druski_2k5

Again, I still don't think this is a big deal if the guy gets up right away and the announcers don't over-do it, and you can't get to B [announcers overreacting] if you don't have A [player not getting up]. Good reference on the "In The Deed...The Glory" video. That hit by Martin looks a little more helmet to helmet than the Oklahoma State hit. He was not suspended for that. If I remember correctly, Martin was flagged for that play? Or maybe there was a punt return in that game where a UL-Lafayette player got lit up and that was a "late hit" or "helmet to helmet", but the flag was not on Martin on the punt return. I know one of those two, perhaps both, were flagged? Either way, like Martinez, he got up and wasn't down, so that wasn't a big deal, and if that were the case here, there would be no case at all.

If the guy that Martin hit gets up as quickly as possible, then this is a non issue. The announcers even said that the Oklahoma State player had back surgery before, so that may have been a reason why he didn't get up fast. Completely clean and legal hit. At first I wasn't sure, but looking at it again the other day, he lead with his shoulder. He may have been laughing about something else on the sidelines, we don't know. What about the head to head on Martinez? .... Oh wait, since Martinez got up quickly it doesn't matter, he wears an 'N' on the side of his helmet, my mistake. Nothing to see here Big XII.

Agreed, I'll be the first to say it was a great game plan, that's the "Multiple" offense I like to see. He kept it balanced, threw it on first down, ran different formations and running plays, ran play action on first down, didn't run zone read 1,000,000 times, and when things weren't working, we did something else, and spread the ball around. If we do that more, and do it well, we will be a very solid offense. Granted, Oklahoma State's defense is HORRIBLE, but it's the "Philosophy" that I liked, not necessarily the stats, [although impressive] and how many points we put up, but the way he called the game. Hopefully he can call a great game next week, we will need it, Oklahoma State's offense is darn impressive, I don't think our defense is that bad, although there were a lot of missed tackles today, gotta clean that up.

-Absolutely! Because it's not Playstation, and the ZR is our bread and butter? You don't just go away from what you do best. You change it up, but there's still a base, otherwise "changing it up" wouldn't be "changing" anything. I don't think you get how unrealistic that is out of Taylor. Niles Paul ran a freaking wide open crossing route, and did you see how badly Taylor missed him then? I also never thought I'd see the day when people actually started calling for screens. You think it's a lot of variety because the plays have different names, but the ZR doesn't lack in the power aspect, and I have no idea how it can't be considered misdirection. Taylor throws deep quite a bit, and as discussed before, roll-outs are a bit much to ask for from a guy that has trouble with standing-still throwing mechanics. Also, the lack of throwing to McNeil, isn't really on the playcaller. That's on Taylor. Zone Read is actually a great base play, matching up well in the numbers game against any defense not absolutely selling out to stop it. When they do, I'd love to say we can just start doing anything with Taylor, but the fact is we/he can't. Matt Davision, a former Division I Football player for Nebraska, even SUGGESTED this morning on the radio to "Do something different on first down". He didn't say "throw it all the time" on first down, but do something different. A rollout, a bootleg, a power play from UNDER CENTER, a misdirection/counter from UNDER CENTER, run RIGHT AT THEM, a short to intermediate pass on FIRST down. Doesn't seem too "Playstation" like when you have a former player suggesting that we should have done some of these things to keep their defense honest and to "change it up" a bit. And execution being the reason why we were in 3rd and long? Maybe a little on the players. But absolutely mostly on the play-calling. When one team sells out to stop one thing, it's time to go with something different to keep them off-balance. The average 3rd down with Martinez in vs. Texas: 3rd and 9.5 The average 3rd down with Lee in vs. Texas: 3rd and 7. You have to do something different, Watson talks a good game, really, I love his philosophy, but he doesn't execute what he talks about, and that's the issue I have. I'm asking for Arizona Holiday Bowl gameplan, and you can do that with Martinez, easily, he adds another element, a little bit of everything, and ask him to make those throws that Lee did. Short slants? Posts? Slot wheels? C Routes? Misdirection? Direct snap? Option? Iso? Power I? Power plays from Pistol, which UCLA used to kill Texas' defense? In regards to Mike McNeill not finding the ball, and it being on Taylor, I agree with you in some regard. However, my NFL team, the Tennessee Titans, have a few ways to make SURE their tight end gets the ball. It's a rollout, with Bo Scaife, the Tight End, being the ONLY passing option to get a good 5-10 yards on 1st or 2nd down, and if that is covered, Vince Young takes off himself. I remember McNeill having a few of these plays specifically FOR HIM in the Kansas State and Texas games last year, with motion, and then a rollout to him. Have you watched Oregon, Alabama, Ohio State, teams like that offense? They do A LOT of different things GOOD. They have the pass to keep defenses honest, and have SOLID run games to go with it, that's being multiple, not being "Playstation". Being "Playstation" would be throwing up fly routes all game long and user jumping/catching over the defenders, something myself and Huskerfan333157 and myself would know about from PS2 online days. Being "Multiple" is not being "Unrealistic". -Correct. This is a good point, but it would have worked better if we had a running game, it was getting stuffed pretty well. Look, I have nothing against the Zone read as a base formation with Martinez and our running backs back there, let me just get that out of the way. I DO have a problem with how we keep going back to it when it's NOT WORKING. It's middle of the 3rd quarter, at home, against a team we haven't beat since 1999, and we are STILL running it?! Texas was cheating their dime and nickel backs up on the line of scrimmage to sell out the zone read, Texas also used 5 down-linemen in the game to stop the zone read, why keep running it? The defensive ends were in contain/spy the WHOLE game against Martinez. They were instructed to look at Martinez and Martinez only, not Helu, not Burkhead, not anyone, just Martinez. If he ran at you with the ball, make a play on him, they were prepared to stop the zone read, why keep trying it? In regards to the wide receivers, yes it IS their job to catch the ball, and downfield blocking IS important, however, when we took on all of our teams before the Texas game, why were we not passing a little more to get our receivers comfortable with catching the ball in real-time situations? We just kept running zone read until the game was over, essentially. Why not give our receivers some reps because at some point in the season we were going to be down, the zone read was going to be shut down and we would need to air it out a bit to keep the defense honest, and we didn't get the work in that was needed in real-time situations to get them used to catching the ball.

