Cdog923

Red Dead Redemption pretty much has the definitive series of posts on the issue. I'd quote them all, but that's too much text at once.

Be careful: your logical, reasoned, informed and intelligent take won't be well received by some around here.

I agree with their right to express themselves. That doesn't mean it's not classless, tasteless, and overall unbecoming of a representative of the taxpayer-funded University if Nebraska. You are way overreacting, its a simple peaceful protest which has happened multiple times throughout history, so whats the big f'ing deal? UNL should support their right to express their views if anything, if they were an overreaching University they would force them to stop. Simply let the players stand up for what they believe in, any resistance is a totalitarian movement that will reduce productivity and make the players become less loyal to the University they support. UNL should support their right to express their opinion. Like I said, you don't have to agree with it, just understand their right to voice their opinion. Their opinion is just as valid as anyone elses. I'm not "way overreacting". Overreacting would be asking for their expulsion. I'm saying they're classless and tasteless because they're intentionally showing a lack of respect for the symbol of our country and all who've sacrificed for it; which, incidentally, has nothing to do with what they're protesting. Everyone who has ever said they're disrespecting people who have sacrificed for the country is claiming they can read people's minds. Unless these players come out and say they don't give a sh#t about how they were protected during wars, then that's just a big giant guess on your part. If you're specifically talking about the lyrics of the song, why should someone who is fighting against systematic racism care all that much about sacrifices made by our soldiers during a time when slavery was legal? Respect for the flag is something that is ingrained in the minds of all members of the military. It means respect for the people who made the flag possible, so it's easy to infer that disrespect for the flag is disrespect for the people who made the flag possible. As for people fighting against perceived systemic racism, maybe they should care about the sacrifices of those soldiers because many of their progeny paid with their lives to end slavery. Might be something worthy of respect. Did you really just drop a Civil War reference?

Not "Take a knee?" There are thousands of brave veterans who have had their legs blown off that would love to take a knee again... Oh for ****'s sake.

I agree, maybe we are just too damn lazy to learn. Since we are on the subject. Why is it necessary to include JR on jersey names? How often have a SR and JR played on the same team in the same year? I think that comes down to personal preference of the player. I can't remember who it was that had a SR. on their jersey one year, but it was to honor their kid, who was JR. Johnny Stanton IV was a bit much, though.

What a stupid thread. Take a lap, OP.

It may just be me, but I've always wondered why people need to see the names on the backs of jerseys to recognize who each player is.

Because we aren't known as "Nebraska University"? Says who? http://journalstar.com/nu-football-helmets/image_b4c9407f-2b5f-5640-9156-558f7eccc59a.html http://www.unl.edu/band/songs.shtml Virtually everything written after 1924

Because we aren't known as "Nebraska University"?

That can depend on the type of read you make. Reading the end tends to be a quicker decision than reading a DT or LB. Plus, when he was healthy, there wasn't another QB in program history that could go from 0-60 as fast as Martinez could. That's what gave it such a boom or bust feel with Martinez, yes. The other thing though is, if your line doesn't pick up it's blocks or gets beat, it's a bust. It's kind of a potential high risk/high reward type of play. At this point, I'd rather just hand the ball off to Ozigbo and let him pound it. Then, sprinkle in the run-pass options and draws for Tommy later in the game. It's a great template for us right now that, when Tommy is limiting mistakes, is making us the best team in the West. I'll always wonder how many of Taylor's big runs were really called as "gives" in the huddle, only for Taylor to pull a YOLO and keep the ball.

To be fair.....we had an all-time defense in 2009. That was kinda my point. If Joe Ganz had one more year of eligibility, we would have been in the NC hunt in 2009. Funny world, eh? I agree 1000%.

That can depend on the type of read you make. Reading the end tends to be a quicker decision than reading a DT or LB. Plus, when he was healthy, there wasn't another QB in program history that could go from 0-60 as fast as Martinez could.

To be fair.....we had an all-time defense in 2009.

The dirty truth is that, had Callahan had a competent D-coordinator, he may still be coaching here.

Love Chalk Talk. It's been my go-to for awhile now.

Yep. He flew hard to the outside even after the RB had cut up the middle.

