Cdog923

In the context of taking everything Sam says with a grain of salt.

Probably not, with the mandate that only the #1 and # of the year can be sold now. Again, thanks Sam Keller.

Those are pretty fugly.

There's a reason, relatively speaking, why Nebraska wasn't very successful from 1988 to 1991.I disagree with your assessment of those years' success. But even accepting it, a QB recruited in '90, for example, wouldn't have been playing in most cases those years anyway. Recruiting is a lagging indicator. That's why I said "relative"; comparative to the previous 4 years or the successive 4 years, that time period could be considered "down years". Yes, but then by that theory, we should look at the 2 to 4 recruiting classes proceeding that cycle. Anyway, the point is, without context that list posted by the recruitnik "reporter" is pretty meaningless and obviously designed to incite just these sorts of arguments. What context does there need to be, though? All of the QBs mentioned were hard misses by Pelini and staff.

That guy is an Iowa hack. He brings up a good point. Not really. I'm not finding anywhere that says Williams will be able to recruit while on suspension. Also, considering the source of that tweet and where he works, I'm more than comfortable completely dismissing what he has to say.

That guy is an Iowa hack.

That's easy: fit. Some kids are better fits at different schools. Baker Mayfield, Cam Newton, Scott Frost; all players who were better fits, for one reason or another, at their destination schools rather than their first.

There's a reason, relatively speaking, why Nebraska wasn't very successful from 1988 to 1991. I disagree with your assessment of those years' success. But even accepting it, a QB recruited in '90, for example, wouldn't have been playing in most cases those years anyway. Recruiting is a lagging indicator. That's why I said "relative"; comparative to the previous 4 years or the successive 4 years, that time period could be considered "down years".

I have no problem with Bush leaving. He saw the writing on the wall, and has been incredibly mature and professional about it. Good luck to him in the future.

There's a reason, relatively speaking, why Nebraska wasn't very successful from 1988 to 1991.

You probably are; it has more to do with POB and Tanner Lee.

I think Rex is going to have to get out of Cincy to really have his skills taken advantage of.

Christ on a crutch, is it Sept. 3rd yet?

Did the swimming pool have too much to drink, climb behind the wheel and run into another swimming pool?

- Yearlong suspension, with mandatory rehab paid for out of his own pocket. - No contact with the team, outside of his son. - Mandatory, random testing both during his suspension AND if, by some sliver of luck, he is retained. Only if these are agreed upon and met, should he be allowed to INTERVIEW to get his job back.

You mean, the nonsense you posted in italics?

Oh good lord. Take a lap.

Kicking a man while he's down shows a lot about someones character He's a grown-ass man who made his own bed. He can lay in it.

In terms of that, alcoholism is an illness that people fight with their entire lives. If he isn't capable of making good decisions while drinking, it may lend itself to him having an actual problem with alcohol.

- Yearlong suspension, with mandatory rehab paid for out of his own pocket. - No contact with the team, outside of his son. - Mandatory, random testing both during his suspension AND if, by some sliver of luck, he is retained. Only if these are agreed upon and met, should he be allowed to INTERVIEW to get his job back.

He needs to get his mind and his health right, that's the first thing. The second thing is, I wouldn't mind at all if the university canned his ass. I'm a live-and-let-live kind of guy, but one of the very few things I have absolutely zero tolerance for is drinking and driving. ESPECIALLY someone with the resources that this guy has.

#1 and 3 don't matter. If #2 doesn't happen the ball is not intercepted. Period. The DB play and wr have no bearing on if through qb puts the ball where it should it will not be intercepted. It will just be incomplete which is what we can live with. #1 matters just as much as #2 does. If the WR gives the QB no help on the ball, then it can lead to an INT. I understand accuracy matters for the QB, but the WR needs to make a better break attack the ball in the air. Not all INT's are the 100% fault of the QB. A comeback is an outside breaking route. If the qb throws the ball on time and to the outside the ball will not get picked. The ball was picked bc you can't miss inside. If you miss inside then the WR slipping matters. If the WR makes a bad break and isn't to his spot on time, it doesn't matter where the QB throws it. If it's a bad throw outside, it's an incomplete pass. If it's a bad throw inside, it's a pick 6. On an outside breaking route, it absolutely matters where the QB throws it. If the receiver's "bad break" leaves him towards the inside, the QB has a split second to try to complete the pass. The point is, the INT (in practice) isn't completely Tommy's fault.

#1 and 3 don't matter. If #2 doesn't happen the ball is not intercepted. Period. The DB play and wr have no bearing on if through qb puts the ball where it should it will not be intercepted. It will just be incomplete which is what we can live with. #1 matters just as much as #2 does. If the WR gives the QB no help on the ball, then it can lead to an INT. I understand accuracy matters for the QB, but the WR needs to make a better break attack the ball in the air. Not all INT's are the 100% fault of the QB. A comeback is an outside breaking route. If the qb throws the ball on time and to the outside the ball will not get picked. The ball was picked bc you can't miss inside. If you miss inside then the WR slipping matters. If the WR makes a bad break and isn't to his spot on time, it doesn't matter where the QB throws it.

Much ado about nothing. That's why it's called "practice".