Jason Sitoke

I think you mean horny toad. And i I was just gonna ask you if you had one and how old it was, but it looks like you answered that already.

I think he was actually coached by Mike Reilly

He was a different kind of player. Yes, he's as responsible for that season as Frazier was. The offense was built around someone with Frazier's skill set. Brook did a hell of a job, but let's not forget that the offense wasn't exactly setting the world on fire without Tommie to end the year. Would have loved to seen Berringer as a pro quarterback....sigh

They had an NFL prospect playing backup . That being said, the offense was nowhere near as potent, but still good. Again...context.

You could argue that. Ohio State had a chance to compete for a national title that year, but in the biggest game always for Ohio State against UM, George wasn't even the best running back on the field and barely cracked 100 yards in a run-heavy era of football. Stats have context.

Wow. I'm on a Husker site and hearing that Nebraska is essentially the same team without Tommie Frazier in 1995. If that's really the sentiment, I don't think I'm up for the challenge of convincing anyone otherwise.

I watched. He won the heisman by getting 300+ yards against a 5-win Illinois team in a November blowout that happened to be the featured game on ABC. That same day, Frazier and the offense dismantled a top-10 Kansas team in Lawrence. Frazier orchestrated one of the best offenses ever witnessed at the college level. Much of what he did in terms of contribution to the running game, does not show up in stats. Same can be said for most other option quarterbacks who know how to pitch the ball or when to give it to the fullback. I am not saying that George stole the trophy, but I was personally shocked when it happened. This was a couple years after Gino freaking Torretta won it, for no other reason than being the quarterback of the best team. I was disappointed, but not appalled when Suh did not win it.

Did you watch Frazier play that year? Serious question

I could have said 'normal' distribution, but that would probably be even more confusing. How about 'bell curve'?

That would be correct

The collection of recruit's individual ratings are summed, but not in a uniform way ( which it looks like many people are assuming). They are weighted using a Gaussian distribution, which may or may not be more valid. If 2 teams have the same number of recruits, and an identical average composite rating....they would be equal if the distribution was uniform. Since it is Gaussian, a team with more highly rated recruits is rewarded more than they are punished for having lower rated recruits. My best attempt at an explanation.

Age is a great teacher.

Not quite sure how adding weight would make a difference when you’re airborne and get hit.

I believe that was a 'confused' icon. I gave you an eyeroll so you can compare.

Bo is waiting for the Cardinal Mooney opening. He's on the Benjamin Button career trajectory.