druski_2k5

I guess I wouldn't mind it for "one" game but these simply are not good looking, too much "Texas Tech" look. But then again, I was against the idea of an alternative uniform from the start and this is what we ended up with. At least Michigan kept their original colors, although I understand the "Black" is for the "Blackshirts", I guess. The fact we changed the helmet to black, that is the one thing I wish would've stayed true to it's form. Those socks are the worst part about the uniform. They look like something a 70 year old man wears while mowing his lawn in khaki shorts in the middle of July. Just awful.

After watching the first year of Tim Beck's offense, we saw a lot of different things from him. We also saw some similar things that we ran last year that we ran with Shawn Watson. I don't want this to be a "offensive philosophy" thread, but I want to talk about the tempo of the offense. What did everyone think of the no-huddle, up-speed, multiple-tempo offense? Did you guys like it? Hate it? Indifferent? Want to go back to a huddle? Should we add more signs like Oregon and use Pony's instead? Hire back Shawn Watson? I remember reading a quote from either Martinez or Beck [i think it was Beck] after the first few games when we started the no-huddle tempo. Beck, I believe, said something that we have "different speeds" of running the offense and calling in the plays. He said there were different gears and speeds they can run it, and they could run it "much faster" than we saw on that day, which was probably the first game of the year. Personally, I liked the way Beck went about calling the offense last year in regards to the tempo [and philosophy but that's a different thread]. I like how Beck would be up in the skybox, see the play develop, and relay the plays from above down to the field. In a way, it was like how we've been running the offense since 2004, but the tempo was much higher, and it showed with how quickly we lined up. But because of the way Beck and Bo want balanace, I think we need Beck in the press-box so he can see more, as opposed to our old offenses where it wasn't neccesary to have someone in the press-box overseeing every play. Although it was not on the level of an "Oregeon-Blur" offense, I think it suits us well given our offensive talent is based on a mix of speed and power. It seemed our offense worked more efficient the faster we called the plays in, as at the end of the play, guys were looking toward the side-line, read the signs, got the play, and we were lined up ready to go again within seconds as guys subbed in and out quickly. It's just another way to wear out a defense, and we as Husker fans know all about wearing out opposing defenses. I'm guessing Bo saw how some offenses ran their spread/no-huddle against him in previous years, especially Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in 2010, that he decided to incorporate it himself for the offense. Oklahoma State in 2010 was ridiculous against a very solid Nebraska defense, and Oklahoma in the Big XII title game simply wore our defense out, but our offense in the 2nd half didn't do the defense any favors. I want to see the up-speed tempo continue to keep defenses gassed, off-balance, and would welcome more of it under Beck. However, I believe if we are up by 7 or 10 or something to that effect, especially up in the 4th quarter, we need to slow it down, and possibly even come out of a huddle to wind the clock down in our favor. We should use the tempo to get up in the game, or to come back, but once we are in a comfortable situation, I think we should use our slowest gear to grind it out and frustrate opponents as to not getting used to the tempo we are running. We don't need to run a high-tempo offense especially if we are struggling on the road, or trying to close a game out. I think the tempo should be predicated on situation and how the offense is performing. What do you think Husker Nation? Should we continue and expand on it, or go back to more of a traditional offensive play-calling and tempo?