I've been doing some thinking about this, and something struck me. Nebraska has had a lot of history, and it has come back to help us, with letting players play a certain position they want, compete for a position they want, or let them do what they want on the field, in order to not only let us have such great players, but we promise players the opportunities and let them play out and let the chips fall where they may. Not with me yet? Here's what I'm talking about. We let these guys play the positions that their HEART desires. Not what "we" want, but we let them have a CHANCE at what they want. Examples. Taylor Martinez: Lighting fast, first step move is amazing, maybe the best running quarterback at Nebraska when it's all said and done. This guy has a gear that no one else has, and that's even talking about Eric Crouch, who is probably my favorite player of all time and I speak highly of him, and when I see Martinez do things that Crouch, Frazier, Frost, never did, that's saying something. Martinez was recruited as an Athlete, he could be a Quarterback, Receiver, Safety, whatever. But there was one thing that got him to commit to Nebraska besides everything else. We promised him a shot. We promised him that he would get a "serious" look at quarterback. We held up that promise and it looks like it has turned golden for us so far. This isn't the first time this has happened either, and this was the reason for the topic. Eric Crouch: I read a recruiting story a while back that Eric was thinking about going to Notre Dame, Ohio State, and Nebraska. All three had coaching changes when he was just getting his career started so he would have had some coaching change somewhere. But there was one thing that made Crouch commit to Nebraska. He was promised he would get a shot at, and play quarterback. Not safety, not defensive back, not a slot receiver, we comitted him as a Quarterback. The results turned out wonderfully, despite what you think may or may not have happened in the fall of 1999. Let's keep that for another topic, I want to concentrate on "promises" only and turning out to be wonderful for us. Scott Frost: Yes, he went to Stanford to go under Bill Walsh, but we allowed him to come back to run OUR option offense, we took him back. The results speak for themselves. Tommie Frazier: Highly recruited athlete from Florida, an option quarterback, but NONE of the Florida schools would commit to him as a TRUE quarterback. Clemson I think may have, but I'm not for sure. I know it came down to Nebraska and Clemson as none of the Florida schools would take him as a quarterback. We took a chance, we told him he would, and we know how that turned out for us. Turner Gill: I wasn't alive when Gill played, but if I remember right, he was a true quarterback out of high school, and others may have recruited him as a quarterback too, but I am not for sure. Obviously we committed to him as a quarterback and you also know the results there too. But there's one thing I came across that made Gill commit to Nebraska over other schools. Gill wanted to be a dual athlete. He wanted to play baseball, and would commit to Nebraska if he was allowed to play baseball. Osborne kept his word, let Gill play baseball, and he was also an amazing quarterback for us. What I'm trying to say is, we let our recruits play/compete/have a shot at what their heart "truly" desires, IF we think they would be a good fit there. Obviously you cant commit to a player if that's what his "heart" desires, but we don't think it could work out for whatever reason. It has to be mutual. It has to be good with the coaches to give them a SHOT. That's just what most of these guys and Martinez wanted. A shot. It's all about the heart and desire. If we truly think an athlete can play "X Position" and do it well, we are going to commit to them and give them a shot, if it doesn't work out, well, we move them around. I am sure there are other stories of guys being recruited not only for quarterback stories, but for other positions, but we let them have a shot at what they want to play, not only because it's what they want, but we think they would be good there. Let's keep it going. That's what it's all about: Competition, desire, heart, passion, commitment, and family. That's the Nebraska way, and it's turned out pretty good for us so far. I think this is somewhat "overlooked" and maybe not a "true tradition" but it has worked out so well for us. Lets keep it up! Go Huskers!

