Elf

Well yeah...it's a list for most consecutive years.

I think the whole "buying in" thing was overblown in 2015, but that's just me. Gerry's INT's against Wisconsin enabled NU to take that game to OT, and he played well the rest of the season. Yes, him not going to class all season is very dumb, but he's only one player on a team of over 100 players. All it takes is one bad apple to spoil the entire barrel. Is that saying actually true? Like, if you have one spoiled apple are the other ones now bad too? The saying is true. One bad apple can and will spoil all the rest if left in the barrel. *Edit* You can save the barrel, or most of it, by removing the bad one(s) in time. However, left alone, that one bad apple WILL spoil all the rest. I have heard any spoiled perishable item stored in a confined space and in close proximity will accelerate spoilage. USDA refuses to confirm or deny at this time True enough, however, when's the last time you heard someone say 'one bad tomato spoils the whole bushel'?

Husker fans have been talking about our turnovers for years now. It's good to see it finally changing for the better.

They certainly do. The rural areas of our country just aren't producing as many kids anymore due to a variety of reasons. There were 8 kids in my family two of us still live in Nebraska (I'm not one of them). My aunt and uncle that live in Dalton NE had 3 kids and none of them are still in NE. Another aunt and uncle were farmers outside Hastings, 2 kids, both moved away. In just my extended family, 9 out of 11 kids moved away. Small towns are consolidating their schools because there simply isn't enough kids to populate them all. As nice as it was to be able to point to a line full of homegrown, corn-fed linemen and say with pride, 'Those are OUR boys!', it's probably not going to happen again. At least not in the foreseable future.

So despite the fact that Riley - and likely others in the administration - how just demonstrated that they fell that it is, in fact, significantly due to our scheme, you're still refusing to admit that. Seems legit. Riley said something to the effect of...we had the same problems this year on defense that we did last year. The things they identified that needed to be fixed, weren't. So Banker is gone. Now, you are completely free to call that a "scheme problem" all you want since it fits your narrative and demands that certain coaches be fired. I simply view it as a performance problem. Banker didn't fix the things that his boss (Riley) said needed fixing. Pretty simple really. True. But if Riley thought Banker could get them fixed, why would he fire him? Going to a lot of lengths to try to finesse something that is pretty obvious. I'm not going to any lengths to "finesse". That's what you do. If your boss tells you that a performance issue needs to be fixed and you don't fix it, you lose your job REGARDLESS of your actual ability or inability to fix the problem. You didn't fix it so now you are in the unemployment line. That's simple, no finesse and no agenda.

If Carlos makes it to NT, it will be his JOB to eat a double team every play. Yes, I realize that. I'd rather have someone else who does not have his ability to make plays but can still occupy two blockers in that spot and let him play a DE spot where he wouldn't get double-teamed as much and more chance to use his athletic ability to make plays. You don't think Carlos can use his athletic ability to make plays at the NT position?

So despite the fact that Riley - and likely others in the administration - how just demonstrated that they fell that it is, in fact, significantly due to our scheme, you're still refusing to admit that. Seems legit. Riley said something to the effect of...we had the same problems this year on defense that we did last year. The things they identified that needed to be fixed, weren't. So Banker is gone. Now, you are completely free to call that a "scheme problem" all you want since it fits your narrative and demands that certain coaches be fired. I simply view it as a performance problem. Banker didn't fix the things that his boss (Riley) said needed fixing. Pretty simple really.

If Carlos makes it to NT, it will be his JOB to eat a double team every play.

I know right! The world of Husker football as we know it is coming to a brutal, bloody end.

I voted 10-2 with losses to Ohio St. and Penn St. If this plays out, we'll also win our division. We'll finally have a pro-style quarterback under center to go with our pro style attack and our defense should be much improved with the switch to the 3-4 and a new defensive coordinator.

I think the whole "buying in" thing was overblown in 2015, but that's just me. Gerry's INT's against Wisconsin enabled NU to take that game to OT, and he played well the rest of the season. Yes, him not going to class all season is very dumb, but he's only one player on a team of over 100 players. All it takes is one bad apple to spoil the entire barrel. Is that saying actually true? Like, if you have one spoiled apple are the other ones now bad too? The saying is true. One bad apple can and will spoil all the rest if left in the barrel. *Edit* You can save the barrel, or most of it, by removing the bad one(s) in time. However, left alone, that one bad apple WILL spoil all the rest.

