Hercules

link edit: more

Reading all of their boo-hooing just brightened my day. Best entertainment for a bye week thus far. Great thread. Also glad to see that some of them are still confident that they're going to win. And if, as some of their readers are hoping, they actually open up the passing game, we are going to destroy them. Those fans seem to have already forgotten what the Blackshirts did to Tyrod Taylor, Landry Jones, Nick Foles, Colt McCoy, Nathan Enderle and Jake Locker. Garrett Gilbert doesn't stand a chance.

I don't think Nebraska is going to have a problem getting "up" for any game in October. The letdowns waiting to happen are the first 2 games of November - Iowa State and Kansas.

You do know that he was a HC in collge right? He also coached a couple of national championship defenses you should be familiar with... Names like Larry Jacobson and Rich Glover come to mind...

At least in this season we haven't lost head to head to Iowa State yet (looking at you, Texas Tech...)

I can't express how awesome this would be. Let's FINISH. :bigredn:

This is a statement game, but I think the whole month is a statement month. Expect the Nebraska that showed up in Seattle to show up to each game this October. I'm looking for 4 blowouts.

It's really not that outrageous. Think about it, if Boise St. gets a shot at the national championship game and wins it, it poses a lot questions on how the national champion game is decided. If Boise St. and Alabama play and Boise wins you are saying that the WAC is better than the SEC. If Boise St and Ohio St play and Boise wins you are saying that the WAC is better than the Big 10. Really it would be in the Big Six interest to have Boise play in the national championship game and hope they lose big so they won't have to hear about it anymore. Why do you think that last year both TCU and Boise St didn't get rewarded and instead got shafted? To keep a potential threat out. It's not that outrageous? The writer compared Boise State to Abe Lincoln, Bobby Kennedy, and MLK. He then suggested Utah and BYU left the Mountain West in order to stick it to Boise State. He THEN suggested that TCU's possible move to the Big East or Big 12 would also be driven by a motivation to keep Boise State out of the BCS. And all the while, he's suggesting that Alabama, Ohio State, and Nebraska are orchestrating each one of these moves because they're afraid of Boise State. Once again, I'm going to have to go with a

These writers seem to be forgetting the fact that it doesn't matter where a team is ranked right after you play them. It matters where they're ranked at the end of the year, when you can evaluate the entire body of work. As far as AP voters watching more football than coaches, I'd say they might watch a little more. But they know far less about the game, and they don't see that much more football. Lots of the AP voters (like Steve Sipple) have a job to do on gameday, and they spend most of the day working on their own columns and studying their own team. Mandel, a national guy, probably watches more football than someone like Sipple, but he's not going to see every top 25 team play, and if he does, he hasn't watched any of them that closely.

And legally, what you are suggesting, has zero grounds. It wouldn't hold up in the court of law, at all. In issues of copyright, a few small differences are all that matter. If what I'm arguing wouldn't hold up in the court of law, then the law is written poorly. EA Sports is using the likeness of student athletes, whether their name/picture is there or not. What EA sports is doing in terms of claiming that their rosters aren't subject to copyright issues or whatever in regards to player likenesses, is roughly the music equivalent of taking a song, word for word and note for note, transposing it up a half step, changing the title, and then claiming that it is a different song not subject to copyright lawsuits. It's BS.

I don't know where you're getting "$80,000" a year in compensation. I went to UNL, and it doesn't cost $80,000/year to go there. Not even close. I don't think it cost half of that for the whole 4 years. Not even a year at Harvard would cost $80,000. And here's the thing - if they don't play, Nebraska doesn't have a football team. If they don't have a football team, they don't have an athletic department, since football is the sport that pays for all the other sports. Without the athletic department, that's $2 million less or so to the academic side of the university each year. Without the football team, the university doesn't get money for jersey sales, doesn't get TV money, doesn't sell every little blanket or pen or anything with their trademarked logo on it. In fact, the trademarked logo would be worth less than the UNO Mavericks logo.

