huskerinacaveman

CF appears to be the only major sport where don't get a reasonable fair shot at winning a championship because you don't play every team. CBB is slightly more so because the big dance is so big, and I don't think a 16 seed has actually ever won, and including anyone else would have even less probability. There has to be a better way to even up the playing field. That still allows for everyone to make a bunch of cash, and get a shot. I think we can establish it here on this board lol

Don't entirely disagree, but the foundation of the playoffs your suggesting is to subjective to rankings. Rankings don't mean anything because not every team plays each other, and as everyone has seen this year under that format there would have been possibly 3 SEC teams in the mix. You shouldn't be able to lose in the conference game or not even play at all.and then have a shot at the National Title,

Besides, you can't feel like you got snubbed if its established that you have to win your conference first.

True, but we do always hear about how we want to maintain the integrity of conference play. You win your division, you win your conference, you get a chance. I think it would be awesome to see an 8-5 team run up and down the field with the bigger conference. Remember the first Boise State game when they faced Oklahoma. Now that was fun, unless you were Oklahoma. If you were 11-2 and lost in the conference game, hey good job, better luck next year.

Don't know how many of you follow cornnation, but its part of my daily reading material. Today they posed the questions what are our expectations should be. Someone responded that the winning the division should be the benchmark in the college playoff system. As I was reading some of the responses, I started thinking of how baseball use to be. You could win the second most games in the whole league, but you didn't win your division and therefore were snubbed for the playoffs. So my question is this. Should there be (at some point) a change to the format in the future to where only one team per conference gets into the playoff. Rankings don't matter, computers don't matter, power rankings don't matter. The only thing that matters is winning your conference. Each conference gets an equal shot. No automatic qualifying. The only issue I see with this is there are only 10 conferences and the independents. There may be some byes involved, but I think it gives the fairest shot for everyone to have the chance to win.

For years around husker football I keep hearing about the injustice of having one second put back on as if it was hose job, and that time had ran out yada yada yada. I am so tired of that. Look there maybe a lot of plays in the husker history that should have gone our way and didn't. A good number of them in the last few years. This is not one of them. Watch it on youtube and hit pause when you see the ball go out of bounds, there will still be a second on the clock. Can we please just stop using this as a point of reference when talking about debacles. It was a kickers fault for kicking it out of bounds, it was Suhs fault for horse collaring a player, it was the secondaries fault for covering all of those guys so well that caused him to throw it out of bounds. END OF STORY. Thank You

I sometimes wish that we could recruit qbs in cycles, Every second year so that way when one guy graduates you have another that has been in the system for a bit, and your don't recruit a bunch of good guys and can only play one.

I have thought the same thing. It seems like the offense that we have now tries to highlight the better parts of many offenses. Kind of uptempo, generally uses the clock, Can be a quick strike offense. Efficiency is the key problem, and if we could increase our points per possession we could have a really really formidable offense. Include a top 25 defense and we could be a very good team. So maybe we are on to something, and it is just taking time to find the right mix to smooth it out.. Gives me a lot of hope for the future.

yeah, but the Pac-12 also among the worse in conference when it comes to offensive play. Stanford, Oregon State, USC, Arizona State, Washington, Washington State are all in the bottom half in total offense. A conference like the B-12 has 6 or their 10 teams in the bottom half of the defensive rankings and most of those offenses are an uptempo O

Should I have added yellow?

A question that has been bouncing between the ears the last year or so is.... If you have an Uptempo Offense, are you more likely to have a bad defense? I haven't compiled stats from any year other than this year, This is what I found.. Here is kind of a key when looking at this, and how I based everything Green = Good Red = Bad High Time of Possession (TOP) is Good, Low is Bad Low Opponent Time of Possession is Good, High is bad High Number of plays on Offense is Good, Low is Bad Low Number of plays on Defense is good, High is Bad Uptempo-TOP-Defense.pdf As you can see the top 25 defensive teams have a lot more green than red. Though the bottom 25 defensive teams are not quite as red. I wish I could throw this up as excel so someone might have different information to throw in it and maybe get a different set of results, but it doesn't allow me too.

I don't know. The only team with an easier schedule than Nebraska is Wisconsin. We have to go up there. I could easily see us only having 1 conference loss, and still missing out on the CCG. If we are 11-1 at the end of the season, is that still cause for a coaching change? or 10-2? No, you can't fire a coach because a team just has a better year then we do. The CCG should be something we strive for, but it shouldn't be the benchmark. Wisconsin is going to be good for a while, and Iowa looks to be on up end towards a peak. Chances are next year is just as hard on us.