I'm actually assuming TA is the one who saw it and was able to take advantage of it. RPO, man. It's killer.

On Oregon's first TD, NU had 2 LB's stacked on the left side of the defense and Oregon ran to NU's right. Obviously, one of the LB's was out of position. Oregon does that to teams with their tempo. On Oregon's 3rd TD (50 yard run after NU turnover) Banderas was lined up as MLB, but he appeared to be lined up over the right guard. Where he lined up, he was giving the offense way too much room on the wide side of the field. Sure enough, Oregon ran an outside zone to the wide side of the field and Banderas got caught inside and was easily blocked by the Oregon lineman. The Oregon RB was off to the races after that. Unless you are speaking on a different play I remember Bando in good position, but completely missed the tackle. I thought Freedom set the edge well on these plays but some people didn't fill correctly. I am speaking of a different play. Bando's complete whiff of a tackle was on the 4th and 1 play from NU's 42. That was Oregon's 4th TD. Bando should have made the tackle for a 3 yard gain, but the RB went right through him. The play I am referencing was Oregon's 3rd TD to make the score 20-7. I could be way off but I didn't understand why Bando was lining up on the boundary side of the center, giving up the wide field. To me, if he was lined up on the wide side of the center, he would have been in position to make the play. Just watched the play you are speaking of. I am not sure why we were over playing the short side of the field. Bando got a little sucked up, but Kieron also made a bad read on the play. Yeah, I am not sure what Kieron is reading on that play. It appears he has outside responsibility. Bando can't let the center (who is pulling on the play) get him stuck on the inside. Maybe I am way off on the alignment issue, because the back is lined up on the boundary side of the field. Banker did say after the game that the D came into the game doing heavy preparation on the inside zone, so maybe Bando is guessing this play is going to be an inside zone read to the boundary. This play is an outside zone play to the wide side, and the D is a complete bust, as NU doesn't have enough defenders on the wide side. The only way Kieron's read on that play makes sense is if he's got outside contain. His angle makes absolutely no sense. He should be filling that hole immediately upon reading run. Instead, he's running right towards the slot receiver that is already engaged by AWill. There isn't even anyone in motion towards the outside that he would be responsible for. In terms of alignment, we're in a Nickel against 4 wides. Bando is lined up A gap on the boundary side, with Young in C gap on the slot receiver. We have comparable numbers on the boundary side; it's just a misplay by Bando. He takes an angle to the center's inside shoulder instead of taking outside lever; it's almost like he's expecting help from the secondary towards the outside. I think we outsmarted ourselves trying to disguise the coverage. We lined up to make it look like it was a Cover 2/Quarters look. But you can see the two Williams discussing something before the play. We are actually running a Cover 3. A Williams has the back and K Williams has the slot. A Williams reads the back and thinks he's going outside so he fired up trying to fight across the block of the slot. But that opens up a huge hole for the back to cut upfield. K Williams runs up because he's in man coverage on the slot. On the other side of the field, it looks like the same thing that got Bando in trouble. Young is in man coverage on the slot so Bando is the only run support on that side of the field. That's why he's shaded to the boundary because A Williams is supposed to have run support to the field. Is it Cover 3 or Cover 1? Either way, Kieron made a poor read. Well, I'm pretty sure it's a Cover 3 but if the outside guys go deep it amounts to a Cover 1. I don't think it was Kieron that messed up. Aaron Williams should have gotten inside and filled that lane. Kieron could also have made a play on it but his primary was covering the slot. Aaron's primary was the back but he didn't get anywhere near him. I don't know; the way Aaron flies to the outside indicates to me he's got outside contain. If he had RB out of the backfield, you'd think he'd flow immediately towards that, right?

Win by 30 or win by 1. Just win, baby.