This. I was brought into it spoiled, so it's not surprised that I have high expectations, but I don't think it's realistic to ask for a 60-3 run or the years of 93-97 for any coach. I was not able to admire the 90s as much as the guys that lived through the 80s but I know my Husker history of how difficult it was from the late 80s to the early 90s, but I never looked at it like that, and now looking at it through that angle, you guys can appreciate that way more, which is kind of a nice twist, hopefully that is what the 2010s bring us.

I was there last year with a few friends, the drive back was quiet and turned into winter conditions that became a hazard on the road through Kansas. We were in the end-zone that was painted "NEBRASKA" where the players ran on and off the field too. Very, very good seats, they were field level, but I can't remember the section and what not, I'd have to find the ticket again. We were in mostly a student section, as ALL of us were standing, with Texas section of fans off to our left, and I had a Texas fan sitting next to me about my age, nice guy, wasn't disrespectful at all. There were some classy Texas fans, but some real obnixious ones as always. Some Texas fan behind us, up about 4 rows from us, was chanting: "IOWA STATE, IOWA STATE, IOWA STATE" the entire time before our defense picked off McCoy on the first drive. So, how did that Iowa State chant treat ya? Ya'll almost lost to a team that lost to Iowa State. Ignorance, but that's what 8 turnovers will do for you when you try to combine intelligence with some Texas fans. Then on the first commercial break, we all sat down, and I could hear the Texas fan say "Whew finally they all sat down in front" and I just said to myself "Just wait a minute buddy, you're sitting with students, we are all standing back up after they come back from break". Which is what we did, the entire time. We were able to get tickets as students through the UNL ticket office, I think we paid 80 bucks for it, but we were very, very, very close to field level. I remember watching Lee take off towards our end of the stadium that set up the go-ahead field goal by Henery, and were very amped up until Adi kicked it out of bounds and....well you know the rest. We are thinking about going again this year once we clinch the North, but they go fast, as they should, great experience though. I know this wouldn't be classy or "Nebraska", but once we would win the Big XII Title, when Bo and Tom Osborne come out to collect the trophy, Bo should hold it up, and then throw it down and smash that piece of garbage and walk out of the stadium with the trophy bashed and destroyed on Jerry's turf.

How fitting I thought that year. The worst tunnel walk of all time combined with our worst football season of all time. Not that it was the intent to start the year, but it's how it turned out. I was at the 09 Oklahoma game, it was amazing to watch without knowing it was coming. Totally out of left field, but amazing none the less, by far the standard. I was a big fan of the 06 Tunnel Walks though!

