th3r0m

I think Martinez gives the offense the best shot at a quick score, but not necessarily the best shot at success. I think that we have a very talented offensive crew that could see a similar or possibly even greater amount of success even without a super talented runner as quarterback. Although he has accounted for much of the offense to this point and the offense seems to be "built" around him thus far, Burkhead and Helu have, in my opinion, more than enough talent to carry this team on the ground. Through the air, Lee or Green passing to Kinnie or McNeil or Reed (or even Niles Paul every now and again) would definitely keep defenses honest (that is of course assuming we never, ever have another repeat of the stone hands fest we saw Saturday). I guess I'm saying that things on the offensive side of the ball were - on paper - looking pretty darn good after the bowl game last year when Martinez wasn't even really on the radar. His being here has definitely added another threat, but our quiver wasn't empty and wouldn't be empty without him. That said, you (and everyone else who's said it) are correct - the loss to Texas is not solely due to Martinez's performance on Saturday.

I don't think Shawn Watson can win - and I don't mean on the field or against Top 20 defenses, I mean with the fans. After reading post after post vilifying Watson for everything from preparation to his game plan to his comments to the press, I've come to the conclusion that many people are going to call for his termination regardless of his performance. If he runs "too many" running plays, he should be passing. Too many passing plays, why didn't we run. "Too many" zone reads, why not dives or powers or options. A balanced game plan, well he should have run or passed more. Etc, etc, etc. It wouldn't matter if the Huskers never lost another game under him, won 5 National Championships and scored 35 points a game - the fan base would still say he sucked ("I mean, if he was any good at his job the Huskers would be scoring 50 a game, sheesh") and needs to go. And the reasoning behind a lot of the ferocity of Watson-hatred is seemingly that he was under Callahan - and since Callahan is "Satan", then Watson must be as well. Watson isn't perfect, by any means, but I'd say he's on par with or better than most O.C.s out there and looking around I'm not sure who we could pick up to replace him and see the instant results everyone seems to be wanting.

The injuries did seem ill timed with regard to bleeding momentum off of Nebraska, but booing a downed player is still uncool... unless it's a kicker (those guys are always faking and pop up just as soon as a flag is thrown, never seen a truly injured kicker ) With that in mind, I have noticed this year - in several games - that the medical teams seem to leave a player on the field much longer than they used to instead of quickly assessing and then moving them off the field so play can resume. I understand the need to make sure that moving them doesn't make the injury worse, but in the K-state game for example, they had the injured player on the field for ages, finally moved him off the field on to Nebraska's sideline and only then had the cart drive across the field to get him. It seems like they would have shaved probably 5 minutes or more off of the time from injury to treatment (as well as allowing gameplay to resume more quickly) by calling the cart in before moving him the first time and heading off the field towards the locker room/med center to better treat him.

No they didn't - if what they ran was a zone read, then that player was unblocked because that player is the "read." Blocking him would make it some other play - a quarterback keeper or running back dive/power - which as far as I could tell was not the case. The zone read Martinez ran was the zone read Lee ran, Lee was just making the right read. Maybe it was just me but texas tried to stop the run way more when martinez was in than when lee was in. Also, texas had to be expecting the pass because we were down 2 tds and leave it up to watson to take 5 to 6 minutes off the clock by running those zone reads that "lee was just making the right read" on, and settling for a field goal. If you guys want the offense of last year then let's start lee, but I would rather lose two more games with martinez as my quarterback than with lee. Texas may have been defending the pass more than the run at that point, although we seemed to still have plenty of receivers open when we did pass - not that they were able to catch them. As far as Watson running a bunch of time off the clock "running" versus passing, virtually 2 out of every 3 passes we attempted were dropped by our receivers or otherwise incomplete. I suppose Watson could have gotten pass happy and just started throwing a bunch anyway, but all that would likely have happened is that we would be complaining how he left the run (which we would now conveniently remember as having been working). As far as "the offense of last year," I'm not really seeing where this years "Martinez led" offense is performing any better against decent teams than last years "Lee led" offense did. As far as Lee over Martinez or Martinez over Lee, I don't care who starts as long as we put points on the board and win. In my opinion, we have enough weapons on offense this year that we don't "need" Martinez to win games; it's sure nice to have him (and he's exciting to watch when he's doing well), but I don't recall any games we've won this year based on his performance alone. What we do "need" is for Martinez to continue to grow and become a better overall quarterback - whether that's as the starter or as the back-up getting quality reps - his physical game is pretty much already there, it's his mental game as a quarterback that needs maturing. As far as losing two more game with Martinez juxtaposed I assume by winning those same games with Lee (that is what you're suggesting right?) I'll take the wins this season and look forward to an improved Martinez next year.