On Oregon's first TD, NU had 2 LB's stacked on the left side of the defense and Oregon ran to NU's right. Obviously, one of the LB's was out of position. Oregon does that to teams with their tempo. On Oregon's 3rd TD (50 yard run after NU turnover) Banderas was lined up as MLB, but he appeared to be lined up over the right guard. Where he lined up, he was giving the offense way too much room on the wide side of the field. Sure enough, Oregon ran an outside zone to the wide side of the field and Banderas got caught inside and was easily blocked by the Oregon lineman. The Oregon RB was off to the races after that. Unless you are speaking on a different play I remember Bando in good position, but completely missed the tackle. I thought Freedom set the edge well on these plays but some people didn't fill correctly. I am speaking of a different play. Bando's complete whiff of a tackle was on the 4th and 1 play from NU's 42. That was Oregon's 4th TD. Bando should have made the tackle for a 3 yard gain, but the RB went right through him. The play I am referencing was Oregon's 3rd TD to make the score 20-7. I could be way off but I didn't understand why Bando was lining up on the boundary side of the center, giving up the wide field. To me, if he was lined up on the wide side of the center, he would have been in position to make the play. Just watched the play you are speaking of. I am not sure why we were over playing the short side of the field. Bando got a little sucked up, but Kieron also made a bad read on the play. Yeah, I am not sure what Kieron is reading on that play. It appears he has outside responsibility. Bando can't let the center (who is pulling on the play) get him stuck on the inside. Maybe I am way off on the alignment issue, because the back is lined up on the boundary side of the field. Banker did say after the game that the D came into the game doing heavy preparation on the inside zone, so maybe Bando is guessing this play is going to be an inside zone read to the boundary. This play is an outside zone play to the wide side, and the D is a complete bust, as NU doesn't have enough defenders on the wide side. The only way Kieron's read on that play makes sense is if he's got outside contain. His angle makes absolutely no sense. He should be filling that hole immediately upon reading run. Instead, he's running right towards the slot receiver that is already engaged by AWill. There isn't even anyone in motion towards the outside that he would be responsible for. In terms of alignment, we're in a Nickel against 4 wides. Bando is lined up A gap on the boundary side, with Young in C gap on the slot receiver. We have comparable numbers on the boundary side; it's just a misplay by Bando. He takes an angle to the center's inside shoulder instead of taking outside lever; it's almost like he's expecting help from the secondary towards the outside. I think we outsmarted ourselves trying to disguise the coverage. We lined up to make it look like it was a Cover 2/Quarters look. But you can see the two Williams discussing something before the play. We are actually running a Cover 3. A Williams has the back and K Williams has the slot. A Williams reads the back and thinks he's going outside so he fired up trying to fight across the block of the slot. But that opens up a huge hole for the back to cut upfield. K Williams runs up because he's in man coverage on the slot. On the other side of the field, it looks like the same thing that got Bando in trouble. Young is in man coverage on the slot so Bando is the only run support on that side of the field. That's why he's shaded to the boundary because A Williams is supposed to have run support to the field. Is it Cover 3 or Cover 1? Either way, Kieron made a poor read.

