huskerstag

anyone know who else committed last night? they mention it on rivals but the name isn't up on the commits list yet.

Firstly, the players you're dissing were Solich recruits. Are you dissing his recruiting? Could that be? Is that what some of us have been saying all along? There's no question of the dominance of the teams of the mid 90's. While that would be the model of success to strive for, comparing this year's team to those defenses is like comparing apples to oranges. Firstly, the 93, 94, and 95 teams had all americans on the DL. Having a stellar pass rush definately helps the back 7 in coverage along with being able to stuff the run. I'm not saying our DL wasn't awfully good this year, but we weren't exactly loaded with talent up front like the year we had Wistrom, both Peters and also Rucker i believe. There was also at least one bona fide playmaker in the secondary such as a Brown, Minter or even Miles. Also, the defenses of the 90's were coached by the great Charlie McBride. He alone had 20+ years of coaching experience at Nebraska. He also ran a much different defense. While still a 4-3, there was a lot more man coverage and a lot more blitzing, especially in 99. This year's team is more zone oriented as that is the way football has gone. Kids want to play in a cover 2 type system since that's what the pros use. Also, with the way Carriker lined up basically anchoring an entire side of the defense he needs to be bigger. We need at least one large body to put on that end of the line to eat up blocks and allow the linebackers to make plays, so saying we're recruiting bigger and slower players to put on the line is somewhat deceiving since they're more necessary in our current system. The Mike doesn't really need to be blazing fast since it's not his job to control the flats. I'd be interested to see how McKeon and Dillard's 40 times compare to Barret Ruud, Carlos Polk, or even Phil Ellis (94). A Mike covering a TE is almost always a mismatch, just the way football goes. Terrel Farley's aren't everyday finds, saying we should be recruiting guys like him is like saying we should recruit guys like Leinart to play qb. They don't come along every day. Of course this year's defense, and offense for that matter, don't match up with the teams of the mid 90's. That's why we aren't in the NC game. I'll wager the defenses of the mid to late 80's didn't match up with those guys either.

Regardless of what folks say about our preseason schedule and playing in the Big XII north, next year's schedule will be as tough as anyone's in the nation when you include both teams in this year's national championship game on next year's slate. Here's hoping we finish off this year's season with another confidence building win.

While not a Wolverine fan, it seems the luster of 97 has worn off a bit to me, from the folks i've talked to. Besides national and big 10 championships the most important thing is beating Ohio St., which has only happened i think once in the last 6 years or something, so he's taking some heat for that, but they are only a year removed from the rose bowl so he's probably not under as much fire as Callahan imo.

IMO that flag is completely warranted because of what the player did. The ball was snapped and hit ZT in the stomach and then fell to the turf. If the player was really just continuing to play then wouldn't he have gone after the ball instead of hitting Taylor? The claim that the penalty was unjustified is so rediculous it could only have come from Colorado.

I can see the SPREAD option attack being successful in the college ranks, as in Utah and now Florida among several other teams, but athletes with quick feet and even quicker decision making skills who can also throw a nice ball are tough to find. However, in the pros that changes significantly because protecting the qb is much more difficult. Spurrier tried to run his version of a spread offense, not the option but still five wide, and couldn't keep his qb's from getting drilled. I agree with the statement that speed has/will kill the traditional option attack because it wasn't that good at spreading the field. The key to stopping the option has always been getting the safeties in the right position. With linebackers that run like defensive backs executing the option becomes even more difficult because the qb is then forced to pitch and the safety takes the pitch man. On top of that, with faster safeties they can play closer to the line, a la 8 men in the box, and still recover into a passing lane, so the safeties are more likely to be in position to stop the pitch. Its true that with excellent execution and play calling the option could work, but imo its more difficult to implement than ever before for the above reasons. I would also take the offenses of the mid 90's against any defense today, but IMO those teams were anomalies because of the extraordinary amount of talent in the backfield and on the o-line, coupled with tons of coaching experience and talent. Collections of talent like that are probably once in a lifetime or at least once every couple of decades and with recruiting today and more money being put into more programs its even less likely to occur. A traditional option attack, while not dead, is probably tought to implement and be successful with than other forms of offense.

FF, if not beating a 'bottom feeder' by 30-40 pts. is truly unacceptable then even the great TO with the great teams of 94 and 95 performed unacceptably. 1995 NU-35, Wash. St.-21 Margin of victory=14pts. Wash St. record=3-8 1994 NU-42, Wyoming 32 Margin of Victory=10pts. Wyoming record=6-6 NU-28, Iowa St.-12 Margin of Victory=16pts. Iowa St. record=0-10 The only game above that was played on the road was ISU, meaning Osborne was limited to 3rd string reserves that game and he rarely played anything below the usual rotation in the 1st half. True that Wyoming was without Frazier and then Berringer and they were decent that year, but they played in a weak conference at the time. It appears that either your standard of success is way too high or you're just trying to make the staff look bad every chance you get.