Agreed. I think in that in the "peso" the line has been tasked exactly as described above - plug the gaps and funnel the plays to the linebackers. At the same time, it would be nice to see our tackles shedding their blocks and hitting our opponent's backs behind the line. As far as defensive end play, it looks like they get blocked to the inside a lot and lose outside containment, leaving it open to plays coming around the end - may be a scheme thing, but its discomforting to see.

No they didn't - if what they ran was a zone read, then that player was unblocked because that player is the "read." Blocking him would make it some other play - a quarterback keeper or running back dive/power - which as far as I could tell was not the case. The zone read Martinez ran was the zone read Lee ran, Lee was just making the right read.

It's not hard to tell if someone cares about the team winning or not. It doesn't matter if one is animated about it, jumping up and down or simply standing up near the sideline watching intently. Sitting ten yards back on the bench with arms crossed pretty much tells the story. If you or Chatelain feel so sure about that, feel free to go ask Martinez to his face whether he cares about the team winning or losing. But I won't feel sorry for you if he punches you in the face. edit: And if you're not sure - then don't write the article implying such. When asked to comment about the game or give an interview Martinez declined to be available, which given his "behavior" on the sidelines points towards a little bit of immaturity. He has a lot of growing up to do and this isn't just with regard to football - he's 18/19 years old and has a lot of life and growth ahead of him. It's kind of a delicate process of giving him room to grow whilst at the same time holding him responsible for his actions. I don't think I've seen anyone tearing him apart over this, but it's the kind of behavior that needs to have attention called to it so that he CAN grow from it - if all everyone does is give him a free pass because he's young and blow smoke up his quantum singularity then itjustifies the behavior rather than deterring from it. Nobody's saying we should give him a free pass. But if you're going to critique him, critique is on-field performance. The missed throws, or the missed reads, that's all fair game. But don't write about his body language, don't speculate on his psyche, and I don't care whether or not he talks to the press the rest of the time he's at UNL. That's his choice. And why shouldn't we? As has been pointed out many a time, being a quarterback is much more mental than physical in most cases - where a quarterback is at mentally is going to affect the team as whole much more than any other position. No-one is questioning his choice in girlfriends or which Xbox game he plays or what he wears, etc, etc. He's being questioned with regard to his actions and behavior as Taylor Martinez, Husker quarterback, not as Taylor Martinez, person. Any other person in the quarterback position is going to be questioned physically as well as mentally (especially if they act the same way he did on Saturday.) As evidence see the threads on Zac Lee after being named 3rd string or Cody Green after getting and losing the starting position last year and being second string this year.

It's not hard to tell if someone cares about the team winning or not. It doesn't matter if one is animated about it, jumping up and down or simply standing up near the sideline watching intently. Sitting ten yards back on the bench with arms crossed pretty much tells the story. If you or Chatelain feel so sure about that, feel free to go ask Martinez to his face whether he cares about the team winning or losing. But I won't feel sorry for you if he punches you in the face. edit: And if you're not sure - then don't write the article implying such. When asked to comment about the game or give an interview Martinez declined to be available, which in addition to his behavior and attitude on the sidelines points towards a little bit of immaturity. He has a lot of growing up to do and this isn't just with regard to football - he's 18/19 years old and has a lot of life and growth ahead of him. It's kind of a delicate process of giving him room to grow whilst at the same time holding him responsible for his actions. I don't think I've seen anyone tearing him apart over this, but it's the kind of behavior that needs to have attention called to it so that he CAN grow from it - if all everyone does is give him a free pass because he's young and blow smoke up his quantum singularity then it justifies the behavior rather than deterring from it.

We were not adjusting the blocking schemes on it to account for Texas' gameplan. It was pretty obvious that they spent their two weeks working on shutting down the zone read, and we weren't able to make any good adjustments to our blocking. We had the patience but the combination of poor adjustments and Martinez making some poor reads kept us from ever breaking a long one. I'm in complete agreement with you.

I think part of the problem with the zone-read is that it has basically become the "Taylor Martinez keeper" play - if the defense is keying on Martinez then the running back should be "open." When Lee went in I don't think the zone read working better was a result of Texas suddenly dropping into a nickel or dime package to keep our passing "attack" from working as much as Lee making the right reads where Martinez wasn't. As for running the zone read a little too much and counting on Martinez for too much of our offense, I can agree with that (although I don't think that Watson is necessarily trying to put everything on Martinez every play, Martinez is just keeping it when he many times shouldn't be.) At the same time, I think that as fans our expectation of the zone read being a "home run" every time it's run are a little high and out of whack. As much as any play is designed to score, averaging 3-4-5 yards per play is much more likely and not a bad result.

Nobody here is saying that the QB shouldn't be a leader. But this article calls out a redshirt freshman QB for his lack of leadership because he isn't a big enough cheerleader, and because instead of talking to the press, he hung out with his family. Screw anyone who writes that article. People want to rip Martinez for his lack of leadership? Than you better be ready to call out Niles Paul, a senior (who two weeks ago in the same newspaper talked about he needed to get the ball more and be a bigger part of the offense), for dropping about 5 passes, 3 of which could have led to touchdowns. You better be ready to call out Brandon Kinnie, a junior who dropped a touchdown pass. You better be ready to call out Rickey Thenarse, a 5th year senior who thinks he can just throw himself at players rather than wrap up. You better call out Zac Lee, a senior, who fumbled a snap and nearly turned the ball over. You better call out Roy Helu, a senior who fumbled the ball on the 2nd drive of the game. Martinez was the least of our problems on Saturday, and he holds no more responsibility for the loss than any one of his teammates or coaches. I don't care what position he plays. Yeah, since nobody has said a thing about any of those other guys at all... In my opinion, you just don't get to play the "redshirt freshman" excuse all season. The quarterback, at any and every level of play, is expected to be a leader on AND off the field - he's the starting quarterback for a highly ranked FBS football team - like it or not the expectations placed upon him are going to be higher than those placed on redshirt freshmen at other positions. If he's the best we've got at quarterback, not just the one with the best "upside," but truly the best overall quarterback we've got, then any criticism lobbed his way with regard to his performance at the position, on or off the field, is in bounds and well earned. While he shouldn't be castigated for every mistake (no one is perfect), he shouldn't get a free pass either - you don't get to have all the benefits of the position with none of the downsides.

yeah Martinez also deserves a chance to run the zone read under the same conditions as Lee. When Lee got in there Watson changed the scheme so every one was blocked rather letting one man run free. I believe Martinez would have better results and more room to recover from mistakes if that man is blocked. If I recall correctly, in the zone read that man is always unblocked - that is the "read" part of the play - and he was still unblocked when Lee was in (although some have said Texas changed up their defense against Lee, I personally didn't see any big changes). It makes no sense that Watson would leave a guy unblocked against Martinez, but not against Lee when Martinez is the bigger running threat ie if that guy being blocked sprung Lee for 3-4 yards a pop, then it would likely spring Martinez for 6-10 if not more. In truth, what you saw was Lee making the correct read versus Martinez not making it. And with Lee making perfect reads we get.....3 yds. Which was 3 more yards than we were seeing from Martinez before he was pulled from the game. Looking past any and all other faults a guy has just because he can hit a home run every now and then is just plain stupid, especially given the other assets we have available on the team. As I said in another thread, a guy who gets on base most of the time is, in my opinion, a better pick than a guy that hits a homerun every now and then. At this point, as electrifying as Martinez can be, I'd willingly take Lee over him as a quarterback, even if he never gains another yard of offense on the ground again because I believe he currently has a better grasp on the offense and on reading defenses than Martinez does. That said, I'm not calling for Lee to replace Martinez as quarterback at this point, but if Martinez continues to make bad reads and/or poor decisions he needs to be pulled until he understands the reasons why he's making them and corrects them.

yeah Martinez also deserves a chance to run the zone read under the same conditions as Lee. When Lee got in there Watson changed the scheme so every one was blocked rather letting one man run free. I believe Martinez would have better results and more room to recover from mistakes if that man is blocked. If I recall correctly, in the zone read that man is always unblocked - that is the "read" part of the play - and he was still unblocked when Lee was in (although some have said Texas changed up their defense against Lee, I personally didn't see any big changes). It makes no sense that Watson would leave a guy unblocked against Martinez, but not against Lee when Martinez is the bigger running threat ie if that guy being blocked sprung Lee for 3-4 yards a pop, then it would likely spring Martinez for 6-10 if not more. In truth, what you saw was Lee making the correct read versus Martinez not making it.

I don't think it was a bad decision. Dropped passes aside (that's on the WRs) Taylor wasn't making the right reads and was losing yardage pretty much every time he ran it. As much as he is a home run threat, consistently losing yardage is a drive killer. While Zac may not be a home run threat he was consistently getting 3-4 yards on the zone read - allowing for a better chance at sustaining drives and putting some points on the board. Hitting it out of the park is great, but consistently getting on base will get you further and win you more games. As far as his confidence being hurt because he was pulled, if that's the case (and not saying it is) then he needs to man up. Life's not fair, you don't always get second chances and if you're not performing, in college football or in a "real" job, you're going to get benched. There's more than one way to "take your lumps" and learn - getting benched and coming back strong the next game is as good a lesson as any he might have learned if Bo had left him on the field. I assume that like Zac has for most of the season, that's exactly how Martinez will handle it - with a good attitude, hard work in practice to improve and intense and smart play on the field. If instead of turning it into a positive and learning from it he wants to sulk about it, I'd rather have Lee or Green on the field. College football is just as much about attitude as it is talent, the Husker's very own walk-on program has shown that to be true.

Running the zone read 30 times when its getting stuffed every time is calling it pretty well? Oh you mean he called a good gameplan..when he had to throw the ball at the every end to play catch up? when does he call a good gameplan when its close? When has he ever beat anythng that resembled a top 25 defense? YOu mean, our amazing 100 yards in the first half was good playcalling? You are going to runt he zone read in the first half and beginning of 3rd quarter when they are clearly playing it? The passing game would have worked with how close texas was playing but when did he really throw the ball downfield? (when it was close that is). If youre a coach, dont you play to the defense weakness? Then if you studied film you would know that texas is a fast defense but has trouble when it comes to power running from the pistol and I formation..and what does he do? He doesnt run power plays from those formations at all. He instead runs zone read, which texas can defend with their speed. I guess its ok not to study film and works on an opponent..i guess its ok not to adjust from week to week, i guess that makes a good coach. Yeah, so we should switch up our offense every single week to make sure we take advantage of that - that will definitely build the consistent identity on offense we fans all call for. Of course if he does do that, Watson gets called for not sticking with the zone-read, which was working until now. The Huskers typically can't pass very well, and pretty much any time they do everyone calls for "THE RUNNING GAME" (you know, the one we had in the 90's) but today, since the zone-read doesn't work, we need to pass or jump into the "i" or pistol. And about the pistol or I-formation - great in theory, but it doesn't appear they practice it, they definitely don't play it and the Husker offensive line isn't all that great at run blocking anyway which means it likely wouldn't work much better. It doesn't matter what he does or doesn't do, Watson can't catch a break with the fans - he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. It's as if it's not the triple option out of the "i" then no "true" Nebraska fan can be happy. I guess my philosophy on offense - which may or may not be Watson's as well - is that you play to your strengths, of which with Martinez the zone read is one. If playing to your strengths allows you to take advantage of the "weaknesses" of a defense - GREAT! But you don't overhaul your offense every week to do it. Texas stopped Martinez and the zone read today and when Watson did switch it up a bit and throw, the receivers dropped the ball (literally). As for not performing well against top 25 defenses, the Huskers seem to hurt themselves much more with fumbles, drops, penalties and lack of execution than "bad" play calling can account for - I think it's more of a psychological "barrier" the players have than it is a faulty gameplan. How the current coaches get the players over that barrier and playing consistently good, mistake free football is the question that I want answered.

I don't think that you can lay this defeat on Watson from a play calling angle. If you want to lay it at his feet because at the end of the day he is responsible for the offenses overall performance on the field, you have a better argument. Fact of the matter was that the plays called - for the most part- put NU in a position to move the ball and to score, but the Huskers did not, could not and seemingly refused to capitalize on them. Maybe a few too many zone reads called overall and a couple questionable 3rd and long play calls, but otherwise I think that game was planned and called pretty well.

Travis-You are misguided. Taylor is putting up the best stats for a freshman QB, not just in the Big 12 but in all of college football. Did you ever watch ZL run a zone read left or an option left? A loss of 2 yards or more ever time. Did you ever see ZL throw interceptions to Texas after 2 straight interceptions, not a play or two later, on the very next play. Taylor is the best QB for NU right now and it has nothing to do with stubborness. Bo makes a lot of money to win football games, PERIOD!!!!!! Bo knows that if we move the chains, chew some clock and score 21 points, we win nearly ever game we play. When you have a QB that can't stretch the field and you settle for 4 FG's against Texas and 5 FG's against VT and only 7 points against Iowa St, you lose 3 games. If the O scored 21 points against those 3 teams last year, NU wins 13 games and is ranked in the top 5 last year. Think about it, 13-1 last year and a victory on Jan 1st in a BCS bowl if we have a QB like Taylor. If Taylor ran this team last year, we would've won more games than 10. If Bo like the fact the Taylor beat his top rated defense, then maybe he thinks Taylor is the best QB for the job, PERIOD!!! That is of course assuming all of our offensive woes last year were Lee's fault which isn't the case although many here like to think it so. And your 21 point, stretch the field theory is a wonderful idea, but Martinez as your hero only works up to last week against SDSU - a high caliber opponent much like VT and Texas - where the Huskers didn't score 21 points, relied on field goals to guarantee the win, where Martinez threw a couple interceptions, put quite a few balls in the dirt (both passing and fumbling) and Martinez didn't really run all that well (compared to past performances.) I have yet to see Martinez "stretch" the field with his passing ability and based on what I've seen so far I'm not so sure that he can. He's a home run threat on the ground, but a well rounded quarterback capable of beating teams both on the ground and through the air? Not so much. Putting up high numbers and beating 3 or 4 not so good teams at the beginning of the year does not a season make and also doesn't do a thing to prove or disprove how good the Huskers could or would have been if Martinez was quarterback last year (see the 2009 season as evidence for judging how the first 4 games of a season can be used to effectively predict offensive performance against Big XII opponents). In contrast to your supposition above, I say that with Martinez as quarterback last year the Huskers actually lose a couple games they won with Lee at the helm while not necessarily prevailing over VT or Texas. As far as Bo being paid "a lot of money to win football games, PERIOD!!!!" so were Weiss and Callahan and a myriad of other not so great college coaches. I'm not saying Bo is a Weiss or a Callahan (I think he's off the charts better) but being paid a lot of money to do something doesn't always mean you're great or even good at what you do, it just means you're paid a lot to do it.

I have not seen the exact wording in the contracts that NCAA athletes sign, but signing the contract and allowing the NCAA and University to use their likeness in signage, promotions, etc is much different than allowing the NCAA to license your likeness to third-party companies for profit (for the the NCAA and EA in this case). I believe that this would be the area that Keller and his lawyers would likely target and build their case on. The judge who allowed the case to go forward obviously (at least I hope) looked over the contract and found the legalese governing player likenesses and their usage ambiguous enough that he felt Keller's case had sufficient merit to go to trial. Whether or not he'll win... who knows - I think that if the players likenesses are being used outside of what is NCAA is allowed to do according to their contract then the players should be compensated though, just like anyone else whose likeness is used to promote something. One thing is for sure though, you can bet the NCAA is reviewing/changing their contract to make sure this is a non-issue in the future.

If we don't make the Big 12 championship, then I hope people have the sense to question the untouchable Bo Pelini for what would have turned out to be a really questionable call. That is what's at stake here. We hooked the wagon to Taylor, and we are gonna ride it. But we're 2-0 yet and there is no reason to expect that scenario so far. Some tempered expectations are in order though. Taylor was always going to take his lumps. By hooking the wagon to Taylor Martinez, we will have an experienced QB when we start in the Big 10 --- and that is huge. Next season is far more important than this season in that next year we play perhaps the toughest schedule in America and will have nationally televised games against Michigan, Iowa, Ohio State, and Penn State --- and, if we win our division --- a second game against Ohio State or Penn State. The potential to be totally embarassed in these games is there --- as is the potential to return to national respect. Haing an experienced and returning QB will help hugely in our regaining respect nationally. If Lee were the QB this year we'd be in huge trouble next year --- going in w/o an experienced QB. Honestly, I'd imagine that the #1 reason Lee is not starting now is that Bo is looking ahead to next year and knows he needs to have a returning QB. So Lee was out. That leaves Green or Martinez. These young guys need to work out the kinks now so that next season NU can compete in the Big 10. Now... Bo can only work with what he has --- so really he is doing the only thing logically he can do in terms of best situating our team for long-term sucess --- go with the QB that will return experienced next year. None of this is to say that this year is not important --- it is. But not like next year. Bo is too smart to be one-season short sighted. It'd be different if Lee were tremendously better (at this moment) than Martinez. He's not. He might be slightly better perched to lead now --- but then he is gone. So let Martinez learn this year and hope for the best. As for Green --- I really do not see much there as potential. Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems that Martinez --- limitations amd all -- is who I'd hook my wagon to too if I were Bo. I'm really not quite sure why next year is "far more important than this year"? It's our first year in the Big Ten - I suppose that's important. We have a very tough schedule next year and losing most of our games due to inexperience at any position would be pretty embarrassing - I suppose that's important as well. But it seems like a lot of people are just willing to give this year away for next year, when it's this year we are playing and it's this year that we actually have a legitimate and fairly straight path to win the Big XII and play for a national championship. Bo has always espoused that emphasis is always on focusing fully on and not looking any further than the next game, so I would honestly be flabbergasted if he chose give up the championship opportunities available to the Huskers this year and go with Martinez to get him experience for next year. I think that Martinez has a lot of potential and that he has a bright future at Nebraska. However, I'm not willing to excuse his inefficiencies and/or deficiencies with a "Oh well, we're preparing for next year." If this season is essentially going to be used as a preseason for next year, then maybe every senior on the team should be benched so that come next year's Big Ten season opener the Huskers field the most experienced team possible. Ludicrous. We still have 10 (hopefully 12) games left to play this season and we have a freshman quarterback, who while having great big play potential, is essentially one dimensional. One dimensional isn't going to cut it against most of the teams we play this season. Big plays are great, but aren't sustainable and can't and won't carry a team through a season. Martinez needs to improve his passing game and his ability to read and react to what defenses throw at him. I believe he will get much better at doing so, but giving him a pass because he's young and we're looking to next year is ridiculous. He needs to be held to the same standard we would hold Green or Lee to given that he's apparently the best of the three THIS season. That said, I don't think Martinez needs to be thrown under the bus or lose his starting position. He's young and needs to work on and shore up some of the physical and mental aspects of his game - his passing game in particular - but our offensive woes yesterday do not fall fully on his shoulders. There were a lot of mistakes by many different players that contributed to the second half offensive "stall".

Because it's the internet. Happy, positive people don't post on internet forums, they're all out and about enjoying the win and the great weather.

Actually, it's not all that far out of an idea to put forth (ie favoritism or the lack thereof) In many, if not most, areas of life and business it's not just likely but unfortunately very common that talent and hard work aren't what lead to promotion - it's where you stand politically (ie favored versus unfavored) in the eyes of those with the power to further (or be a detriment to) your career. Not saying that's the case here, but WHO you know usually gets you further than WHAT you know or how hard you work. I know plenty of people who work extremely hard and are extremely knowledgeable who have been passed over many a time for promotion by people less knowledgeable, less qualified and less able to do the job they're promoted to, but who have an "in with the boss." It's my fondest hope that what you say above is true (and it's just as, if not more, likely than not that it is), but many a career has been made, extended or ended because of how someone "feels" about a person rather than the facts. I didn't mean to completely disregard that possibility but there is a coaching staff that, you'd think anyway, would question a bad decision. Also, unlike business, the coaches' performance is put on display and monitored every week (at least). This isn't like promoting one doofus to one of many management positions where that doofus's performance can be obfuscated in bureaucracy and layers of other employees (not intending to strawman what you said, I was just picking an example). This is something where we can see a supposed doofus's performance and ask, "What were they thinking?" But I didn't think that yesterday, Martinez performed well and just looked slightly crisper than the other two QBs. I don't think he's leagues ahead and might not be tops on every attribute of what makes a good QB, but he look a little better and might have more potential for growth. So I just find it unlikely that in this instance (I didn't mean every instance of promotion) that the decisions are more transparent to the people that the coaches have to answer to. Watson wouldn't want to look bad by promoting the not-best QB and Pelini wouldn't want to field a team that has a lower likelihood of winning. I'm sure they have favorites, everyone does, but you'd hope that someone else in the staff would call out a decision like that and ask for some good rationale for it. I think that we see more of what you're describing within coaching staffs (Cosgrove, anyone? ). So I feel that what you say is possible in this instance, but seems unlikely. Above all, though, I hope that the coaches aren't too proud to reverse a decision if it doesn't work out after a few games! Right on, wasn't really disagreeing with you, just pointing out that it's something that happens more often that we'd like to believe. As for who's starting/playing qb, whether it's Lee or Green or Martinez, I really don't care - I just want to see some consistency and stability at the position this season (big numbers don't hurt either). May the best man win

Actually, it's not all that far out of an idea to put forth (ie favoritism or the lack thereof) In many, if not most, areas of life and business it's not just likely but unfortunately very common that talent and hard work aren't what lead to promotion - it's where you stand politically (ie favored versus unfavored) in the eyes of those with the power to further (or be a detriment to) your career. Not saying that's the case here, but WHO you know usually gets you further than WHAT you know or how hard you work. I know plenty of people who work extremely hard and are extremely knowledgeable who have been passed over many a time for promotion by people less knowledgeable, less qualified and less able to do the job they're promoted to, but who have an "in with the boss." It's my fondest hope that what you say above is true (and it's just as, if not more, likely than not that it is), but many a career has been made, extended or ended because of how someone "feels" about a person rather than the facts.

Hey now, don't knock NWMSU. Actually odds are good he'd enjoy more success going there than he'll get at Missouri (not that he'd necessarily play more or at all, but NWMSU looks to have a better future program wise than Missouri at this point....actually probably more success than most of the Big 12 North schools to be honest ).

I keep seeing this prayer posted as if it is some kind of reason as to why Husker fans should not be upset about the outcome of the game (and how said outcome was obtained). The issue I have with this is that the prayer asks for and assumes a fair and honorable game taking place, with both sides holding and being held to the same set of standards. In this instance it can be argued that the outcome was decided by a means other than fair and honorable. If either Texas or Nebraska had beaten the other handily (by a touchdown or more) there is no conspiracy theory. If the refs had blown the whistle at one second and then the clock ticked to zero, I have no issue with Texas getting another play (it would still suck mightily, but again no conspiracy). The fact is that the clock ticked to zero before the refs blew the whistle, but one second was added after the play was summarily reviewed in a fashion out of context with similar plays throughout the game, against a clock that has been shown to not only be erroneous, but typically out of sync with both the official time clock and the scoreboard time clock and by the replay official rather than the head referee on the field (who typically calls for and "makes" clock adjustments). This fairly odd set of circumstances, which lead to a Texas victory, makes it easy to question whether or not the final outcome of this game is truly valid with respect to the standards we and the prayer place heavy emphasis upon and feel should be upheld by both the teams and the officials in these sporting events. The prayer "provides" appropriate responses to winning and losing when games are played and decided with the prayer's standards applied and upheld. The prayer does not provide for, or even hint at what may or may not be appropriate in situations where games are played/decided with a different set of standards divergent from the prayer's applied (ie there is no appropriate response supplied by the prayer for getting held up and robbed like a 7-11 ). Application of the prayer, therefore, to this situation doesn't seem fitting nor logical and using it in an attempt to soothe ruffled feathers and/or call out others for "bad fan behavior" is out of context. All that being said, I do not believe Texas was in collusion with either the referees, the Big XII or the BCS in order to change the outcome of this game. They are however, the recipients of a rather happy set of circumstances that assured them an extra chance for a win and place in the national championship game - a chance that not only paid dividends with regard to the Big XII championship but also kept the BCS from a rather massive meltdown with regard to TCU's right to contend for the national championship title as well. My final two cents is that we as fans should do our best to let it go, or at least move it to the back burner to simmer until next year, so that we can focus on the challenge presented by Arizona and the celebration of what has been a very rough, but successful season.

Well good luck with that....you do know that he'll just pop right back up again after a long weekend right?