On Oregon's first TD, NU had 2 LB's stacked on the left side of the defense and Oregon ran to NU's right. Obviously, one of the LB's was out of position. Oregon does that to teams with their tempo. On Oregon's 3rd TD (50 yard run after NU turnover) Banderas was lined up as MLB, but he appeared to be lined up over the right guard. Where he lined up, he was giving the offense way too much room on the wide side of the field. Sure enough, Oregon ran an outside zone to the wide side of the field and Banderas got caught inside and was easily blocked by the Oregon lineman. The Oregon RB was off to the races after that. Unless you are speaking on a different play I remember Bando in good position, but completely missed the tackle. I thought Freedom set the edge well on these plays but some people didn't fill correctly. I am speaking of a different play. Bando's complete whiff of a tackle was on the 4th and 1 play from NU's 42. That was Oregon's 4th TD. Bando should have made the tackle for a 3 yard gain, but the RB went right through him. The play I am referencing was Oregon's 3rd TD to make the score 20-7. I could be way off but I didn't understand why Bando was lining up on the boundary side of the center, giving up the wide field. To me, if he was lined up on the wide side of the center, he would have been in position to make the play. Just watched the play you are speaking of. I am not sure why we were over playing the short side of the field. Bando got a little sucked up, but Kieron also made a bad read on the play. Yeah, I am not sure what Kieron is reading on that play. It appears he has outside responsibility. Bando can't let the center (who is pulling on the play) get him stuck on the inside. Maybe I am way off on the alignment issue, because the back is lined up on the boundary side of the field. Banker did say after the game that the D came into the game doing heavy preparation on the inside zone, so maybe Bando is guessing this play is going to be an inside zone read to the boundary. This play is an outside zone play to the wide side, and the D is a complete bust, as NU doesn't have enough defenders on the wide side. The only way Kieron's read on that play makes sense is if he's got outside contain. His angle makes absolutely no sense. He should be filling that hole immediately upon reading run. Instead, he's running right towards the slot receiver that is already engaged by AWill. There isn't even anyone in motion towards the outside that he would be responsible for. In terms of alignment, we're in a Nickel against 4 wides. Bando is lined up A gap on the boundary side, with Young in C gap on the slot receiver. We have comparable numbers on the boundary side; it's just a misplay by Bando. He takes an angle to the center's inside shoulder instead of taking outside lever; it's almost like he's expecting help from the secondary towards the outside. I am not a football coach, but it just seems odd to me that Bando is lined up on the A gap on the boundary side? Why not line up in the A-gap on the field (wide) side? By the alignment on the field, there is a HUGE gap created between Bando and Aaron Williams. Also, Aaron Williams and Kieron Willams go the the outside of the slot receiver. I know Aaron is playing coverage on his man, so it looks like Kieron is expecting Bando to get to the inside gap and flush the RB outside. Again, I have no idea what the defense was called, and how they were supposed to line up. It's a complete bust all around. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted the MLB to line up according to the RB to play the inside zone. Even then, we have a man advantage against IZ on that side, not accounting for the slot receiver

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEVJKnDs1DM?t=53m15s The play in question.

On Oregon's first TD, NU had 2 LB's stacked on the left side of the defense and Oregon ran to NU's right. Obviously, one of the LB's was out of position. Oregon does that to teams with their tempo. On Oregon's 3rd TD (50 yard run after NU turnover) Banderas was lined up as MLB, but he appeared to be lined up over the right guard. Where he lined up, he was giving the offense way too much room on the wide side of the field. Sure enough, Oregon ran an outside zone to the wide side of the field and Banderas got caught inside and was easily blocked by the Oregon lineman. The Oregon RB was off to the races after that. Unless you are speaking on a different play I remember Bando in good position, but completely missed the tackle. I thought Freedom set the edge well on these plays but some people didn't fill correctly. I am speaking of a different play. Bando's complete whiff of a tackle was on the 4th and 1 play from NU's 42. That was Oregon's 4th TD. Bando should have made the tackle for a 3 yard gain, but the RB went right through him. The play I am referencing was Oregon's 3rd TD to make the score 20-7. I could be way off but I didn't understand why Bando was lining up on the boundary side of the center, giving up the wide field. To me, if he was lined up on the wide side of the center, he would have been in position to make the play. Just watched the play you are speaking of. I am not sure why we were over playing the short side of the field. Bando got a little sucked up, but Kieron also made a bad read on the play. Yeah, I am not sure what Kieron is reading on that play. It appears he has outside responsibility. Bando can't let the center (who is pulling on the play) get him stuck on the inside. Maybe I am way off on the alignment issue, because the back is lined up on the boundary side of the field. Banker did say after the game that the D came into the game doing heavy preparation on the inside zone, so maybe Bando is guessing this play is going to be an inside zone read to the boundary. This play is an outside zone play to the wide side, and the D is a complete bust, as NU doesn't have enough defenders on the wide side. The only way Kieron's read on that play makes sense is if he's got outside contain. His angle makes absolutely no sense. He should be filling that hole immediately upon reading run. Instead, he's running right towards the slot receiver that is already engaged by AWill. There isn't even anyone in motion towards the outside that he would be responsible for. In terms of alignment, we're in a Nickel against 4 wides. Bando is lined up A gap on the boundary side, with Young in C gap on the slot receiver. We have comparable numbers on the boundary side; it's just a misplay by Bando. He takes an angle to the center's inside shoulder instead of taking outside lever; it's almost like he's expecting help from the secondary towards the outside.

Damn it; false alarm.

Yup; we got the Yeezy cleats.