74Hunter

You may be thinking of Don Johnson, kimosabe.

Yea, thanks....... No problems.

NU never led at one point in that game. For 26 of the 30 minutes of the 2nd half, Iowa led by 11 points. NU was not threatening to win that game. Did the cold weather make it look like you were watching a different game? All due to mistakes by one player and the tossing of Gerry. The playcalling was pretty damn good all game long.You go boy! Way to throw the players under the bus. God know the coaches weren't seeing the same thing and calling mostly passing plays... Definitely only one player that cost is the game. PASS PLAYS FOREVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR! Pass plays beat Michigan St, brought us back against Miami, kept us in the game against Iowa. So we should ignor the strength of the team (our recievers) ranked as the best in the B10 and run the ball with our backs?????????? Really! I have no words for that. If your QB cannot reliably get them the ball, then are they still a strength? He can when he sets his feet, You should ask someone to tell you the story about the last drive against Michigan St. It will be a classic some day.Yep, a true classic to turn a 4-8 season into 5-7. Hip hip... We won that game, Really ! it was in all the papers.Yep, it was a true classic!!! Just like losing to BYU, Miami, Illinois, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue, and Iowa were true classics. Hip hip... Those are just footnotes in history. That's what Bill Callahan said after a losing season in his first year. LINK?"Just one game, just one season....." All actual Husker fans know that line. No link needed. As only a casual Husker fan for most of the year since I spend most of my time following Iowa - where is this quote from? Bill Callahan said it in 2004 after he ended our streak of 35 straight bowl games.

I like that quote, quit a bit, actually.

What is the joke, the quote, says they might change the contract so next year he will get paid for his 5 win season... I glossed over that, OMG, WTF?!?! This is what we've been reduced to under Harv, Pederhorst, and Riley?!?! That, my friends, is the epitome of pathetic.

Maybe that'll teach Langsahan to not call a pass play. We can only hope.

Where are 9 wins built in? We have a very difficult schedule for next year. People said this even when Bo was here IDK, ask those who used that narrative over the last 7 seasons in an attempt to discredit the previous staff.

That's a no brainer. The previous staff earned the bowl bonuses via APR.

God, that is a great call! Except that Fisher at least made it to a Super Bowl. Riley hasn't even won a division in the US game.

I'd bet that more knew him than knew Riley. Sure, I'd take Frost, Herman, McElwain, Harbaugh, Wittingham, etc, etc, over Riley, NU ties or not.

Comes up blank.....prolly not a bad thing. ...

Huh...... Anywho, you listen to those Dbag burnouts? Listening to that show drops your IQ about 40 points. I can't believe that the Husker sports network is affiliated with those two......ummm....."Eichorsts."

False. Or the Cotton boys wouldn't have been on scholly.Unless it's different for the coaching staff Huskerhead has it correct. Family of university emoployees can go to school at discounted rate. It's totally different if the kid is going to be playing a sport. As pointed out elsewhere, student athletes could be recruited to schools simply by giving their parents a job. Not that it's not being done currently in the SEC.Iirc, if the kid's parent is a coach and the kid is on the team, the kid HAS to count against scholarship limits, even with the staff/family member tuition rates. If correct, just chalk another one up for Riley "getting good" for his boys. Unless the rule has changed recently, Dan Hawkins kid at CU (Cody?) walked on to not take up at scholly. It was stated about 5 times during each CU game when they both were there. Doug McDermott did it at Creighton for basketball his senior year, too. Not sure if the rules are the same but it's not uncommon, I guess. True, I'm not sure how it works, just thought that I heard that about the Cottons, could be wrong about that.

False. Or the Cotton boys wouldn't have been on scholly.Unless it's different for the coaching staff Huskerhead has it correct. Family of university emoployees can go to school at discounted rate. It's totally different if the kid is going to be playing a sport. As pointed out elsewhere, student athletes could be recruited to schools simply by giving their parents a job. Not that it's not being done currently in the SEC. Iirc, if the kid's parent is a coach and the kid is on the team, the kid HAS to count against scholarship limits, even with the staff/family member tuition rates. If correct, just chalk another one up for Riley "getting good" for his boys.