I was at the game last night and I agree, he started off well, hit his first 3 pointer i think, but after that it seemed he lost his focus and didn't have his head in the game, maybe acting a little pouty and started getting beat down the floor and playing a little poorly on defense. I don't remember him playing much if at all in the last 10 minutes. That said, BJ Walker was a beast last night. I haven't heard much about him so I'm not sure if he's going to be a solid contributor or just had an above average night, but he, Maric and even Wilkinson and Dorisseau controlled the boards last night, it was actually pretty impressive to watch.

I agree if we had played the entire season as we did against CU we would have 11 wins, but that would also make us UNDEFEATED. Did anyone really think we'd be undefeated at the start of the season? Is going undefeated the only mark of a good team, or improvement from one year to the next? If that's the case then all but two coaches in the nation should be on the hot seat right now, and by the end of the year then either Carrol or Brown should be worried about his job too. If we're going to look at the entire season, then lets do it. We struggled offensively early, but the passing game especially came alive in the 2nd half of the season. The two Big XII north teams we lost to we could have and possibly should have won, but instead of imploding and throwing in the towel or making excuses such as coaching, youth, lack of O-line production or injuries the fellas hung together and finished the year very strongly. We also beat what record-wise were the two strongest teams in the North. Those are things we didn't see at all last year. Last year's defense didn't show up for the 2nd half of the season with the exception of the MU game, the passing game regressed and players quit on each other. Looking at individual games and individual performances is not looking at the season as a whole. Sure there are areas the team struggled in such as the run game and getting off the field on 3rd and long, but almost every team struggles in some areas, which is why only two teams are now left with perfect records. I really fail to see how anyone cannot see improvement from last year to this year.

People love to point to Belichick as the model for a tremendous coach, and I won't disagree. Most people forget however that he started his career as a head coach with the Cleveland Browns. His record there went like this: 6-10 7-9 7-9 11-5 5-11 Record his first 5 years as a head coach=36-44 His next HC job was a 5-11 year at NE after they went 8-8 the year before. This was done with one above average quarterback and an eventual stud behind him. Even the great Belichick couldn't produce championships right away and possibly even regressed a year or two from where they were the year before. Coaching a football team at the major college or professional level is exceedingly complex, which is why IMO coaches need more than 1 or 2 years to be properly evaluated, likewise with an AD or GM on the professional level. I guess its fun to speculate since that's all we really have to do at the moment, but lets at least try to keep it all in perspective rather than picking isolated 'case studies' to validate our arguments.

As i remember, way back in the early fall before the season started several people set out some benchmarks of what they'd like to see from this year's team. Most said they wanted to see progress, sort of an unquantifiable term, but most said progress would be a solid bowl game and a 8-3 or 7-4 record. It now appears that the team has reached those expectations. We're currently 7-4 and, while probably not looking at a new year's day bowl, are still looking at something respectable. IMO the defense for the most part has played much better than last year. The pass rush is now statistically in the top five in husker history, and believe it or not, that's not just because of the front four or seven, but you've got to credit the relatively young and inexperienced secondary too. The linebacking corps lost two starters, one a bona fide playmaker and the other at the very least a stud athlete. The running game struggled the second half of the season, but we also played much better run defenses in that stretch. The upperclassmen on the O-line were injured for most the the second half of the season and we played several freshman and sophomores in their place. The receiving corps has shown marked improvement and did so without Mr. Herian and two questionable replacements in his stead. We've got a freshman receiver who trails only the great Johnny Rodgers for catches and yardage in a season, and no Rodgers didn't play in strictly a running system. Most importantly though, the staff got the team to play for them and for each other. There could have been another monumental collapse as we saw last season and no one would have blamed the team for it, but instead the boys kept their heads up, took ownership of their mistakes and played their hearts out for each other and for their coaches. From my perspective all these things point to progress. I'm not just dwelling on the positives of the season as there have been several disappointments as well and we're all well aware of the letdown at Kansas, the horrible first half against Oklahoma etc. However, just as the great teams of the past were epitomized by the likes of Frazier, Wistrom, Connealy and Mike Brown, I feel this year's team is no different and we can look to the play and leadership of Taylor, Ross, Carriker, Moore, and McKeon and say they all stood in there, took their shots and refused to flinch. I haven't been around the board for several weeks because i couldn't stand to see the extreme reactions from so many people after every game. IMHO the only true way to judge a team and staff is by their season taken as a whole. Judging the team and staff on a game by game basis is somewhat silly in my book as all but the very best teams will go through tough games each season and so far this year all but two have lost. Its true that at the beginning of the season i was counting on KU as a win and after the 5-1 start i expected MU to be a win as well. But again, I'm unwilling to judge any team or staff based on a handful of games or even worse, a handful of plays. As far as I'm concerned the entire coaching staff has done quite well this season and deserves our support and respect. Anyone who says otherwise is being shortsighted in my opinion, or maybe buying into so much of the media hype that IMO has tried to stir the pot so to speak. As far as I know most of the folks on this board aren't insiders with the program and most have not played major college football, so if you don't feel like listening to me b/c i'm just another average joe like y'all then look at some other threads and see what former coaches and players have to say. I haven't heard or read anything but positive comments and high praise for the the coaches and players. If anyone knows what's really going on its those guys and not a bunch of outsiders. For me that's enough to throw wholehearted support behind the entire coaching staff and every single player. I'm proud to be a husker fan and can't wait til the bowl game. Go Big Red.