I'm not hating on Taylor, I would love nothing more if he wins us a National Title and brings home a Heisman trophy in the next two years. With that finally out of the way..... It is a little unrealistic to compare him to Crouch, Frazier, Gill, Frost because of those teams those guys played on were at a much higher level. However, I think you can compare individual ability and how said player played with your eyes, and not looking at statistics and wins and all of that. To say that Crouch was not Barry Sanders as a runner, would be true. There is only one Barry Sanders. But to say he wasn't a "great moves" guy is clearly not correct at all. Zoogies and Hercules got it right in this thread earlier on but I'd like to add to it. Crouch had moves, period. He was a great juke and jive runner, and had great instinct and amazing acceleration and knew when and where to cut up-field. Frazier also had good jukes but did not have the acceleration Crouch had. Was Eric the best option pitcher in the world? He was at least serviceable and made nice pitches when needed. But he was always pushing the ball as hard as he could and as fast as he could up-field to get as many yards as possible. A "move" I would say he had, was the ability to make the outside defender commit to the running back, took his lane and cut up-field. All Husker quarterbacks could do that though, that's why they were as great as they were. It wasn't "flashy" like his 01 Missouri run or a Barry Sanders/Lawrence Phillips run, but he was able to turn a 4 yard gain into a 15 yard gain. Crouch, and other Nebraska quarterbacks, were able to make something out of nothing if a passing play broke down. They were able to scramble for positive yards as opposed to running into their linemen for a guaranteed sack. Nebraska quarterbacks usually have great vision running the ball and are a threat to do damage on the ground during a broken passing play. That is what Taylor lacks. Taylor, when healthy, has amazing gap speed. He might be faster than Crouch in that regard, it's close though. Taylor is way, way, more effective in the zone read option runs as opposed to the traditional option runs. Crouch ran some zone read, but not a lot, but he was way more effective in the option game. Again, going back to their background and who they had coaching plays a huge factor in this. Our old quarterbacks were tougher runners than Taylor, but again, it depends on coaching staff, player mentality, and just used to doing one thing or the other. Not being critical there, just an observation. The biggest thing I want Taylor to improve on, is his ability to scramble and make something out of nothing. He doesn't have to runs for 200 and pass for 250. He doesn't have to be Crouch and carry the ball a ton of times because he has no one around him. He just has to be effective with his feet, which opens passing lanes. And by running on passing plays, or improving his option game, that will happen. Our offense has the types of players to truly be something to watch this year, and I hope they can maximize their potential. There were drops last year that happened, but Taylor's WR's, in my opinion, are a little better than what the old teams were used to having. Drops happen, but you hope to minimize them by putting the ball where it needs to be, or as a receiver, hauling it in if you get your hands on it. Some of the "drops" can be attributed to bad pass trajectories. Again, i'm not being critical of Taylor, sometimes that's the way the passes come out due to pressure, rolling-out, or just not a great throw. Especially coming from someone who hasn't played a ton of quarterback. Our old offenses differ from our new offenses though. The old ones were play-action deep passes, and in our new ones, post-Solich, we rely on some slants, drags, curls, screens, way more than our old offenses which can inflate the percentages a little. I remember reading a quote from Crouch a while back that he said he'd love to play in an offense we have today, because of the multiplicity and new things we throw at opponents. I think all of our quarterbacks would be just as deadly, if not more, in a system like we have now. I will give Taylor credit though. He has never ran the option until last year, so I will cut him HUGE slack on that. He hasn't been playing quarterback very long so I will give him some slack on that as well. In-fact, his ability to play at a fairly good level in such a short time is impressive and he has my kudos for that. Could he be better? Absolutely, and him and Bo would be the first people to admit that. But everyone can always be better, that's why you practice and play the games. I also give him huge kudos for wanting to work on his passing and attending passing camps and taking time out of his personal schedule to do that. Wonderful, that's the kind of leadership we need. I'm happy with Taylor as our quarterback and he has a huge ceiling, but he's not the option runner or has that great vision as a runner that our previous great quarterbacks had. That is something he needs to improve on, and I hope he does, because he can really take us to glory if he can get a little bit better vision and feel for the scrambling/option game. Nebraska needs a game-breaker dual threat quarterback, or an NFL ready quarterback to be great. It's how it's always been. I'd rather we have the dual threat guy though, it's worked before. I want to see Taylor as the "game breaker" and not the "game manager". We've never had a "game manager" win BCS games or National Titles. And come on, this is Nebraska, we are USED to having quarterbacks that don't have NFL ready throwing motions and look awkward throwing the ball.

I think the identity we need to have is not an offensive one of what style we run, but a defensive one, in which our team is going to punish opposing offenses, play wih fire on every down with the most passion possible. I like a balanced 50/50 offense and we need to keep defenses honest. We have brought in good players with speed to be able to do that. If we run an 80-20 run to pass ratio, we won't be able to bring in great athletes on the outside. 1997 Nebraska was the last team to win a National Title with a heavy run oriented scheme. But there were many factors that played into it: defense, bigger rosters, weight room advantage, solid veteran loyal coaches, and Tom Osborne. Bo is not Tom. If we mix in options, misdirections, isos, dives, counters, zone reads, and traps with an effective passing game, we will be hard to defend. Then we can recruit at every position of offense as opposed to taking a hit at one position because of style of offense. Tom's offenses were multiple, regardless if you believe it or not, but we didn't need to throw to win because of our advantages. Times have changed an we need to be balanced. But we still need to run well and have the option game as an important step because that's who we are. But with a more solid balanced passin attack. However, our true identity always should be an intense defense that hits hard, covers well, plays with fire, and when that team plays next weekend, they are still feeling the effects from the blackshirts from the previous weekend.

We tried that before....it didn't work out so well....

I LOVED my Droid X. I would have bought another Droid when my contract was up, but after about 6 months of having it, it started freezing, locking up, re-starting, slow as molasses, etc. I got tired of it. I guess I could have rooted it to make it better as my co-worker suggested, but I don't think I need to hack something in order to make it work properly. After my contract ran up, I switched to the iPhone4S. The main reason why I switched? Crash-ability. My iPhone does NOT crash like my Droid did. Yes, it is a little un-fair to compare my iPhones first few months with the months in which my Droid started messing up, but even when it was new it was still "iffy" from time to time. I miss a few things from my Droid: Swipe, Customization, Swipe, Customization, lock screen, Handcent SMS [text messaging service] and incoming or outgoing calls pictures. But mostly Handscent SMS, Swipe and Customization. The iPhone does not crash, my Droid did. I have co-workers and friends who said the same thing. After a while, their Droids all crashed but all iPhones are still going stronger than ever. That was the biggest difference. The iPhone also is faster at opening apps and what not. Market: I found the Android market to have more of a variety and offered more free apps than the iPhone. Android wins there. However, it ultimately came down to crash-ability. If I had a Droid that performed just like the iPhone, I would go with the Droid every day of the week.

1994, 1995, 1997: Nebraska Cornhuskers 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007: San Antonio Spurs 2003, 2007: Boston Red Sox 2000, 2006: Nebraska Volleyball I root for the Tennessee Titans in the NFL, and we were 1 yard close in January 2000, and had some decent to excellent teams [2000, 2002, 2003, 2008] that never got to the Super Bowl. As well as some decent teams that did not make the Super Bowl, or qualify but should have, for the playoffs [2006, 2007, 2011] My senior year in high school [2004-2005] saw the Red Sox finally winning it in October, beat the Yankees after being down 3 games to 0, then they went on to sweep the Cardinals in the World Series. I then watched that get followed up by the Spurs winning the NBA title in June in a thrilling 7 game series with the Detroit Pistons, was, at the time, my greatest sports season ever. Except for that whole "Callahan" thing in the fall of 2004.... Then it happened again! The Spurs won it all by sweeping the Cavs in June 2007, and followed it up by the Red Sox winning it all, sweeping the Rockies that October. That was my 2nd greatest sports season ever...except for that whole "Callahan" thing in the fall of 2007.... The Spurs also narrowly missed winning it all in 2004[lost conference semi-finals], 2005[lost conference semi-finals] and 2008 [lost conference finals] I'm hoping the Spurs can add "one for the thumb" this summer!