Win the games were suppose to win some of the games were not and I don't think anyone will have a lot to complain about. Generally that means we should have a pretty good season. EDIT**** I don't mean get blown out in the games were not expected to win.

Yeah, no names. I can't even imagine who though Cross while disappointing, I'd understand

Corn Nation reporting that two have been suspended, one high profile transfer. Gaw Darn it! http://www.cornnation.com/2013/12/27/5247078/corn-flakes-minnesota-is-up

I did mean the solar system. Sorry im drunk on calories. And by we i mean man, an actual human. I dont know. Im just a little weary of all the video games, online games, etc. I think it can really hold back some kids by stunting face to face communication and imagination. I mean hell, the best presents i got when i was young wasnt the presents. It was the boxes the presents came in. Built a lot forts, houses, castles, barns, cars, animals, etc out of boxes. It took thought and imagination. Now the games and computers do much of the thinking for you. I did mean the solar system. Sorry im drunk on calories. And by we i mean man, an actual human. I dont know. Im just a little weary of all the video games, online games, etc. I think it can really hold back some kids by stunting face to face communication and imagination. I mean hell, the best presents i got when i was young wasnt the presents. It was the boxes the presents came in. Built a lot forts, houses, castles, barns, cars, animals, etc out of boxes. It took thought and imagination. Now the games and computers do much of the thinking for you. Sir, I am 30 years old and have played video games my whole life. I have more imagination and a lot of it comes from playing video games. Also, if you have seen some of the crazy things that "kids" do with these things it would blow your mind. Furthermore, computers, and video games are reasons why countries like India are getting out of the 3rd world ways. I am sure kids of the 1800s would tell you the the boxes ruined your imagination. Different generations, I dont expect you to understand it, just as I dont in other ways for the kids growing up these days in other ways.

From what I've read most of the huskers will be ready to go. As for Georgia there are a lot more.

Awesomeness

lol, I did, and you're right. Forgive me

I find it funny that when husker fans say that Beck is a crap OC because he keeps forcing something when its not working. The next week he is a crap OC because he doesn't stick with the same play. Then we have the week where everything clicks well and we talk about how long it will be before he leaves for a head coaching gig. We have to be one of the most Bi-Polar fan bases out there. I am glad that someone brought up the year that Tommy Frazier went out for the year and then talk about how Tom Osborne kept the offense the same. BB wasn't an option QB, and was a walk on just like RK3. Tommy Frazier passed on average 10 times through the first four games (14 times a game for the 93 season). Brook passed on average 21 times through 7 games. That is a pretty big difference. For those who say that TO ran the same offense and just stuck with the run. Yes he did because Phillips still had an awesome year that year, but there was a significant change to throwing the ball more too Difference is that Tom Osborne did change his game plan so he didn't just stay with the same game plan and Brook still had a great line in front of him. TA and RK3 did not have much of a line towards the end of the season. Had the line stayed the same and the same other injuries took place this year, We might have won another game or two, and the close ones might not have been so close.

If we win, then it becomes "Well we should have because they were beat down by injuries" If we lose, then its because "SEC"

We are pretty much right back to where we started, but just using different terms. Are we multiple in the scheme? Are we multiple with the players? I agree that the offense was tailored to much to TM skills and not so much to the QB members collectively. TA was a better fit to keep it close to what it was with TM, (that was evident when the option game became a fixture of the offense during the TA games)but RK3 isn't a duel threat QB and that hurt us in the Iowa game. Recruit players that fit within the system that you want to employ, but if your system is multiple, then recruit the best talent you can get, and tailor the system around your key players. But as we saw in Northwestern this year, they suffered through some big injuries and played a much harder schedule then we did. Georgia on the other hand has a pretty solid system of recruiting for their system, and are having success though less than desired.

Those are pretty significant laurels for a guy who has yet to do...well, anything... Yeah if it were what I said. You should really only change an offense because of a player if he is a once in a life time type player. Stanton has a good pedigree, but yes your right hasn't done "....well, anything....:" You build an offense around a player and he gets hurt and your stuck with what we had this year. An unnatural fit at QB. TM was such a dynamic runner and Beck's multiple system was built around TM, and it that isn't multiple. That is singular and it showed every game where TM was naturalized in the run game *almost* What could we have done differently? I dunno, don't really want to get into the would could, and should of.

Jokes aren't appreciated in such a serious conversation hahahaha

Thanks, I was wondering if anything happened to this guy. If he plays for us, I hope he doesn't bring his baggage, open it, and throw it all over the place.