Would anyone agree that sometimes we play down or up, depending on our competition? Terrible turnovers versus Iowa State, yet beat a decent Oklahoma team and play Texas to 00:01 but yet we then absolutely throttle a decent Arizona team? Seems like we have just been so dominant early on, we let up in the 2nd half, and the other team scores points, and some of Idaho's points were set up by stupid turnovers, maybe that's the reason the line is so close or that people are buying into Locker without anything else to really back it up, except he is a media darling?

Way to represent West Coast!

I say it everytime this gets brought up, I'm glad to see more people remembering this look. 2001 setup for the win! I'm surprised how many people liked the red socks, it was something unique without getting drastic, plus it makes the white pants look much better overall and less "boring" without any stripes. The patches are balanced on the left and right sides and "Nebraska" is on top the numbers, although in small print but effective, to represent who you play for on the front of the jersey. And then this for the road, the exact opposite of the home uniforms. These were the only uniforms I truly enjoyed, you could see the sleeve color perfectly, and the numbers were on the side of the jersey so they stuck out perfectly with shoulder pads on. You could also go red tops, red bottoms, tall white socks with black shoes for an All-Red uniform. Then a white top, white bottom, tall red socks and black shoes for an All-White look from these. I think that would look best for Home/Away and Alternatives in my opinion. Sure our current ones are "okay" but if I had my choice, see above. I never got into the shoulder stripes of the Rodgers era, the N on the side of the jersey in the 80s, or even the white shoes that came with it, of course I'm also a part of the younger generation. White pants, no stripes, white tall socks in 1997 is just too bland, almost looks like you're wearing a dress with all the white, there is no "flavor" in it. I also hated the 1962 uniforms. I understand why we wore them, and it was cool for one game, BUT NEVER AGAIN! I wasn't fan of the numbers as well, the jerseys were okay looking, but the helmets, blah, gray face-mask and black numbers, puke! Keep them in 1962. Although 2002 was "interesting" and "different" I like our approach much better now. Maybe 2002 would have been better had the pant stripe not be as "thick" and the white on the jersey was "solid" instead of two lines. As well as having a red bottom for the road instead of all-white on the road. I wouldn't like all-white on the road all the time, but every now and then I think is okay, same goes for all-red as I stated above, but not looking like 2002 though.

I tend to agree with this ideology. Osborne knew we on missed Pelini in 2003 and how well his defenses performed. Callahan made it easier on Osborne, by losing games, for Osborne to state the "if you win X amount of games we can make it work or you will keep your job" or if you "lose X amount of games it's going to be tough". Don't get me wrong, Im sure Osborne told Callahan that and among other things about how it was a polar opposite of what things should have been, but that was the public reason and it was made easier by Osborne cause Callahan lost the team so badly. If Callahan had won a few of those loses, Osborne would have cited "It's more than just about the game" and would list everything besides results on the field for his reasons for firing Callahan. Shunning of former players, no respect to walk-on program, things that just weren't how they used to be. Since Callahan lost most of those games, he could easily file it under "Bad performance on the field and we don't do that at Nebraska" so it made it even easier to fire him. Purely classic Osborne Politic/Coach talk, but that's how he is, he can insult you while doing it classy, or can say one thing but probably means something totally different when he is talking about negative things, ie, Callahan, the Big XII, etc. At least that's how I saw it.

T-Mart and E-Mart, sounds good to me. GBR!

Hilarious, I don't remember any pre or post game leading up to this, back then I was young enough only to remember the games and how dominant we were in 1995. I had NEVER, and I repeat NEVER heard the grass argument before in a game. Perhaps this game was why they quit talking about it. I couldn't stop laughing when I heard this argument, ya it is easier to laugh at it when you know the result, but come on, this had to sound stupid prior to the game. To be fair, it could make a small difference, maybe a possession or two, or something like that, but not an entire game, usually the best team always wins, grass, turf, whatever. Good memories though of everything else.

B-b-b-b-but-but-but-but, we'll play "anyone, anywhere, anytime" Or however it went. Sorry, if that's what their ideology is, like Florida State of the 80s, and they never returned our call, then they deserve to be called out on it. Regardless if their Athletic Director really said it or not. I respect the fact they have showed up for their big games, although they should have lost to Virginia Tech, good job, congrats, but maybe we should just move to the WAC then and pull the same stunts, everyone would be mad at us. I'm sick and tired of hearing about them. They are a good team yes, a very good team, but could they do it in a truly AQ conference? That remains to be seen. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, I know we offered a 2 for 1, but didn't we also offer, or did they want a 1-1-1, In Boise, In Lincoln, and on a neutral site somewhere and those plans fell through or am I mis-remembering?