I think the whole "buying in" thing was overblown in 2015, but that's just me. Gerry's INT's against Wisconsin enabled NU to take that game to OT, and he played well the rest of the season. Yes, him not going to class all season is very dumb, but he's only one player on a team of over 100 players. All it takes is one bad apple to spoil the entire barrel.

People get cancer diagnoses out of the clear blue sky. And then what do you do? Just not accept healthcare? Accept it, run debt up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars (two different family members have had cancer costing over two hundred thousand in healthcare), and then either spend the rest of your life in debt? Or you die, and your family is burdened with that debt? What's the solution there? You're OK with going into lifelong debt, not accepting healthcare you can't pay for, or passing that debt along to your kin? Why, when every other first-world nation has figured out how to treat their citizens without them going into debt? Why should America/Americans be uniquely burdened like this? Funny that you mention cancer. My grandma died from cancer when my dad was 11 years old. My grandpa would hear of a rumor of a new cure for cancer so he'd pack up grandma in the car and take off. He racked up a debt of over $250,000 in the late 40's/early 50's. He was a blacksmith and he still managed to repay every penny. Grandpa believed that you do what it takes to pay your debt as long as its honest work. They just don't make men like grandpa anymore. I'll ask that if things in America aren't to your liking, and you already know where things ARE to your liking, why have you not moved? Its a serious question because it's what I would do. I'll call 100% bullsh#t on a 1950s-era American Blacksmith making enough money to 1) pay off a $250,000 debt starting in the 1950s and 2) doing it while working as a Blacksmith. First, a Blacksmith is a uniquely unusual trade to be engaged in in the 1950s. But they exist today, so let's say he had a tremendously unique niche job. OK. Today, a Blacksmith will make between $30,000 and $75,000. In 1950s money, that's $2,500-$6,300 per year. Presuming your grandpa was an EXCELLENT Blacksmith, let's make him a top earner at $6,300/year, and heck, because we're generous, let's double his salary. So your grandpa, as a 1950s-era Blacksmith par excellence, made $12,600 per year. He had bills, obviously, like food (29% of his expenditures in the 1950s), housing (27%), apparel (11%), and healthcare (5%). We won't even count his expenditures on kids (presuming only one, your dad), travel (for grandma's treatment) entertainment, or anything else. He lived a Spartan life. At $12,600 per year, with those normal expenditures, he would have had about $3,500 per year to apply to that debt. Even presuming no interest on that debt, it would have taken him 71 years to pay it off, again presuming zero other expenditures and no money spent on children or anything like travel, a new couch, a TV - nothing else. We could even give him cost-of-living raises as the years go by and it would still have taken him over 40 years, starting from 1950, to pay that off. If he wasn't the best Blacksmith in the country and didn't make double that salary, we're talking a debt that isn't paid off to this day. Either you're not telling us the whole story, you're not privy to the actual story, or this isn't remotely true. I'll be the first to admit I'm no economist, so if someone wants to fact-check my numbers by all means please do. Further, what is this nonsensical idea that, if I don't like what's happening in my country, I need to leave? Is that what America is to you? As soon as you don't like it, if you know of a better system somewhere else, you give up your citizenship and move on? I think America is much more than that, personally. I think it's worth fighting for. I think if I don't like something about this country, it's my obligation to roll up my sleeves and work to make it better. Sounds like, according to your story, that's what your grandpa would have done. Maybe they just don't make men like your grandpa anymore in your family. I just noticed the personal attack at the end. Why don't you take that attack and shove it right up your f'ing ass?

Why the mandate for only this? Why not mandate insurance for every single debt we incur....just in case? People die all the time with unpaid debt, medical or otherwise.

People get cancer diagnoses out of the clear blue sky. And then what do you do? Just not accept healthcare? Accept it, run debt up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars (two different family members have had cancer costing over two hundred thousand in healthcare), and then either spend the rest of your life in debt? Or you die, and your family is burdened with that debt? What's the solution there? You're OK with going into lifelong debt, not accepting healthcare you can't pay for, or passing that debt along to your kin? Why, when every other first-world nation has figured out how to treat their citizens without them going into debt? Why should America/Americans be uniquely burdened like this? Funny that you mention cancer. My grandma died from cancer when my dad was 11 years old. My grandpa would hear of a rumor of a new cure for cancer so he'd pack up grandma in the car and take off. He racked up a debt of over $250,000 in the late 40's/early 50's. He was a blacksmith and he still managed to repay every penny. Grandpa believed that you do what it takes to pay your debt as long as its honest work. They just don't make men like grandpa anymore. I'll ask that if things in America aren't to your liking, and you already know where things ARE to your liking, why have you not moved? Its a serious question because it's what I would do. Right now my wife and I both receive benefits. My wife is in medicine, I'm in education. If for some unforeseen circumstances we lose our insurance and one of us, or our kids, get sick and the only realistic solution is to move to Canada, we'll be on the next plane to Winnipeg. Moving to Canada isn't as straight forward as one would think. It's not a straightforward deal when moving to any country from my understanding. Thanks for that honesty.