Legally, that's all that matters. When image releases are signed (for photo or video work) all it takes is seeing someones face in the photo or video work. If you don't show their face, you owe them nothing. Since you're (incorrectly) hammering EA over this issue, let me ask you something. Do you think it's fair that Nebraska is auctioning off game-worn player jerseys? AJ Green from Georgia was suspended for 4 games for doing this very thing. If you think it's unfair for EA to use generic player models (with close statistics/attributes), then what are your feelings on ESPN/ABC/FSN using actualy photo's and video's of a players likeness to make BILLIONS of dollars. TV money for college sports dwarfs the money EA makes on their video games by a buttload... This is a very slippery slope, with severe consequences. If all that matters is whether their picture is being used, or their name, than the term we use to discuss it shouldn't be "likeness." A "likeness" refers to a resemblance, something that's very much like the real thing, but not actually it. That IS what EA Sports is using. And yeah, there are plenty of organizations who exploit student athletes for money. There's a reason Tom Osborne among others think that student athletes deserve to be paid. The money they make, not anyone else, but THEY make for the university, for TV networks, for retail stores, for EA Sports and others, is completely ridiculous. The entire economy of Nebraska gets better or worse depending on how 18-22 year old student athletes perform on Saturdays. I'm ALL for graduate students getting tuition waivers and stipends for their teaching, but the idea that they do get stipends for their teaching, which is in addition to their own classwork, while athletes aren't paid even a small stipend for the work they do, is insane. I've never met a Physics graduate teaching assistant whose teaching performance would affect the university's funding. As for the game jerseys, it is hypocritcal of the NCAA to allow a university to sell player-worn jerseys while not allowing the players to do so themselves. The player did the work that makes that jersey worth selling. The university is taking the profit. No one can convince me that that is in any way fair. It's just not. You can't make a perfect system, but you can do better than the one we've got now.

I'm thinking more and more that the SDSU game was a blessing in disguise. Here's to seeing the Nebraska team from Seattle dominate KSU down in Manhattan.

Geographic absurdity for sure. However it was reported Texas guaranteed our non-football sports could have a home in the Big12 in the event that the Big10 tries [again] to force our hand. Texas guaranteed Notre Dame a home in the Big 12? And Texas gets that authority from...? So glad we'll be gone next year.

I hope you realize the comments about the video game and not wanting it to go away are a joke. The game will not go anywhere. Besides - this game has been around for how long and i haven't seen anyone else take up the fight against it. In fact I believe the two main names taking it up are O'Bannon and Keller, both players who FAILED at the next level. And again - I believe all these players signed something with the university and the NCAA allowing them to use their images/likenesses to promote the NCAA. Whether guys were successful at the next level has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. And if the court prevented EA Sports from using player's likenesses, that would do a lot of damage to the EA Sports NCAA game franchise. Because the only reason most people buy the game every year is for the new rosters. If not for that, I sure as heck wouldn't have bought a new game each year, like I used to 5 years ago. The game doesn't improve in any way year to year, they just change the rosters. You could make the argument that EA Sports' SOLE source of profit with NCAA games is based on using player's likenesses, since there's hardly any other reason to buy the game year in and year out. If the EA Sports Franchise is unable to use players likeness, this wont prevent anything other than changing the cover that usually has an actual player on the cover. (after thinking about it that wont even change because it is always a player who has graduated) The reason nothing will change is because EA will provide the gameing platform as they do currently with a generic roster with everything mix matched to not even resemble a CFB team, however there is nothing to stop NCAA athletic depts from giving the rights to their logos and the authority to use the SCHOOLS likeness in their game. (meaning EA can create stadiums and team logos without repercussion) Then a week after it comes out some 3rd party will have created rosters with players likeness, sizes, speed, etc. (just like they do now) In the end EA only creates the platform, 3rd parties change it to make it lifelike. The fully customizable and savable rosters is what makes EA so smart, without that option they may be in hot water, but because they can sell the platform and allow it to be customized this allows the 3rd party market to make it lifelike and thus impossible for Keller/Obannon and anyone else to collect. Its pretty simple. edit: Technically EA could create one gaming platform and every year a 3rd party could create a new customized roster for people to upload. But EA makes small tweaks to the game play each year to bring people back. So, the argument that people come back for the roster is bogus, because a 3rd party could adjust an NCAA 2010 roster to reflect NCAA 2011 players and you would have the same game only with the new rosters. The rosters that come ON the platform use the likeness of the student-athletes before 3rd parties ever touch them. They've got position, number, height, weight, build, skin color, physical attributes/skills, even hometown is set so that it resembles a "likeness" to the actual student athlete. Are you really going to tell me that, "QB #3" on Nebraska isn't really Taylor Martinez? Or that "DT #94" isn't Jared Crick? Just because their name isn't on it, or their real picture isn't there? Please. And yes, EA Sports makes minor tweaks to the game each year. Really stupid, meaningless tweaks that don't improve the game whatsoever. They're like the professors who fix a couple typo's in a textbook, create a few new ones, and come out with a whole new edition so that their new students have to buy the new book, and the old students can't sell their old used one back. It's a scam. Also, while you can customize and save rosters, you can't use those rosters in online play. And since right now, every hardcore Nebraska fan wants to use Taylor Martinez in the zone read in online play, the only way they can do that (to my knowledge) is if they have the new game. Rosters ARE the reason people buy the new game every year. Not because EA Sports decided to make the field goal net blow in the wind on kickoffs.

They'll like Turner when he wins. Until then they'll rip on anything they want.

I hope you realize the comments about the video game and not wanting it to go away are a joke. The game will not go anywhere. Besides - this game has been around for how long and i haven't seen anyone else take up the fight against it. In fact I believe the two main names taking it up are O'Bannon and Keller, both players who FAILED at the next level. And again - I believe all these players signed something with the university and the NCAA allowing them to use their images/likenesses to promote the NCAA. Whether guys were successful at the next level has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. And if the court prevented EA Sports from using player's likenesses, that would do a lot of damage to the EA Sports NCAA game franchise. Because the only reason most people buy the game every year is for the new rosters. If not for that, I sure as heck wouldn't have bought a new game each year, like I used to 5 years ago. The game doesn't improve in any way year to year, they just change the rosters. You could make the argument that EA Sports' SOLE source of profit with NCAA games is based on using player's likenesses, since there's hardly any other reason to buy the game year in and year out.

The only people against the players in this lawsuit feel that way because they play the video game and don't want to see it go away. I play the video game, but I can at least separate my desire to play the game from the logical part of my brain which sees that the student athletes are getting screwed over.

Yeah, I'm sure it was a joke. A really, really, really lame joke.

Actually they do get permission. Before they can ever step foot on a field, athletes sign something along the lines of their school, conference, and the NCAA can use their image for marketing purposes. So, do video games really fall under the umbrella of "marketing purposes?" EA Sports doesn't make a video game in order to advertise for real football games on Saturdays. They do so for their own profit. If players have given permission to use their likeness in a video game, why hasn't EA Sports gone ahead and put names on the back of jerseys? Why is my quarterback's name still "QB #3?"

Yeah, that doesn't make sense. But polls at this point of the season are virtually meaningless. Nebraska's still ranked 6th in both polls even with this guy. If they do their thing and keep winning, it'll be fine.

Eh. He seems reasonable enough for now. Time will tell. If Nebraska's the only undefeated team at the end of the regular season and he still has them ranked 13th, then yeah he's clueless and a Nebraska hater. But for right now, whatever.

I think it's a pretty fair thing to ask. EA Sports and the NCAA are using the likenesses of student athletes for a profit, without those students' permission. The players should be compensated if it's going to happen. Hopefully if it goes down, the court requires that they'll have to compensate players or universities or something, and EA Sports will hold out, saying it won't make games with players' likenesses if that's the case. Than we can have NCAA2K12, and be rid of the terrible EA Sports games.