Every home game, student tickets for the win!!!

Also forgot to add Marlowe, he looked good out there returning kicks and the jet sweep carry that he got.

Robinson was the only one I wasn't overly impressed with. His first carry of the game was a loss, and he finished with 4 attempts for 7 yards. His explosiveness wasn't quite as good as I expected it to be. But, collectively, they all played very well. Good point on Robinson. I just meant he is built for more of a bruiser back, but not necessarily had a good game. I think on his first carry someone missed an assignment up-front, at least that's what it looked like, I think it was a run to the right side. Who were the backs that played in the 2nd half? Okafor? Mendoza? I think I'm missing someone else...

Hopefully we were just playing vanilla on offense, I saw a few corner blitzes, a few middle blitzes, but not a lot of stunting and end pass rush. I was very upset that our defensive line seemed to be getting pushed back against WESTERN KENTUCKY, but hopefully the defense that we saw in the first two drives will be the defense that shows up with urgency, because I was not happy to see their running game be so productive, especially when Rainey had that long run right up the middle of our defense, in which Gomes saved the day again, dude is a baller. Hopefully these issues are fixed and we were playing a little conservative, Bo didn't seem too upset on the sideline and of course after every game there are things to work on, I have faith in this staff, let's hope they get it figured out by Kansas State, with some of the holes last night that game worries me a bit now.

Impressed with: Martinez speed and poise and his passing is about where I thought it would be, the deep ball was a little forced and rushed but that will come with time, I think Kinne played very well and quiet, I think he is a good 3rd down blanket, I thought Cody Green looked good on his Touchdown pass to Niles had some nice touch, Lavonte David was everywhere, Gomes with another great strip play, our defensive ends looked alright, Crick got a good hit on their QB. Dissappointed: Rush defense. Linebacker play besides David. We kept falling for misdirection, counter and power plays. Where in gods name is Mike McNeill? A few drops on offfense. Niles and PJ Smith fumble, Gomes had a dropped pick, and unfortunately Meredith being hurt, I hope he will be okay. The pass rush seemed a little weak too I thought. Hopefully we were just play vanilla bcause if we take on a good balanced or good rushing team, we could be in for a fight.

I like the depth we have at running back, I think we played very vanilla on both sides of the ball, and obviously with our running game of how many touches. We don't want Helu banged up too early, and why waste carries for him and Rex in the WKU game, it just saves them for bigger games later in the season. I expect Robinson to get more carries though because he is more of a bruiser type back. I was impressed with the explosiveness of our running backs out of the backfield in the 2nd half though.

From what I've heard about Crouch, he definitely seemed cocky on the field, but I heard he is very humble and quiet off the field. I also liked that when Martinez scored his 2nd touchdown, he threw the bones at the crowd, that was awesome. :throwdabones1:

I was just thinking the same. Before I remember it being very balanced, hopefully it gets back to that. And yes, the "In The Deed The Glory" video did not appear until the Oklahoma game, no one was expecting it, and people went nuts. I know the same guy isn't there this year, but hopefully they are planning the same kind of ideology for it.

Just for the record, I complained about the sound system around the rest of the stadium besides the north end in the survey of stadium expansion, and I could have swore there was a small percentage that complained about the audio in the stadium that needed and an upgrade or something more balanced. I would expect the North endzone to hear a lot, and that makes sense, but there is absolutely NOTHING for the rest of the stadium. I would think they could be able to put other speakers around the stadium so everyone else can hear what's going on. I don't mean a jumbo-tron in the South stadium, that would be rad though, but just something so that we can hear the music and the commentary. It's just as hard to hear commentary as it is music sitting anywhere else besides North endzone, I would think they could put speakers around the stadium to make it enjoyable for everyone else.

No, the entire Missouri team has Martinez beat with their motto of "Get Money", while not a nickname, it's incredibly stupid. This, but it won't end until kickoff so lets keep going! :koolaid2: :koolaid2: