be something better, but it didn't work out in LP's case. You can talk bad about a few of our players (and I mean a FEW because most of our players are upstanding citizens), but I will be damned if I just sit back and say nothing while someone says something bad about TO. The man has more character, honor, integrity, respect, brains, and courage then most of us could ever dream of having. Not to mention the fact that we lead the nation in CoSIDA academic all americans. I wonder where Missouri is on that list? Back on topic- We used to rush the field all the time even when we dominated. It is tradition everywhere, just don't do anything stupid when you are on the field.

Wait a minute..Whut? Why doesnt a bowl game count? (careful) I think that he meant that it didn't count for scheduling purposes because they didn't schedule Alabama. (he seemed to be saying that if they played a big name school like Alabama during the regular season then Utah would have a better argument for deserving to be in the title game.) Exactly right carl. Been working so haven't been on to clarify that. It wasn't a regular season game so we can't say that they should go to the NCG based on the "they beat Alabama argument." So that's what I meant by that.

Like I have already said Junior...you can't do it that way. That's not a true playoff system and it would solve nothing. As you guys know I am against a playoff. Numbers 9,10,11,12 etc would complain about not getting in so nothing would change. The bowl games would suffer...you can't guarantee that every game matters...No clue how money would get handled...the OOC scheduling/scheduling in general. There are more, but I am drained right now. Everybody thinks they should have played in the NCG even before the BCS. And its more the fans that do the crying. Here is what happens with the BCS...win all your games and you are good to go. (The Utah argument does not count...they need to play someone first and Alabama was a bowl game so that doesn't count either). I watch games every Saturday. Every week matters. I don't do that for any other sport and that is why I love college football. Why would I want to change that to please a bunch of cry babies from the MWC who just want a piece of the pie handed to them and not work for it like the rest of the conferences did.

7. I'll ignore the implication here and answer the question: Believe it or not there is football outside of the games that involve Nebraska. And yes, I watch as much college football as I possibly can. Low blow by me, sorry about that. But don't tell me you are emotionally invested in those games, because if you are then you are one of the few. I watch as much as I can too, but I won't really care about the game. So? The Big 10+1 determines a conference champ without a conference title game and a given team doesn't play every other team in their conference. The point: It can be done. Yeah it can be done, but not in a playoff scenario if you want to get a "fair" system like people keep saying. Mostly if we go with what you suggest in this post then we would do a tournament with all the conference winners and the conference winners would be decided by the two best teams going at it no matter the division. That's the only way yours would work, but that would be more in favor of the big schools. Plus that just adds to the confusion on who would be the teams that go in case of three way ties and what not and you would see more of them. And I am assuming you still would want bowl games, yes? They would be greatly diminished by this system whether you think so or not. I see this system you have here having just as many faults and consequences as the BCS.

Is any other reason really needed here? You bet. Like I said the only way to determine the real champ in a playoff system is to do a full blown playoff system. Regionals and all of it. Which would mean completely changing college football. You won't be able to do bowl games and once again an 8 team playoff wouldn't be a fair playoff and would have just as many problems as the current system. Just getting tired of you saying we don't have valid reasons not to do a playoff and we won't back anything up, but you are doing the same thing not giving reasons why we should have one. The real champs thing is all you say which I already covered why we can't have a real champ without the full blown playoff scenario and that would ruin college football. We have to think about the big picture here and not focus in on just one aspect.

@Jen You still keep saying that we don't have valid reasons for not doing a playoff, but you don't answer some of the questions like I said (see above post) or what Huskerswrkhavoc has said. You give no answers to why we should have a playoff other than it would determine the real national champs. We might be able to get the best of the bowl games with a playoff, but the only way I see that is if we do a +1 type situation which would still have it's flaws, but might stop some of the doubting on who is the national champs. Playoffs are best determined by regional playoffs and then the real playoffs. That is the least flawed system in a playoff scenario. That would do away completely with bowl games and add a LOT more games so I don't think they are even considering this option. That also means that the regular season wouldn't matter as much as it does now. If we go with no CCG's then that would mean the conferences with 12 teams would have to play everyone in that conference. There goes OOC games for those schools. If we stick with CCG's then that would mean that you would probably have to go with the two best schools in the conference so last year it would have been Texas vs. Oklahoma (there would be more of a monopoly in this scenario because you want the best teams in the playoff which means better recruiting and TV time/money for them), but they already played each other in the regular season which gives pac-10 and big-10 conference champs an edge unless you make them play a CCG too. Also that reduces the OOC games they play and guess what...that means schools like Boise State, Utah, etc wouldn't even get a shot, because they wouldn't be able to play any of the big boys. If they do anything I wouldn't mind agreeing on a +1 type situation where everything is thought out and they covered most of the bases. I don't want to see them rush anything. There has to be a compromise that most fans can agree on and what the pro-playoff people want is too much while the anti-playoff people is not enough so we need some type of middle ground. The pro-playoff people don't realize that you would have to rework almost the entire system that college football has in order to have a "fair" playoff system even with just an 8 team playoff (which wouldn't be a true, fair playoff system). That includes conference and OOC play plus how many games they play. @krc- That's exactly what a playoff would do and I agree that, for the most part, once you lose in this system now then you probably won't be playing for the NC.