Good point Knapp, I saw the same Tweet by Christopherson today as well. It's more of a un-written rule, kind of like how B1G schools don't go after other B1G coaches. It's not applauded or favored, but it can and might happen. Also, Frazier being a jackass or not, should not be criteria for the Hall of Fame. If that's what's keeping him out of the Hall of Fame, that is wrong. Being a jerk should not be criteria in keeping one in or out. I've heard stories on how he was a jerk, and I've heard the opposite. It depends on who you ask. However, that made him such a great leader and competitor. Frazier was not well liked among his teammates, but he was respected by his teammates, and they went into battle with him knowing he would be there for them and Frazier stated he would be "nothing" without his teammates. What should either get him in or not, is what he did on the field. His resume speaks for itself. I expect the same "on the field" criteria to be held to the same standard for Alberts, Crouch, and future prospects like Suh and whoever else might be eligible in the future.

Just some examples right here what is wrong with the game-play.

Tommie will get in eventually, but that's not the point. He should have gotten in on his first attempt [i am not sure when his first attempt was, was it last year?] With a resume like that, how are you not a fist ballot hall of fame player? I think it's a lame rule that you cannot select someone for the Hall of Fame from the same school two years in a row, or even during the same year. I understand "exclusivity," but he should have gotten in before Will Shields.

You bring up a good point Knapp [as usual], I think it depends on who the quarterback is. In a more traditional pocket passing quarterback, we go right after him with our defensive line, but with a more mobile quarterback, we tend to play "safe" on the line and let our back 7 do the work in coverage or come up in run support. I like that we adjust against different styles of quarterbacks, but, I wish we would take a page from Iowa or Michigan State regarding mobile quarterbacks every now and then, maybe not all the time, but a nice change of pace from possession to possession would be ideal I think for our defense.

Just to clear up one thing about 2K5. ESPN NFL 2k5 was developed by Visual Concepts, published by 2K Sports [who is under Take-Two interactive with the GTA franchise now] and ESPN was ONLY used as a LICENSE for graphics and presentation. ESPN did nothing to develop that game, but add in their music, menus, over-lays, commentator [Chris Berman] and NFL style shows. That is all they did, they allowed 2K to use the license for presentation, which was GENIUS. Ever since EA got the ESPN license, and exclusive rights for that matter, you see NO ESPN integration in ANY of the games like 2K did. 2k3 was actually the first of the series to use ESPN. Games like NFL 2K3, NBA 2K3, and so on through 2K5, used the ESPN licenses and they got better and better every single year. They actually used it. EA only got it so they could keep it from everyone else. Yes, the NFL did put up their rights for auction and they can do that legally and EA bought it, but, you can't tell me that EA didn't persuade the NFL or ESPN into doing that. They knew they could just buy the licenses out and put 2k out of business in football. EA tried to do this with the NBA but thankfully the NBA said no, and now we have the best basketball game ever in NBA 2K11 out. With competition we now have one of the best baseball games ever in MLB 11 The Show [if you have a PS3 that is ] Competition breeds success, the free market does work, unfortunately, EA took the easy way and cheap way out. Although they lost a ton of money and dwindling sales over angry consumers with the decline in their games in regards with the NFL exclusive rights, they won the video game football war with dollars instead of programing. Business sense it was a great decision, yes, but creative and competitively and what's best for the consumer? No way.

