KingBlank

29 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of context hilarious

4 hours ago, Minnesota_husker said:

I think most people who want Miles gone seem to agree that it is because we have seen the same thing over and over again. 

 

I think it is pretty apparent he just isnt that great of an X's and O's coach. He has done a great job of getting talent in here but has only had 1 maybe 2 good seasons... I think this team is still very good this year and while the 3 losses bug me, they were all on the road and honestly they were correctable things. This isnt a dumpster fire, we can correct some things and make the dance. This years team isnt my concern.....

 

My concern is Miles ability to bring in young talented guys and coach them up. My concern is a team like next year where we will most likely lose 90% of our points. My thought is it is a perfect time to hit reset with a new coach. I dont know how you could fire Miles especially if he wins a tourney game but I just think we know what he brings to the table and I would love to see Nebraska try and take the next step.

 

That all said, Miles is a good, personable dude. I just think some fans let that cloud the fact he isnt a great coach.

Exfreakinactly

51 minutes ago, lo country said:

 

I agree. I thinks it's pretty obvious we need to do better recruiting. I also think we need that D to get a lot better of we want to play for a conference or the MNC.  Bama and Clemson are at a different level.  OU with the high octane O really didnt appear much of a threat to a team with their own dynmaic playmakers and a solid D.  Offensively, I really like what our O is evolving into.  If the D could improve as well, Frost is onto to a winning combination for sure.

 

What I witnessed was of the worst displays of tackling fundamentals ever by a top team.  Look I understand good players but Jesus H put your head up and take the ball carrier to the ground.  4 times the Oklahoma guy was celebrating the tackle and the dude had drove over him and was still in play.  At some point you have to have people play football, I mean Bobby D is part of the staff so I understand the lack of tackling.  Some of those might have at least made the game competitive. 

17 hours ago, Cdog923 said:

 

He was also, for all intents and purposes, kind of scummy. 

If people around here want a 3 time convicted drunk driver to coach here,  a guy that liked many women should be a shoe in. 

5 hours ago, Cdog923 said:

 

What are you talking about? He was good

21 hours ago, LumberJackSker said:

I'm not the biggest Pelini fan but its impressive he won as many games as he did because that staff sure couldn't recruit.  Did any of the 2010 defensive line recruits play more than 10 snaps in their career?

Ya i mean all those pros he recruited getting paid mad money

13 minutes ago, seaofred92 said:

 

That my friends is fantastic 

On 12/6/2018 at 12:25 PM, Mavric said:

If it goes to 16 teams, it should be a Pod system

• Four 4-team Pods
• Play your Pod every year (those three teams home-and-home every two years)
• Play one other Pod every year (every other team every three years, home-and-home every six years)
• "Protected" games each year to preserve rivalries while balancing pods
• The team with the best record within each year's paired Pods goes to the CCG

At first I wanted to play half of a third Pod each year instead of the protected games (so you would play every team at least every-other year) but I think it would be too hard to keep all the rivalries so there would be too much push-back.  I'd have to dig a little deeper to see if you could get that to work within the Pods.

 

East Pod: Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland

North Pod: Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern

West Pod: Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois

South Pod: Texas, Oklahoma, Purdue, Indiana

 

Protected - Scheduled in years where the Pods weren't already playing each other (red=always, black=if possible, trophy game not preserved)

Illinois - Northwestern, Purdue, Ohio State

Indiana - Michigan State, 

Iowa - Minnesota, 

Maryland - 

Michigan - Ohio State, 

Michigan State - Indiana, Penn State, Rutgers

Minnesota - Iowa, Wisconsin, Penn State, Nebraska

Nebraska -  Oklahoma, Minnesota

Northwestern - Illinois, 

Ohio State - Michigan, Illinois

Oklahoma - Nebraska, 

Penn State - Michigan State, Minnesota

Purdue - Illinois, 

Rutgers - Michigan State

Texas - 

Wisconsin - Minnesota, 

 

Trophy Games not guaranteed - Illinois/Ohio State, Minnesota/Penn State, Nebraska/Minnesota, Michigan State/Rutgers

Wow you must be bored lol, that's much think 

21 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

 

It was perhaps too late when it happened, but the last charge on Palmer was a ridiculous call.  Coffey was in a terrible position, about to be beat on a drive, and got bailed out by flopping.  

 

It seemed like the team lost the game when Copeland got T'ed up, they played like garbage after that happened.

You can't have your elbows out trying to fly like a bird, you will get called every time because it is a foul.  

7 hours ago, Ulty said:

On my ESPN app, when I go to the Gamecast tab on each of these games, it shows the following in terms of attendance, with a listed stadium capacity of 85,458:

 

CU: 89,853

Troy: 89,360

Purdue: 88,911

Minnesota: 89,272

BCU: 88,735

Illinois: 88,316

MSU: 88,793

 

I know some of ESPN's info is dubious, but where do these numbers come from, and why would there be such a disparity between these attendance figures and the actual tickets scanned? 

Ever been to Nebraska basketball game and they announce there is 15000 people in attendance but it's half empty?  Because I have and it's hilarious

7 hours ago, Ulty said:

I know there was some discussion on this board after the MSU game about the student section being empty at the upper levels when it was shown on TV, but the announcers also frequently commented on how loud the stadium was that day. For any of you who were there, do these numbers compute? Was it really only 2/3 full? Same with the Illinois and BCU games? A few no-shows is one thing, but 30k empty seats for a game seems hard to imagine.

It was empty in every corner, picking on the student section is ridiculous, they stand have more people in each row.   The rich balcony was empty for both games, and no there isn't 4000 people worth of room to stand behind the glass up there.  It's people in every section

1 hour ago, hskrfan4life said:

Chances we advance to final four?

70 

1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

What are the similarities between our situation and those?

Well to be honest Osborne, Perlman, Green would have had a very hard time in today's culture keeping his job intact with some of the incidents that happened.   Would we have kept the beatings, robberies, rapes quite, fights in bars where cameras didn't exist, or would we have admitted them and kicked the player off? You tell me because Tom never wanted to lose a player because he always thought he could fix them.  O yes sir there are some similarities they just happened 20 years apart. 

4 hours ago, Husker in WI said:

 I get where you're coming from, but we did have a game canceled this year and that messed the season up pretty bad - a dome would've changed that. Exactly how different the season goes is debatable and we'll never know, but that's a bigger argument for the dome than just not liking bad weather. Now we may never have another weather cancelation without a dome, but it has more supporters because of that. 

 

With that being said I'm not really a fan of domes - I just think this year brings up an interesting case. 

Dude it was the first game canceled due to weather ever, you are definitely in a very small minority

3 hours ago, Omaha-Husker said:

 

Stop.

 

A dome with 90K capacity would cost a billion bare minimum.  Memorial isn't remotely set up to retrofit into a dome either.

 

What an absurd f#&%ing concept.

Correct

Dome is literally the worst idea.  This is Nebraska we don't need a dome ever. Ya weiners, buy a coat.   Plus snow games are fun as heck to go to. 

On 11/27/2018 at 8:27 AM, TonyStalloni said:

For all Husker fans, about all we have is recruiting till spring ball. I was thinking this morning about many of the past recruits we have coveted and when they became Huskers but for some reason they flamed out and never became what we had hoped.  On the other hand there were some players who came in relatively unheralded at least on a national scale but became very good to great players.

 

My list of kids who didn't succeed:  (Not meant to be critical of these players as there are many reasons a young man doesn't have success.  They peaked in high school,  didn't care for the culture here,  injury,  got into trouble etc.)

 

Tyler Moore, Johnny Stanton, Adam Taylor, Kevin Gladney, Jordan Stevenson, Collins Okafor.

 

Then there are the players who weren't highly regarded nationally who rose up to become great players for the Huskers:

 

LaVonte David,  Roy Helu,  Rex Burkhead,  Alphonso Dennard,  Taylor Martinez (debatable on greatness level but I always thought he gave 100%),  Ameer Abdullah

 

With recruiting in full swing in the coming weeks we will have high expectations for all of them but which do you think will exceed expectations?

 

Add your selections to the list if you want.

 

 

David was the number 1 juco recruit in the nation according to some.  Rex was the Texas Gatorade player of year if I recall.   Hello Helu was recruited by top tier programs.  Ameer had late hard interest from Auburn.   Those guys were pretty highly regarded as incoming football players. 

1 hour ago, ColoradoHusk said:

Apparently one guy is. 

You saw what happened when he did, the worst 3 years in the modern era. I dunno facts and stuff

49 minutes ago, Enhance said:

The most significant, tangible difference between Pelini's first year and Frost's is inherited talent.

Well you know also the record

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

As we ran out of Pelini's recruits...

 

 

Careful it's not ok to give Bo credit for anything ever around here

20 hours ago, C N Red said:

I know people will some how find a way to stick up for the student section, but i sit in the north and have had to look at a wayyyy to empty student section too many times over the last 15 years. I get it, we've sucked some over the years and a few games i can understand, but its getting to a point of being embarrassing. They call for a black out and cant even get their sections filled. Sorry, but its time to cut back student tix and start selling seats to the public. There are 80-90 year olds i saw in the stands for the whole game yesterday.

You also have the rich seats half full and the 600 level half full during that game in the second half.   Do they lose the right for their tickets as well?  

Huh weird

13 hours ago, Redux said:

 

You keep trying to push the idea that Defense isn't affected by the Offense, then try to point to scoreboard.  It's a pretty weak argument and a bad look for someone preaching numbers and statistics.

I don't even understand how you have construed a comment I made which literally makes no mention of other parts of the game.  My arguement has nothing to with punts or other defenses scoring and the total "defensive" points to change that.  It's purely about our defense giving up points, which in fact in how the game is scored from its inception is the most important part of that side of the ball.  Just offense is about scoring and special teams is about field position.   Football is massively more complicated game when it is played and scored, but the actual defense on the field at the time, giving up points per game will always be the defining stat.  Defense scoring numbers should not in any argument about defense include the total of the game if there is scoring by interception ect.

2 hours ago, Jason Sitoke said:

Incorrect.  But if you'd have shown your work, you could've gotten partial credit.

Pretty funny there bud.  Unfortunately the team that holds the other team to less points actually wins the football game.  I more the anyone point to statistics as the basis for judgement, points per play is metric used by fan bases to artificially inflate their own opinions of how good a defense is.  Also if the score was 29-28?  Who wins?

2 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

One defense gives up 500 yards of offense but only allows 21 points because the other team fumbles twice in the red zone and misses a field goal.

 

Another defense gives up 200 yards of offense but allows 31 points because their offense turned it over deep in their own territory and the special teams gave up two long kick returns.

 

Which team has the better defense?

In that highly unlikely scenario the conclusion would be hard to come too.  In your second scenario the defense only gave up 17, if I'm assuming the final score was 31.