Since our schedule has 9 wins built into it and a monkey could coach this team to 9 wins, I'll say .500 +/- 1 game.

I know what I expect and I kind of having a feeling what will really happen. Care to share? I agree with CM, we need to check ourselves.

See, I don't think any of us would have a problem with that type of offense. But, that's obviously not what Riley and Langsahan want to do on offense. They want to pass the ball first. They want to pass to set up the run. That is their philosophy. Yep, that whole line about game planning and play calling to fit the strengths of players was BS. Sad to see.

Couldn't have said it better.

I haven't lowered my expectations for the program, but I have put them on hold until a new coaching staff is brought to Lincoln. Riley is what he is, I'll expect more of the same for the next 1 or 2 years.

I agree, but not tipping is a total bag move. I start at 20% as a guide line, if service is subpar I'll lower it accordingly, if it's better than average I'll raise it accordingly. I think I've not left a tip maybe twice in my life, and those were extreme circumstances, such as being personally insulted by the waiter. Hell, I've had service so bad that the manager comped the tab, yet I still tipped the server.

Sobering. We got Rileyed. What are you talking about?, Riley's not used to having to worry about bowl bids. Golly shucks, jeepers, this is exciting. You are correct, my apologies. Hip, hip hooray.

totally TA. The wide open receiver proves that langsdorf put Tommy in a great position. People can claim that DL needs to know his qb's strengths and weaknesses so he should've justhe ran the ball, but a 3 year starting qb for a power 5 school should have enough common sense to know game situation and that 4th and 1 means you don't need to and shouldn't go for a home run shot, especially when you have a wide open receiver a couple yards past the 1st down. Obviously TA would've still had to get it to carter accurately enough to catch, and carter in turn would've had to make the catch, but the coaches still put them in a position to make the play. Tommy didn't even look at the check down and stared down the fly fade the whole way. But here's the thing....TA has been a 3-year starter and in that time has shown no consistency in being able to make those throws. It's not like him missing that throw was an anomaly. It's what Tommy does, and DL should recognize that. Now if Tommy were a freshman and hadn't shown such inconsistently I would feel better with the call, but DL is not playing to Tommy's strengths. I understand but the biggest thing is that TA didn't even bother looking down at the check down, he just went straight for the low percentage home run ball. It's not like throw was just that bad. It was a decent throw to give the WR an opportunity to either go for the catch or try to I draw a pass interference. The DB just made a better play defensively. My point is as a 3 year starter Tommy should have enough common sense to know he shouldn't throw the home run ball and that he still had over 4 minutes with 3 timeouts, on 4th down. Know the other routes for the play and find someone else that perhaps isn't being covered like a blanket. Maybe we should've just run it, though, since Tommy is barely even able to decipher when to bite the bullet and throw the ball away, let alone find an open check down reciever. I see what you're saying, but at what point do you put more blame on the coaches? TA has lost every single game, or at least the vast majority of games, where he has had to throw more than 40 times. I don't think it's as simple as "Tommy should have enough common sense." It's a coach's job to put his players in the best position to win. By your same reasoning, you could argue that Tom Brady and Tyrod Taylor should always be coached and put in similar positions to convert 4th and 1 because they should just have enough common sense. However, I think we'd both agree how a team might approach a 4th and 1 with Brady is much different than how the Bills would approach 4th and 1 with Taylor. The same principles apply, here, imho. Put him in a position to win like against Illinois when he was told to run the ball and threw it anyway an lost the game? Sometimes you can't fix stupid and I think we found that out against Iowa. You raise a great point I can't really argue with. But, those are two different situations - one was an obvious communication error and the other was TA not reading the defense and throwing a bad ball. TA shouldn't have been asked to throw that ball or put in a position to think that was OK. Is it on him for throwing it? Yes, but, I put blame on the coaches for giving him the choice. Other than the fact that it was a pass play tagged no pass and the entire offense ran it as a pass play.

So we have more talent this year than last. Interesting. Funny how that works, sans the narratives.

I swore that someone posted a thread about him a few weeks back.

Key word right there. These are still Bo's players, and I have yet to see if any of the players brought in by the new staff have discipline. Yea, it's not as if these things haven't plagued Riley teams before. Oh wait...