Oh EA and NCAA Football, how the mighty have fallen for my former favorite video game where we would look forward to every July. There are so many things wrong with NCAA Football on the PS3/Xbox 360, most of it has already been stated here. I still prefer NCAA 05, 06, 07, and 08 on the PS2 as opposed to the Next-Gen systems of College Football. In-fact, I still play NCAA 07 daily on my PS2. I have bought NCAA on next gen, but I haven't bought it used since NCAA 10, from the 2009 year. I have either bought it used [no profit to EA], or my roommate [who was the absolute best online player on the PS2 and XBox playing days] would buy it and I would try it out. We both agree next-gen is broke, but what can you do when online for XBox and PS2 is no longer functioning and we love college football a ton. The one thing that is extremely missing in the franchise is jumping and one on one battles in the air. You cannot jump catch on Next-Gen NCAA but you can jump as a defender/defensive back. That hinders the offense because EA can't code defense to play correctly. Ratings should have an effect on this. My 6'6" receiver with a jump rating of 89 should be able to out jump a 5'11" corner back with a jump rating of 70. It's absolutely ridiculous that you can't have one on one battles in the air like you could on PS2. Some say that it was cheesing on PS2, but you could jump with the defender to user jump swat or user pick on defense to combat the jump catch on PS2. It came down to user skills, on next-gen that is not the case. There are so many things broken with the game-play -Before a receiver cuts on a route, the defensive back mirrors the receiver and cuts TWO STEPS before your guy does. Now yes, we run that defensive scheme with Bo [match-read zone and try to mirror routes] but that is real life, this is a game where they jump EVERY route EVERY time to PERFECTION. It doesn't work like that in real life. Sometimes, yes, we do a great job of it under Bo, but it shouldn't happen all the time, or even against worse teams like Idaho who play like Alabama every game. -Super linebackers bat every pass down -Make the right read in the zone read but still lose yards -Throw a perfect Post Route but it gets jumped by the safety who is out of position in Cover 2 -Inability to jump with receivers but you can jump with defenders -Hard to user-control linebackers when playing defense -Hard to jump with defenders, you have to strafe by backing up to the cursor, which is dumb because that only happens if it's a lob in real-life -Option game is useless, guys don't make correct blocks/stay on blocks, and quarterbacks are slow even though their acceleration and speed are good for scrambling -Almost impossible to throw over the middle deep, or sideline deep [unless it's a corner route against certain coverages] -Man up. Defenders do not man up on their correct receivers in certain coverages -EYES IN THE BACK OF THE DEFENDERS HEAD! I cannot stress this enough either. A corner will be running man to man with a receiver, then you throw to the other open receiver, you lead him, but the defender who is manned up on another receiver, INSTANTLY turns as you throw the ball, and picks it off BEHIND HIM without even looking. There are NUMEROUS videos proving this point. -The Defensive A.I. knows what plays you are calling. Example: [this happens a lot on PS2 but happens just as much on PS3 and there are videos showing this as well] 1st and 10 on the computers 35. I have used ONE formation the whole drive, I-Form Normal. Been running either option or various running back runs. I decide to call play-action from the same formation. The computer, who has been blitzing to stop the run in a 4-3, comes out in a DIME formation and drops everyone in coverage when I snap and run play-action. Another one that upsets me: 3rd and 6, I come out trying to fool the defense in Shotgun 4 Wide, and call a HB Draw. The defense, who should come out in a Dime or 3-2-6, comes out in a 4-3 and slants to the middle of the offensive line to stop the draw. There is no reason why a defense would come out against 4 WR with a 4-3 base. Another: Call an option to the right side when you've been running weak-side options out of I-Form Normal. Defense calls 4-3 over, and slants to the right side where the option is going to go, when the whole drive I had been running a weak option and other runs to the weak side, but the minute I call for a strong side run, the computer knows it instantly. Last one: Goa-line: I come out in a Pistol Slot formation and am going to run an option. Computer defense comes out in goal-line and blitzes the corners who would have left all the receivers open. So next time at the goal-line, I come out in a Pistol Slot and call a pass play, and the computer defense comes out in a Nickel or Dime package. Yes, I know the answer is to audible, which I do, that is obvious. But even if you audible WITHIN THE FORMATION the computer audibles to the correct packages against the audible, as they should if it's a different offensive formation, but there are mismatches. The fact isn't I should audible when I see mismatches, I can already tell that and do audible if a play will not work, but that's not the point. The point is, the computer defense should not know what plays you are calling and come out in odd base defenses to stop a certain play when it's obvious I could throw it deep against a 4-3 with 4 WR and score. The point is they are not programmed correctly to counter productively, rather, they know what you are calling. I am not complaining about the franchise because I suck, I can hold my own on Next-Gen PS3 and I am very, very good on PS2 [but not as good as my roommate who is a defensive GOD but my offense might be slightly better than his...maybe lol] but the fact that simple physics and simple coding and simple football tactics are completely broke, is absolutely ridiculous. That's just game-play and that was more of an introductory into how bad the game-play is. I could go into further detail even more, and more-so if I actually played Next-Gen NCAA more. I could go on an on about presentation, recruiting, graphics, features, etc. And +1 to the mention of ESPN NFL 2K5. Hands down one of the best video game football experiences ever, that game STILL destroys Madden today, and that game came out in 2004.

The thing about a 3-4 defense, is that you can bring a 4th defender [or more] from other places, but you DON'T HAVE TO bring a 4th defender. Yes, with zone blitzing and what the Crimson Tide and Steelers do from various packages is one thing, but there is no rule stating you have to bring a minimum of 4 defenders per play. The nose tackle is supposed to be so big and huge, that he can be two defensive tackles in one, leaving only thee on the line, with 4 linebackers and 4 defensive backs in a normal 3-4 set. I don't ever see us going to a 3-4 defense under Pelini. He is always worked with a 4-3 and always talks about playing a two gap system and how much he loves his gap system. The only thing that would resemble a 3-4 defense would be a "Spinner" package, but that in itself is not a 3-4 base defense, it is more designed to stop the pass and confuse spread offenses. Most of the inconsistencies on defense last year stemmed from inexperience, in certain spots we were too slow, not a lot of talent on the field [at the time, although they nicely did progress in certain areas], to injuries, and to guys not communicating and not being a cohesive unit. We lost a ton of talent from 2010, especially with the injuries to Crick and Dennard, that we looked like a brand new green and young defense. It was a very average defense last year. Pelini brings pressure when it's needed, but if you bring pressure you are usually asking for man coverage with no safety help behind you, unless you are zone blitzing, and we may not have had the experience or talent last year to do it consistently. He did state this year he wants to "get back to the style of defense he's known for playing" so either that is blitzing a little bit more or just being better overall, let's just hope it makes the defense a world of difference from last year. I still believe that 2011 is like 2008 for Pelini. He was getting adjusted to new conferences offense just like in 2008 when he became a head coach. Hopefully we see a great leap in the defense this year for 2012 that we saw in 2009.

These two quotes don't match up. I've heard that we were using more of our running backs in the slot as well, getting much more speed on the field. And don't we have speed everywhere too combined with balance and power? Martinez, Bell, Turner, Abdullah, Green [when he was here], Reed, combined with Heard [when he was on offense], Burkhead, Cross, and Marrow? That's a nice combination of speed and balance there. I don't want to bash on the guy for making a decision that was best for him, but this doesn't add up if what we are doing with our running backs is true. And the fact there will probably be a senior at TCU when he comes back eligible to play doesn't match up either. It's too bad one of the three didn't take a redshirt. My only guess is, it was either he was homesick, which is understandable, or what I lean more towards, he was growing frustrated [and impatient as stated by his dad] that he, a 5 star running back, couldn't beat out Abdullah, a three star, and wanted out. Hopefully we are trying to get as much speed on the field as possible for our offense as opposed to a "three yards and a cloud of dust" offense that I fear we are entering in a possible "Big Back era".

My source tells me he chose TCU because of the uniforms.

