RunTheBall

The trick is actually utilizing McNeil's skills to the fullest. He won't get the rock unless the ball is thrown his way, and for some reason that happened very little last year. Maybe Lee gained more confidence with McNeil in the bowl game, but was it enough? I really don't know. IMO McNeil needs to average at least 5 catcher per to really do some damage, and he needs to be one of our 1st options in the red zone. The also need to get him the ball on the move. All of his catches seem to be when he is unable to move quickly downfield after the catch. Any tight end will work on the curl or stop. Hit him on a slant or deep in the crease. We never took advantage of his speed and athleticism. He was the most wasted asset in America this year. Possible exception of Julio Jones.

I'm not a big smiley guy, but in this case ...........

Someone, anyone, has to step up as a big-time QB. I don't pretend to know who it will be, but that is and always has been the piece that sets an offense apart, makes a bad offense good and a good offense great. C'mon Watson. We appear to have some physically talented guys. Coach 'em up!

Uh...just curious as to why you think the B10 is wanted to add a school(s)? Very few schools would add much to their profits or prestige, but any school would add a conference title game. For the record, I would fully support NU in the B10. More money, potential rivals, (since we haven't established a real rival in the north even after playing them for decades) and a conference that isn't completely controlled by one state. I think they're looking at a CCG foremost, but also they're looking at the availability of the BIG TEN Network. The more cable systems they can get to carry it, and the more that carry it on the "basic" tier, the more money they make. And of course they'd like more eyeballs where it is already carried (Directv for example). Notre Dame is of course the first choice, but I'd be surprised if they were interested. The talk after that is about getting into the east coast, especially the New York market. Thus, UConn and Rutgers. If they ignore geography, and I think they would be willing to, they may look at Texas. That would be the whale of the college football world, after ND. Texas brings a slew of good athletic programs, a bunch of eyeballs, and several big cable outlets. And of course it would get the Big Ten into the Texas recruiting game. I'm still betting on Texas to be the choice, if thye're interested. Notre Dame likes being an Independent. It all about the money. They don't have to share their revenue with anyone since they do their own licensing agreements. Texas would never bolt in a million years. They tailor made the Big 12 conference to their advantage. Why would Texas give up systematic control of the Big 12 to be just another member university of the Big 10? I just don't see Michigan, Penn State, or Ohio State giving up their strangleholds to let Texas share in their spoils. To repeat, I'd be surprised if ND was interested. I have read that Big 10 teams actually make more from their share of the conference revenue than ND gets from NBC but even if that's true, ND takes pride in being independent so they probably aren't interested. As I said before. As for Texas, I don't know which way they'd jump. Yes, the Big 12 works to their advantage, but the Big 10 provides a bigger national stage, and the Big Ten considers itself to be about more than just athletics. Texas has to like the idea of being included from a prestige/academic perspective. I suspect that the athletic interests at Texas would carry the day and say no, but they'd give it a lot of consideration. I'm not sure most of us, viewing things from our parochial, fanboard, easy chair perspective, really understand the weight the Big 10 carries in academic/education circles. We may not all appreciate their athletics (I do, btw) but don't be surprised at the universities that end up jumping at this opportunity. In the end, the Big Ten may decide to stay at 11, but if they decide to go to 12 or bigger I don't expect them to have any problem finding prospective members willing to join. It's interesting, but I haven't seen any opinion from Perlman on this issue. I know TO has said he's not interested, but Perlman might be wetting himself at the idea of getting his university into that prestigious club. I'll be watching this whole process with great interest. If by some miracle they do come after Nebraska, I think it would be a great thing for the Huskers, financially, athletically and academically. The Big 10 is a secure home for the foreseeable futre. I don't believe that to be true of the Big 12.

I like Adrian okay, and I like Matt as well. Change is a constant, so we'll survive this. I think Adrian had gotten a little stale the last couple of years, so maybe it was time for a change. I learned to survive without the irreplaceable Lyell Bremser, I can certainly learn to live without Adrian Fiala.

I think everybody, including Adrian, has been expecting this change sooner or later. Davison has obviously been groomed for the job and the time is now. I wonder if Matt will take Fiala's "Big Red Wrapup" spot as well? I think it's time, too. Criminy, Adrian's older than I am!

Uh...just curious as to why you think the B10 is wanted to add a school(s)? Very few schools would add much to their profits or prestige, but any school would add a conference title game. For the record, I would fully support NU in the B10. More money, potential rivals, (since we haven't established a real rival in the north even after playing them for decades) and a conference that isn't completely controlled by one state. I think they're looking at a CCG foremost, but also they're looking at the availability of the BIG TEN Network. The more cable systems they can get to carry it, and the more that carry it on the "basic" tier, the more money they make. And of course they'd like more eyeballs where it is already carried (Directv for example). Notre Dame is of course the first choice, but I'd be surprised if they were interested. The talk after that is about getting into the east coast, especially the New York market. Thus, UConn and Rutgers. If they ignore geography, and I think they would be willing to, they may look at Texas. That would be the whale of the college football world, after ND. Texas brings a slew of good athletic programs, a bunch of eyeballs, and several big cable outlets. And of course it would get the Big Ten into the Texas recruiting game. I'm still betting on Texas to be the choice, if thye're interested.