People get cancer diagnoses out of the clear blue sky. And then what do you do? Just not accept healthcare? Accept it, run debt up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars (two different family members have had cancer costing over two hundred thousand in healthcare), and then either spend the rest of your life in debt? Or you die, and your family is burdened with that debt? What's the solution there? You're OK with going into lifelong debt, not accepting healthcare you can't pay for, or passing that debt along to your kin? Why, when every other first-world nation has figured out how to treat their citizens without them going into debt? Why should America/Americans be uniquely burdened like this? Funny that you mention cancer. My grandma died from cancer when my dad was 11 years old. My grandpa would hear of a rumor of a new cure for cancer so he'd pack up grandma in the car and take off. He racked up a debt of over $250,000 in the late 40's/early 50's. He was a blacksmith and he still managed to repay every penny. Grandpa believed that you do what it takes to pay your debt as long as its honest work. They just don't make men like grandpa anymore. I'll ask that if things in America aren't to your liking, and you already know where things ARE to your liking, why have you not moved? Its a serious question because it's what I would do. I'll call 100% bullsh#t on a 1950s-era American Blacksmith making enough money to 1) pay off a $250,000 debt starting in the 1950s and 2) doing it while working as a Blacksmith. First, a Blacksmith is a uniquely unusual trade to be engaged in in the 1950s. But they exist today, so let's say he had a tremendously unique niche job. OK. Today, a Blacksmith will make between $30,000 and $75,000. In 1950s money, that's $2,500-$6,300 per year. Presuming your grandpa was an EXCELLENT Blacksmith, let's make him a top earner at $6,300/year, and heck, because we're generous, let's double his salary. So your grandpa, as a 1950s-era Blacksmith par excellence, made $12,600 per year. He had bills, obviously, like food (29% of his expenditures in the 1950s), housing (27%), apparel (11%), and healthcare (5%). We won't even count his expenditures on kids (presuming only one, your dad), travel (for grandma's treatment) entertainment, or anything else. He lived a Spartan life. At $12,600 per year, with those normal expenditures, he would have had about $3,500 per year to apply to that debt. Even presuming no interest on that debt, it would have taken him 71 years to pay it off, again presuming zero other expenditures and no money spent on children or anything like travel, a new couch, a TV - nothing else. We could even give him cost-of-living raises as the years go by and it would still have taken him over 40 years, starting from 1950, to pay that off. If he wasn't the best Blacksmith in the country and didn't make double that salary, we're talking a debt that isn't paid off to this day. Either you're not telling us the whole story, you're not privy to the actual story, or this isn't remotely true. I'll be the first to admit I'm no economist, so if someone wants to fact-check my numbers by all means please do. Further, what is this nonsensical idea that, if I don't like what's happening in my country, I need to leave? Is that what America is to you? As soon as you don't like it, if you know of a better system somewhere else, you give up your citizenship and move on? I think America is much more than that, personally. I think it's worth fighting for. I think if I don't like something about this country, it's my obligation to roll up my sleeves and work to make it better. Sounds like, according to your story, that's what your grandpa would have done. Maybe they just don't make men like your grandpa anymore in your family. You can call bullsh#t all you want, it won't make you right. He worked his ass off for years to pay off that debt. It took him upwards of 25 years to pay it all off. And get this, blacksmithing is what he was by trade but it wasn't all he did. Good job on your assumptions. And no one said you needed to leave. It's pretty nonsensical for you to come to that conclusion, I simply asked why you haven't because it's what I would have done in your place. I used to have a lot of respect for you and now after your last couple of posts in here I have zero. I'm all for being accountable for your own decisions and I don't need the likes of you to tell me how to make them. When I was younger I made a conscious decision to NOT buy health insurance because I didn't need it. If I had racked up medical bills with no insurance, I would have done just like my grandfather did. Unless of course I had died, that would have made it a bit difficult. *Edit* When it comes to wanting socialized medicine you are in the minority in this country. Colorado's Amendment 69 (also known as ColoradoCare) failed by a margin of nearly 80/20. Even in left-wing Denver it failed by nearly a 2-1 margin.