Well it is good to have our name out there in SEC country. You really think Bernard eh? I like his stats and all, but I hope he would be the only RB we take if he somehow wants to come to NE. I know we have a long wait on the Green kid from Texas, but I like that kid. And Jeff Luc...seems like he has a slow 40 time compared to some of the other guys we are trying to get at LB. I like guys who have more of a ten yard burst more at linebacker and are smart football players, so I don't like to judge a guy based solely on 40 times. Just something that stood out to me, but who knows maybe the other guys have skewed times and maybe his time was somewhat slower due to unknown reasons and he could be faster than that. It's nice to see the #2 SE guy looking at us though.

Thanks for the article and summary SECHusker. Anyone know what are chances are on some of these guys?

City rec basketball and beer league softball doesn't bring in the money like college football does. Plus those are more fun (no doubt they are still competitive), but it's more for people who like to play. They use a playoff, because what...are they going to use a bowl system for these leagues? Would teams sign a contract with the Yankee bowl? Besides those leagues don't have 120 teams and the win/loss records are a little more cut and dry in softball leagues. Look I understand the reasons why people want a playoff...I do. But the fact is you can't have both the bowl games and a playoff like people are saying. You either do a straight playoff with regional playoffs to decide who goes to the playoffs or I could see a +1 scenario MIGHT be able to work if done right. If you do straight playoffs then the regular season games won't matter anymore. The money you talk about is important. Those vendors, hotels, restaurants, etc, depend on that income from the bowl games. Not to mention the tax dollars the city receives.

It would be easy to institute play-offs. What makes it "hard" is a certain segment of society wants to keep a stupid and inherently flawed system in place. Name them. And you are basing this on what exactly? Seems to me as though you are projecting what you do to every other college football fan. Personally I love college football and I'll watch the FAU Owls play Toledo, I'll watch San Diego State versus Boise State, etc. The actual number isn't the point: It's the fact that the stadium is sold out or close to it. In your sCUm and OU scenario, if the Buttaloes were to somehow beat OU in the conference title game then yes, as conference champs they'd go to the playoffs. Yes every conference would have a title game or none would. Are you aware that the Pac 10 and The Big 10+1 are two conferences that somehow determine a conference champion without a title game? So it can be done...crazy I know. Again with the "holes." All you've done is vaguely hint around at all the holes without any specific examples to support your position. So again, what "holes" are you talking about? So if there were playoffs you'd stop loving, and watching college football, simply because a playoff system was instituted? The "holes" I am talking about is can you guarantee me that every game would matter, revenue would be generated for the cities that hold the bowl games to the extent it is with the bowl games now, and they would play no more than 14 games in the season (14 is already high for these STUDENT athletes). How would you determine the real conference winner without a regional playoff that would make a playoff a little more fair which adds more games and goes back to every game wouldn't matter? How would you deal with OOC games which is nice for schools of other conferences to get a chance to play each other? How would you determine the schools that go to the playoffs...would you take the top 8 that is based on bias polls like it is now? What if a top 8 school didn't win their conference...do they still go? Those are just some questions that spring to mind that nobody seems to answer...I said I didn't want to go too far into it, but apparently you want me to. So you would watch the FAU owls huh? You just get that name, because we have them on the schedule? Chances are you don't really watch them and the only reason most people do is because they are the only game on. The majority of people don't really care to see those types of matchups which would put you in the minority and in this country majority rules. Fact is when you watch those teams...you are not really emotionally invested in that game. Mostly what I was saying was most people won't TRAVEL to the bowl games (if there is a playoff) unless they are loyal fans of that team. And yeah sherlock I am aware that the pac-10 and big 10 have no title game. Did you know that they play everybody in their conference too? And I would stop loving and watching if they decide to just go with a playoff without thinking things through and just doing it, because of a bunch of cry baby fans. Maybe we should just put in a rule where everybody plays and everybody is a winner and not keep score while we are at it.