This is the one that comes to my mind also. A chance at 4 straight NCs seems incredible. Give me a two/fer/one and I'll take Miami in the 84 Orange Bowl(83 season) and again in the 02 Rose Bowl(01 season). Those two would give us NCs in 4 straight decades.

Word around town is that Andy Gdowski, 6'4" 245, will walk on from Grand Island Senior High. His brother Jake is a schollie O-line at Colorado State. Andy will play DL.

Sorry about the rant. Didn't mean to hijack the thread away from the 3 team idea. I saw that rumor also and think it would be great. We'd get to keep our 2 oldest rivals, increase revenue and play in a great new conference. I see a WESTERN DIVISION of Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois. Or maybe a SOUTHERN DIVISION of Nebraska, Kansas, Missori, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State. Take it if it's offered, Perlman. Seriously, If the Big Ten does expand, I think it will be by adding Texas. They don't really care about geography and since they can't have Notre Dame, Texas is the next biggest thing. I'm just not sure if Texas would go for it, since it would mean sharing revenue evenly.

I'd be surprised to see the Big 'leven take Nebraska, but if we had the opportunity we should grab it. The revenue is much greater and is equally shared, but more than that, it cements a place for Nebraska in a stable conference that's not going anywhere. The Big 12 will always be hostage to Texas, will always let Texas have their way on revenue distribution and worse, on a Big 12 network. Texas has always blocked any effort towards a Big 12 network because they are planning a "TEXAS" network to keep the money to themselves. Whether that is viable or not isn't the point. Texas being a greedy, short-sighted school that would abandon anyone and anything for a little more money and being unable to recognize that a strong conference requires several strong teams. Nebraska would be better off in the long run in just about any arrangement that doesn't include Texas. But, I doubt we'll see it happen. Texas will stay in the Big 12 exactly as long as we let them keep most of the money and TV exposure to themselves. If that ever changes, they'll be gone to any group that offers more money/exposure. They can't help it, it's what they are.

Great idea. I'd love to see any of them on the schedule. I voted for 1) Wisconsin, because I like them, they wear a great color, they have a great Husker connection, and it would be a good physical test. I think it would be a really fun game to watch. ..... 2) Ohio State, because I really, really hate them and always have, we've never beaten them, they've never been to Lincoln and it's the kind of big-time game I'd like to see more of, especially involving the Huskers. Did I mention that I don't like them?

By 2015 Chris Peterson will be a distant memory and Boise will be relegated back to the status of a Sun Belt team. Well, maybe. But most people thought they'd fall off when Koetter (.722 win pct) left after 2000, and again when Hawkins (.828) left after 2005. Petersen is at .924. The next guy will have to be around 1.000 to continue the trend. Winning percentages are nice, but they haven't had success on a national stage until recently under Hawkins, and specifically under Petersen. Perhaps, but the expectation that they'd fall apart has been there after the last 2 guys left, just as you stated your expectation regarding Petersen. The big difference for the program is the BCS changed to let them in. They've been good enough to get their coaches hired at decent BCS schools (Houston Nutt preceded Koetter, so 3 in a row). I'm not convinced Petersen will leave, but if he does, their history says they'll maintain a good presence as a program. If we play them, I hope they are as big as it's possible for Boise State to get. More bang for the Huskers when they put the slobberknocker on 'em.

Tim who?

We don't seem to have a real rival since the Big 12 stole the annual OU game. Texas is probably who I most want to see us beat, but a year to year rival right now seems to be Mizzou. I think it changes based on who is playing best and winning the division. It was KSU in the beginning of the Big 12, then it was CU for a while. So, right now I have to say Mizzou. But I really, really wanna whale the crap outta Texass.

By 2015 Chris Peterson will be a distant memory and Boise will be relegated back to the status of a Sun Belt team. Well, maybe. But most people thought they'd fall off when Koetter (.722 win pct) left after 2000, and again when Hawkins (.828) left after 2005. Petersen is at .924. The next guy will have to be around 1.000 to continue the trend.

Actually was a pretty average day, offensively. Defense gave nothing though. That game really set the tone for the hard-nosed team we would be in 94. Good times.

Yep. That was Carl at a Big Red Breakfast, maybe mid-season. I think if any of the 3 DTs had gotten dinged that Randle would have been thrown in. He might be a situational guy in 2010, to rush the passer.