I hear what you're saying MichiganDad3 and it does seem that way. In 2003 we saw an attacking defense that converted those into turnovers, but we had NFL caliber players in the defense. We saw great coverage skills plus Suh in 2009 and an experienced secondary in 2010 with a healthy Crick and newcomer David, again with NFL caliber defenders. In 2011, I think it was mostly in-experience in the secondary, injuries up-front, and just not a lot of cohesiveness within the unit. I don't mind that we aren't as attacking as we were in 2003, but I just want to be effective. If we have to bring 7 and drop 4, then so be it. If we have to bring 2 and drop 9, then so be it too. I'm all for whatever works. The defense can't get any worse than last year. 2011 to me seemed like 2008 defense. Bo first seeing new offenses [big XII compared to B1G Ten], so hopefully 2012 will be more like 2009 or 2010, without Suh of course.

Yes, Bo did make statements about last year on how the B1G will adjust to us and we will not adjust to the B1G. That made me smile with hope when he said that, but you are right, it seems we are trending away from that. I do like the fact though, that we are very fast at receiver, probably one of the most explosive units at that position we have seen in years might be over the next few years, starting this fall. My fear for this program, is that we are going to be stuck in neutral. I fear we will go dive down into the 1987-1992 years where we are a decent team but get destroyed in bowl games because we are big and slow. We have got to get faster on defense [linebackers, defensive ends] and we either have got to blitz more or get some penetration from our front four so we can play coverage behind that. On offense, I don't want to see power back strictly, unless they are mixed in with other all-purpose backs.. I want to see either balanced backs or speed backs. When we won National Championships and many conference titles, we were not a slow team. We had guys who could break tackles but could also take it to the house. Anyone could get the ball and make something of it. You never knew who it was going too, and sometimes you did know but you couldn't stop it. We were very multiple [yes I said it] on offense, but we were fast and tough. I don't think our offenses or defenses are tough anymore and hopefully we get that mentality back on both sides of the ball. When I think of big backs, I see Ron Dayne, Jerome Bettis, Mike Alstot. We need running backs who were like Ahman Green, Lawrence Phillips, Brian Westbrook, Danny Woodhead type of running backs. We need guys in that 200-215 range who can do a lot. But then we need bigger backs [perhaps even a full back....] to take a hammer at the defense. Our offense looks to be like Burkhead being and Cross the balanced backs, Abdullah being the slasher, and then Marrow as the hammer of the backfield. On the Aaron Green story, I believe he left because he wasn't happy with playing time. Just my opinion, no inside sources, his dad said himself he is not a patient guy. With that said, I still think we are going to attempt to be a very balanced team, but I don't want to become so big that we are so slow from 1987-1992 that we get KILLED by SEC teams. It was only when we made recruiting changes [recruit speed], and defensive philosophy changes [5-2 to 4-3, blitz more] until we became team of the decade with all of our success. Not saying it will happen again or overnight, but I believe that's the philosophy we need to take and let everything else fall where it may.

Hopefully they can find a nice balance of Burkhead while combining the other backs to take the load off of Rex. With that being said, I liked Green better than Abdullah when they got carries last year. I know Abdullah had the most carries of the young running backs, but it just looked to me that Green had better vision and looked more natural back there than Ameer did. I'm not saying Ameer is a bad running back, but to my eyes, I thought Green looked better. I expect one of them, if not both of them, to step up and get involved more this year.

I agree with the physical style. There are times where technique and finesse is needed, but I like more of a physical bump-and-run style defense. It showed during 2009 and 2010 how effective it could be. And even against normal sets where a 4-3 is utilized, I still am in favor of keeping those receivers jammed to disrupt timing routes. I like more aggression from our defesive line and linebackers. I hope we see more blitzing from linebackers, although not too much. I wouldn't want to be in Cover 0 all the time, but I figured we would see more blitzing from Bo like we did in 2003. Maybe some zone blitizing too. We will see though, it's a step in the right direction. I love hearing "they play physical" and "they play more man to man defense than any other team in the country". It's all about pride and it makes me glad to have such a tradition on defense as we do.