Because existing bowl games could be used to host the play-off games and teams which do not qualify for playoffs, but still meet bowl eligibility requirements, would still be able to go to the, or a, bowl game. 1. There are older fans who would be able to travel to all the play-off games. 2. With Nebraska's national fan base, someone who lives in Seattle might not be able to go to the quarterfinal in Jacksonville, FL but maybe they could make the semi-final in California. The point: Not all fans could afford to go to all play-off games but that would just give other fans a chance. Now, local tourism dollars would probably be decreased in a play-off scenario versus the current bowl structure. See points 1 and 2 above. Have you seen the stadiums for D1-AA and lower? They are full or pretty close to it most of the time. 1. I'm not advocating having play-off games a "higher seeds" home field so that's a moot point and doesn't even begin to "destroy" the current bowl structure. 2. Again, for teams that don't make the play-offs, keep the smaller bowls so they can still go. 3. If the Rose Bowl isn't hosting the national championship game, or if neither the Pac-10 champ or Big 10+1 champ are involved in the BCS title game the Rose Bowl maintains its Pac 10 / Big 10+1 ties...ergo...Wisconsin vs Oregon in the Rose Bowl could still happen under the current system. 4. What about the yawner in the Rose Bowl a year or two ago when Illinois played USC? Under a play off system USC wouldn't have been in the Rose, it would've been Cal or some other Pac 10 school and maybe, just maybe, Illinois would've had an actual chance to win rather than getting blown out like a slightly better version of Notre Dame. The point: We can have a true playoff system, just like EVERY other level of football and still maintain the quality and integrity of the current bowl structure. And the individuals who say that a play-off system would render the college football regular season meaningless are offering a straw man argument. 1. Make a team's non-conference strength of schedule more of a factor. Give more "points" to a team which plays a strong OOC schedule and give less points to a team which plays a "Kansas State" ou of conference type schedule. 2. Award automatic playoff berths to conference champions. There you have it...a way to institute a play-off system which: I) maintains the integrity of the current bowl system and II) maintains the importance of the regular season. NEXT!!!!! Sorry Jen but you just make it sound so easy. It's not and only a fool would think there is an easy fix. There are so many holes with what you just said that I don't even want to think about it or go to far into it. Keep the smaller bowls you say and only the fans of that team will watch it. Everyone else will be more concerned about the playoffs and guess what...we don't want an NFL system and no one cares about Div- 1AA and that they have a playoff. You said they fill their stadiums...oh yeah 16k people...congrats. You say award automatic playoff berths to conference champions. I hope you are assuming every conference would have a conference championship or that none would. Also what happens if say they do have a CCG and Colorado beats Oklahoma somehow and Colorado was number 24 in the polls. So they should get to the playoffs automatically? And if you did away with CCG's then how would you determine the winner of the conference? Just too many holes in a playoff system for college football so I am against it for those reasons and the fact I love college football because there is no playoffs. I watch pretty much every game I can (except the dumb Tuesday night games) during the regular season and honestly I don't do that for any other sport out there.

I read you there man. In my heart I just feel like they would destroy the bowl experience if they do a playoff. No doubt about LSU and 2 losses though...never happened before if I can remember right. The BCS is partly to blame for that, but also the NCAA for the 85 scholorship limit. Your comment on the conference championships is also a big deal...I agree all conferences should do away with conference championships, because they are the main reasons things get messed up in the Bowl rankings. Whether we like it or not...the bowl games do great things for our economy. It is about money...just imagine what would happen to Omaha if we didn't have the college world series. I am sure there is a way to incorporate all of these things, but I don't want to see us rush to do it. Because when we rush things...we mess things up.

No I don't mean the coaches either. They need to just prepare their teams and prepare these kids for the real world. And good job of saying nothing useful there bob.

I don't think we can include Colorado and Missouri fans on that list. Only reason they are obnoxious to us is because we have a rivalry. All teams have their obnoxious fans. I don't really care for this list anyways, because I have met some great Oklahoma, USC, and Clemson fans. Same old Foxsports garbage of a list if you ask me. Its a matter of perspective really.

@Junior- Huskerswrkhavoc put this exactly how I feel. So on your post, Junior, about an 8 team playoff then that means the teams that make it all the way to the final game would be playing 3 games. How many people are really going to travel to see a team like Utah play 3 more games? You guys are asking that we ruin college football as we know it, because you want a "fair" system. Trust me a playoff is not fair either. Like I said you would have the number 9,10,11,12, etc. teams that might have 2 losses like some of the other 8 teams that made it in. They would cry about it and you know it...not so much the players but the fans. For example Nebraska is #9 and didn't make it, but they have the same record as a couple of teams who did get in...wouldn't be so cool would it? Then we would go to some crap bowl game that only husker fans would watch. Instead of getting a decent bowl game that most of the country would watch. That's all I have to say about this. Us as fans need to just sit back and watch the game. Leave the business end to people that know a little more about the behind the scenes aspect then fans do.