A lot to like - I would note that he runs outside only when that's the opening, especially off of the option, which is the design of the play. When the opening is there, he takes it, inside, outside or backside. Doesn't go down with first contact, a great trait for a speed guy. And finally, in addition to a good burst he seems to have what I call long speed. He just keeps getting faster as the play goes on. Several times it looked like guys were running even and then he just started pulling away. We haven't had an RB with good long speed since Ahman. He may be a step up from the guys we have. I'll be surprised if he redshirts. Thanks for the linky.

I think we'll see a lot of guys emerge next year, as Bo gets his program kicked into high gear. The best new starter at the beginning of the season will probably be P.J. Smith. He played the most this year and looked at least as good as the departed seniors. However, by the end of the year we'll be talking about Eric Martin. He'll be the WLB, but I think by the end of the year he'll be the nickle and dime backer as well. He has the look of a big-time playmaker.

Thanks for reminding me about the importance of confidence. That may be the biggest question mark for the offense. The 2009 season could be a major problem for the offense's confidence. Will the decent performance in the Holiday Bowl be enough to bolster the unit's confidence? I think if Lee looks good in summer 7 on 7s after his recovery that will tend to reassure everyone, and coupled with the Holiday Bowl give them a decent amount of confidence entering the season. Talent, experience and confidence must all 3 be there for a consistently effective offense.

Perfect. And they don't seem to get it. If you're a WAC team with national aspirations you simply can't schedule Cal State at Davis. I think Boise is trying to get over on the college football world, and it seems to be working. I believe they had a chance a couple of years ago to be considered for the MWC, but weren't interested. They are content to be a big fish in a tiny pond, but they want to be treated like a shark anyway. If they want national respect, they can't play FCS teams, and they can't turn down 2 for 1 offers from traditional powers. Yet that is exactly what they do. To be repetitive, screw 'em.

Perhaps there is some basis for this. On Jan. 4th, This article was publlished by HuskerLocker. In it, they discuss the D-line No mention of Baker? Later they discuss possible defensive "wrinkles" Again, they talke about Crick, Meredith and Jay Guy at tackle, but not Baker. When I saw this, I wondered why they ignored Steiny. It's possible they've heard coaching staff chatter about a possible move, I suppose. I suspect we'll hear more before spring practice. Personally, if the Pelini's think we have good depth on the d-line without him, I find an offensive tackle tandem of Baker and Yoshi (might Smith move to Center?) very interesting.

Do we have legitimate reason to expect an improved offense next year? A quick look at each position group, with an eye on the potential to be better ......... or worse. QB - Both guys are back, a year more experienced. Lee's injury explains a lot, IMO, and gives every reason to expect a more experienced, healthier Lee to be much improved. Also have Martinez and Spano to consider. Overall, every reason to expect a lot of improvement and very little reason to expect a drop off. WR - The mystery group to me. Should have been much better than they were. No one plays with any consistency, and that may reflect coaching, sad to say. The important guys are back, and Paul and Kinney both show a lot of potential as big strong WRs, and Paul has good speed. Have to expect some improvement due to experience, even if position coaching is an issue. Good potential for improvement again and the only negative is will the coaching get the consistent performance we need? TE - Everybody is back. A lot of talent here and history tends to indicate coach Brown knows his stuff. The key for this group is finding more and better opportunities for playmaking. The great mystery to me is why we made almost no effort to get the ball to these guys where they had a chance to get some yards after the catch. Again, everybody has a year more experience, so plenty of reason to expect improvement. The key will again be coaching, this time on the strategic level. Get them the ball, please. RB - The only real problem was injuries, perhaps compounded by youth. Other than Helu there was absolutely no experience. Again, everybody is back and if we get a little better luck with injuries we could/should see tremendous improvement here. I can't see any real reason to expect any kind of dropoff. OL - Ah, the offensive line. Barney Cotton is either your favorite whipping boy, or the unfairly maligned oldtime Husker. Next year I think we'll have a good idea whether he can do the job or not. The injuries here, both to starters and potential backups, were incredible. The C, LG and LT all fought injuries all year, making it very difficult to judge overall ability. We lose the starting center but everyone else is back with a year more experience. In addition, a very highly regarded class of freshmen are ready to step in, at least as very active backups. No more excuses. The line, if properly coached, should explode this year. All in all, there is every reason to expect a far more experienced offense to be greatly improved. It would be difficult for them to not be healthier, everyone will be a year older and only one full-time starter needs to be replaced. If the offense is reasonably healthy there will be no excuse for the offense to not be a lot more productive. I view 2010 as kind of one last chance for several offensive coaches. I expect them to come through, big-time.

VPI = Virginia Polytechnic Institute ............ most of us call them Virginia Tech.