FarmerTed

If you’re looking for something to do today, how about submitting your name for the NFL’s supplemental draft? Evidently anyone can do it, even Quentin Castille. Pelini unceremoniously booted the once promising running back on August 22 for the usual mysterious undisclosed violation of team rules, ending Castille’s shot at the riches and fame of pro football. Or so we thought! Castille has found his way into the NFL draft after all. He’s parlaying the 349 yards rushing that he racked up in 11 games during his junior year at something called “Northwestern State University” in 2009. What NFL team wouldn’t want a D-1 castoff who averaged 3.3 yards/carry and 0.09 TD/game against the likes of McNeese State, Sam Houston State and Nicholls? (In fairness, he did post 7 yards on 8 carries in NSU’s 68-13 loss to Baylor.) If I sound bitter it’s because the last time we saw Quentin Castille he was running all over Clemson in the 2009 Gator Bowl, posting 125 yards rushing while Helu and Lucky were slowed by injuries. He could have been good. And because of Castille’s undisclosed shenanigans, these things didn’t happen: (1) the easy Iowa State victory in October, (2) Helu’s orderly and unrushed return from injury, and (3) Rex Burkhead’s uneventful (and healthy) 2009 redshirt year. And of course, (4) Quentin Castille’s NFL career. LINK(Better off Red)

Are the Huskers “back”? This is the hot topic in Husker circles. But what exactly does it mean to be “back”? Is it consistent 10 win seasons and Top 10 finishes? Big 12 championships? BCS appearances? Our peers’ renewed envy and hatred? It’s a slippery definition, but we’ll know it when we feel it. I don’t anticipate for a moment that the Huskers will go undefeated in 2010. That kind of expectation would be unrealistic and unreasonable at this stage of the program’s resurgence. Too many unwelcome or random things could (and almost certainly will) get in the way of perfection in 2010, especially with the offense’s tiny margin for error. But this post isn’t about reasonable expectations. It’s about reasonable hope — actually, one particular type of hope that Husker fans once took for granted. It wasn’t terribly long ago that Husker fans had a perennial hope that the team would win all its games and contend for the national title. That hope was usually grounded in reality; some years it bordered on expectation. It felt like the natural order of things and that it would always be that way. Sure, Florida State might step up and wreck things early in the season, or Oklahoma might do so later on. But the point was that even though perfection was rare, going into the season there was no ceiling. The realistic best case scenario was almost always an undefeated season and a national title. And that more than anything characterized Big Red Fever: the frenzied anticipation of knowing that anything could happen. For me, being able to approach a season with that mindset is what it means to be “back.” It wasn’t realistic to hope for an undefeated season during the Callahan regime as the Huskers were in a constant state of rebuilding. In 2008 it was too soon, and although 2009 came together nicely it wasn’t reasonable to hope that the Huskers could beat Virginia Tech and Missouri and Oklahoma and Texas and the rest. Not really. But 2010 will be different. The Huskers probably won’t go undefeated, but for the first time in years, they might. It will not be insane or indefensible to hope that the team will win all its games. It is again the realistic best case scenario and the odds of it happening are finally better than winning the Powerball. Why is it reasonable to hope for perfection in 2010? The Huskers will likely be favored in every game they play. They will begin the season in the Top 10 and have road tests at Washington and Oklahoma State and difficult matchups with Texas and Missouri in Lincoln. But each time they run out on the field they will be the expected winner. So the hope that they will win every game is at least anchored in some reality, even if the chances of it actually happening are somewhere around, say, 5%. Not bad considering where the program was just two years ago when Pelini came to town. And that is why the Huskers are officially “back.” This is what we have been waiting for. Again, I’m not suggesting that an undefeated season in 2010 is a reasonable expectation. It’s not. But once again, at last, it’s OK to hope for it. LINK (Better Off Red)

Good thread. Bo makes it hard to like him sometimes, but our tolerance level is high right now. It's sort of a complex issue -- if you ask me, I don't think it matters much what kind of guy a head coach is, as long as he's not a total embarassment and he wins. It's probably a cynical view, but that's the way it usually goes -- win and we'll find reasons to love you; lose and we'll find reasons to dislike you. It all boils down to winning. Put up an article on this on Better Off Red yesterday actually -- would be curious what you guys think. Here's the link.

I don't know that you can give Watson a pass for 2009's struggles, but given Lee's injury I think he gets an Incomplete. More thoughts over at Better Off Red -- click here

A few questions as we sort this out: (1) Do we know for certain the clock kept by the official on the field read 0:00 after the play? (Could be, I don't know this.) (2) Does the official on the field really start and stop the "official" game clock before and after every play, independent from the scoreboard clock? (If the answer is yes, it would seem that the field clock and scoreboard clock would be substantially off from each other late in any quarter. But I've never seen it.) I always thought that the reason the field officials correct the scoreboard clock from time to time is so that the scoreboard does consistently match. If they are different, they call attention to it over the PA and fix it. So without a correction, we can assume the scoreboard clock was correct.