I think it would be a nice gesture. There are so many connections that Frank has on the program and dating back to Devaney. That's what makes this place so special. I thought he got a raw deal, I remember being vividly upset when he was fired, thought he was fixing some things. Firing a coach after 9-3, who then went on to finish 10-3, recovering from a disastrous 7-7 season the year before, was a step in the right direction. No, they weren't 1999 Nebraska, but I thought he bought himself some more time. He faulted in recruiting a bit, got a little to bland on offense, his staff got older and he ended up going younger for 2003, but I thought his staff should have gotten another year in 2004. Then he could've retired whenever. I thought I read somewhere [Omaha World Herald??] that he was thinking about giving the job to Bo once he retired. I don't have it saved though, but I swear I thought I read that. Regardless, I think this needs to be done. He was more than a head coach, but most only see him as that because how it ended here for him, but he did so much more than that. I think the job was too big for him. Although if you're Osborne during 1997, who else do you hire? I was a fan of Frank, and still am. But it just seems that the job "may" have been too big for him once Osborne's recruits were gone. The program did slip a little bit, but I thought at the very least, he was moving us in the right direction after Colorado 2003. I'm not going to comment on any personal issues because things have been said, some of it is probably true, but I don't know if that lead more to his firing than results on the field or not. We are still paying for his firing and the Callahan disaster, hopefully we can put those away for good and Bo has a breakout season and we can move on from the whole thing finally.

I think we can all agree if we could have one player back for one more year from 2011, Lavonte would be the guy. Let's hope we can plug and place, because we won't be truly able to ever "replace" a guy like him. He defined what a Blackshirt should be.

It usually seems like the spring game attendence numbers reflect the last game/ bowl game/offseason....obviously. With us falling low of expectations in the last year, I can see lower numbers. The one I can't get my head around, is the 2000 spring game. We were coming off of the 1999 season, a season in which we could have [read: should have] won a National Championship had we not had a case of the fumbles that year. 1999 was the last year we beat Texas*, the last time we won a conference title, and we dominated in the Fiesta Bowl against Tennessee, and clearly was the best team playing at the end of the 1999-2000 year. I truly believe we would have won the National Title if we had a chance to get in like we should have been. Crouch was going to be a Junior, Newcombe and Davison were going to be Seniors, Tracey Wistrom was coming onto the scene, we had a solid backfield with Buckhalter, Miller, Diedrick and Alexander, Dominic Raiola and Toniu Finoti were on the line, Carlos Polk was going to be a Senior, Charlie McBride retired so we would see a new defensive coordinator in Craig Bohl. What was not to get excited about? We were going to Notre Dame that year, going to Norman to go against Bob Stoops, who was recently hired the year before, and going to Kansas State to get revenge from the 1998 game there, Iowa was coming to town, and coming off of Frank's best team, yet attendence was still extremely low. I don't know what gives. The weather maybe? But even then most people buy tickets ahead of time or walk in at the front for the start. Maybe people thought we should have won the national title and we didn't so attendence was down.

Kind of a different but fun read. Yeah I don't understand the hate for Marlowe either. He's just a quiet guy who works hard and you don't expect much out of him, probably because he doesn't "stand out" to anyone, but I think he is a solid player. He is faster than most people think. Remember the reverse against Michigan State he almost [read: should have] scored on? He was burning on that run. Hopefully he can make some plays for us this year. I think he's a great guy to have in the slot, and even run a few slot options with him. All you hear about is how hard he works and it shows because he was playing over Jamal Turner later on in the year.

Good luck to Khiry. I wonder if him juggling the responsibilities of college and football/baseball were just too much. I had high hopes for him, however, we have a ton of wide receiver depth, so we will be fine there. In terms of Cody Green, I had heard he was in his ear a lot for a while. I think it was even stated on here a few times, im sure. He said all the right things in public, but behind closed doors it seems like it's a different story, which makes it even worse. He did not live up to what we or he wanted either. We'll see what happens, hopefully the damage will be nothing.