People get cancer diagnoses out of the clear blue sky. And then what do you do? Just not accept healthcare? Accept it, run debt up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars (two different family members have had cancer costing over two hundred thousand in healthcare), and then either spend the rest of your life in debt? Or you die, and your family is burdened with that debt? What's the solution there? You're OK with going into lifelong debt, not accepting healthcare you can't pay for, or passing that debt along to your kin? Why, when every other first-world nation has figured out how to treat their citizens without them going into debt? Why should America/Americans be uniquely burdened like this? Funny that you mention cancer. My grandma died from cancer when my dad was 11 years old. My grandpa would hear of a rumor of a new cure for cancer so he'd pack up grandma in the car and take off. He racked up a debt of over $250,000 in the late 40's/early 50's. He was a blacksmith and he still managed to repay every penny. Grandpa believed that you do what it takes to pay your debt as long as its honest work. They just don't make men like grandpa anymore. I'll ask that if things in America aren't to your liking, and you already know where things ARE to your liking, why have you not moved? Its a serious question because it's what I would do.

I disagree with this. As far as you knew you were healthy, and fortunately you didn't end up needing it. What if you had suddenly learned otherwise -- or your situation unexpectedly changed? I'm glad it didn't, but what are your options then? Then you get a job that offers health insurance as a benefit. If the situation changes rapidly enough that I can't get health insurance in time? Then that's my fault and I'm the only one responsible for the debt and the decision that put me in debt.

I think I've given up hope on that happening. Ever.

I disagree with a government mandate to buy anything, including health insurance. When I was young I was incredibly healthy, only got sick on very rare occasions, so I never bought health insurance. I simply didn't need it. When I was a kid there were 10 people in my family. When things like the flu or a cold virus went around I was always the last one to get it, if I got it at all. Now that I'm older I need the health insurance. I have diabetes, sleep apnea, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, sick sinus syndrome, (I have a pacemaker for that one), daily neuropathy pain, daily light-headedness and I've already had a TIA (minor stroke). My wife has fantastic health insurance through her work. The hospital bill for the pacemaker installation was $114,000 and we didn't have to pay even a single penny. I realize that not everyone has insurance of this quality and I think it's a shame we can't make it so everyone that wants it, gets this same level of care. I had another trip to the ER that resulted in another hospital stay just last week. I can't wait to see the bills roll in on this one, 3 ct scans and 2 ultrasounds plus quite a few other tests, ER visit and transfer by meatwagon to a Kaiser approved hospital. If we didn't have health insurance through my wife's work we wouldn't be able to afford the premiums for me. We tried to get mortgage life insurance on me, just in case... The premiums would have been over $1000 a month and I'm only 54. People like me should be able to get health insurance at a reasonable cost, but we can't and somehow that needs to change. If my wife didn't have health insurance for us, I'd be on the outside looking in. A couple of you might recognize this eatery on E Colfax Ave. I had my stroke outside this place.

If it was up to you we would maintain the status quo until hell froze over! I have no idea how you get that out of my post. Whatever...

I miss the 90's too. Obviously this won't happen but it disturbed me how over the last couple of years we can't even blow out the "gimme" teams and get young guys playing time. It's been more than the last couple years since we've been able to do this.

Disagree We will see what the stats say but I reckon it will be 50-50 to 55-45 run pass. Air Raid......Lang's will wet himself if they don't throw 60%..........Texas Tech here we come! I wouldn't care if we threw 80% as long as we're winning.

I think they want the walk-on so they can move Darlington back to WR. They want three guys who they could use in a game if needed. Depending on the situation, you could play the walk-on to avoid burning Gebbia's redshirt. Makes sense.

I'm amazed that he is still here but I do know the guy is actually a class act and not the prima donna type who wants to quit if he doesn't play. I almost wouldn't mind it if he did just so he can go somewhere that will utilize the talent he clearly has. A fellow s sider. His lack of playing time is straight up insulting. Wilbon was hurt for part of the year and then he was apparently in the doghouse for some reason. Generally speaking, if you are in the doghouse, its most likely your own fault and your job to dig your way out. So I'm just wondering, how is that insulting?