I don't have a clue, I'm guessing not since beer isn't really made the same way, but who knows.

I think a lot of has to do with what your priorities are. A few years ago my priorities on the weekend were drinking and drinking. I didn't really have any other reason to function. If that's the case, the hangover only lasts until you tap the next keg. However, nowadays when I have to work or at least be able to go outside the house they do seem to be worse...especially if I smoke. If I smoke and only have a few I'm done for the next day, and I'm only 23!! However, if you're really interested in drinking and not being hungover, the better alcohol you buy the less hangover you'll get, especially in the arena of hard liquor. My local health aide taught me that the filtering process is what separates Absolut from say Barton's. The more filtered it is the fewer congeners there are in it. Congeners are what cause you to get dehydrated and feel f'd up the next morning. Also, clear liquors have fewer congeners than colored ones do. So if you go shot for shot with Vodka while your buddy drinks Whiskey, all things being equal, he'll feel worse in the morning. Just remember to be safe out there kids.

I just realized that if its Texas and USC in the Rose Bowl, one way or the other we'll be playing the nat. champs next year. get excited

I was just wondering if any of y'all have anything superstitious that you do or don't do to avoid jinxing the team. The first three weeks of the season I posted a prediction about the score, and yards in the Contest forum. I avoided that the week of the ISU game and the offense played much better. So I haven't gone back to that thread since. I like to think that my sacrifice of the chance to win Hboard pts. is what has the offense playing much better lately. Just wondering if anyone else is doing their part to keep the Huskers lucky. Of course by mentioning it, it will probably stop working.

Agreed...Me and the guys in my pledge class never really cared too much about drinking good beer, just mass quantities of it. Natty Light was the first beer I ever drank enough of to make me do this>

Has anyone actually seen it strike 0:0:00:00? What happens? Are there fireworks? a midget doing a striptease? I'm gonna watch this weekend and find out. I'll let all of you know.

How bout we just donate whatever Hboard pts. we had before the system was changed?

I think it was Steward Mandel on SI who wrote that ranking football teams is an inherently illogical process, especially at the mid-point of the season. A couple things to remember about ND, they started off playing most of their games on the road, and I think much of the respect ND gets in the polls right now is not just because they're ND, but because they're coach is Charlie Wies. The guy gives instant credibility to the program. We can whine about the ratings now, but by the end of the season everything will be much clearer, and frankly, that's the only time it matters.

I guess you could call me old school, but i've never been a fan of the 'upstart' team. I'll root for the traditional power school on almost every occasion. So unless its a non-conference game of there's a team from the Big 10 playing I'll take the school with the tradition. I'm cheering for UT but hoping its close. Either way I won't be upset about this one, just looking forward to a fun football game to watch. My prediction is that Texas controls the ball and the clock with a power running game and keeps the score in the high 20s.

Back in the beginning of the Big XII didn't we try to get OU as a 'non-conference' game and they refused? Something tells me we offered and they said no b/c we were so far up and they were so far down. Anyone else remember this?

My top two would have to Barnett and Neuheisel if he's still coaching anywhere. Something about Colorado that brings out the worst in people.

does it have anything to do with navigation?

I'm not sure we can label all of these instances as problems in gameplanning. If we say that every time a team gets across the 50 then the coach has made a mistake we're setting the bar way too high. While I agree that the first 1.5 quarters against Tech weren't planned well at all, I think Cos and co. have done a fine job of gameplanning and adjusting in game in every other game this season. Pitt moved the ball within field goal range against a soft zone but who's to say that they wouldn't have burned us deep otherwise? We've known all season long that the secondary is the weakest unit on defense and one busted coverage is all it would have taken. The first drive against BU should have resulted in an int. if not for the late hit on the qb. Other than that, Bell made some good thows to convert on those 3rd downs. But it didn't seem that after the first drive the defensive scheme changed any, i think it was more a matter of the defense settling in. As someone else stated, a game is 4 quarters long, so judging a staff's competence on 1 or 2 drives a game isn't a fair assessment.

IMO it's not completely accurate to judge a defense simply on statistics. If you look at the big picture then you'll see that last year the defense won maybe 2 games for us - KU and MU. The rest of the season was pretty poor in my opinion. This season, the defense won the game for us against Pitt and probably WF also. They really helped out against Maine. In the TT game we fell in a hole early, but the defense bailed the offense out for pretty much the rest of the game, limiting TT to field goals off of turnovers and setting up a score on the fumble recovery. If you're gonna judge a defense on its ability to keep a team in the game and get stops when they're needed then this year's squad is much much improved over last year's. Regardless of how many yards or points we given up, that's enough to make me believe in the D for the rest of the year.