Hercules

More accurately, it's what he calls himself.

Kansas wasn't going to get Tommy Tuberville. That was as crazy as the KU fans who thought they should've gotten Jim Harbaugh from Stanford.

Kansas needed Turner Gill as much for image as they did for football. When you're in the middle of a players-selling-tickets scandal and your previous coach was a tyrant, you need someone like Turner Gill to come in and save the image of the program. You won't find a better guy.

He still has to prove himself as a big-time college football coach. He will. It's just a matter of whether he does it at KU, or if you guys screw yourselves over by firing him before he has a chance, so he just goes and does it somewhere else.

T-Magic.

Defer to the players. That's what they call him.

Thanks for NOTHING!!!

 

He'll probably be on Coach Pelini's staff in a few short years ...

Yeah, that was a brutal way to start his BCS coaching career... Still, give him time.

And if he ends up on Pelini's staff in a few short years...? I wouldn't mind that at all (Comparing QB coaches, Watson's had Zac Taylor, Joe Ganz, and Zac Lee... Gill taught Frazier, Frost, and Crouch).

Most of us are bad enough at evaluating talent on the field... Do we really need to also perform psychoanalysis on a 19 year old?

Wow. There really are people here who think they know more about the game then Pelini and Watson.

I feel for Lee. I really do. But I also have to think that even he would be a little ticked off at this thread. I highly doubt that Lee is questioning the decision of his coaches, or the play of his teammates. Zac Lee is a class act. He's going to be a huge part of this offense's success whether he's on the field or not. And, if he remains the backup, he's not going to go around feeling sorry for himself and tell others that the coaches "screwed" him out of his spot. That kid is a heck of a lot more grown up than some of the people on this board.

Herc, I don't claim to know more than the coaches. It's just what we've all heard. Coaches haven't come out and said Lee is struggling this camp; rather the opposite I think. You are assuming here that Lee is not starting because he is struggling and the coaches are seeing this.

 

I have to say that's a reasonable assumption. But I put forth why there may be reasons to doubt it. You're right. It's not my knowledge, and the coaches sure know a hell of a lot more about football than I do. Further, the practice reports could all be erroneous.

 

I don't care what guys with any kind of ties close to the program have said here, nobody knows anything. If people were coming on here with that kind of information, why didn't they just leak every little detail about the QB race? Why are we still not really 100% sure who's starting? Furthermore, nobody really knows what the "doghouse" is. Philip Dillard was in the doghouse, and when he earned his way out of it, he was a better player for it.

 

I think you could be a little off the mark here with 'nobody knows anything.' Well, I don't. But it doesn't mean that there aren't people who might. Heck if I know how they know, or if they know. It's a judgment call here. And knowing some details, does not mean knowing every little detail about the QB race - and knowing every detail, does not mean an obligation to share it (indeed, it'd be inappropriate to, probably).

 

As far as knowing 100% for sure who's starting, I think for a day or two it has been pretty certain. Not even based on "insider" claims, because every single sign is pointing in this direction. It'd be a shocker if it weren't.

 

Not to go down the Philip Dillard road again, but Willie did say if you didn't see in another thread, that Dillard did everything he could to earn his way out, but was kept in until our redshirt freshman linebackers (Comp and Fisher) struggled mightily. Absolutely, he was a better player for it; but he was also overweight before being in the doghouse, something he had to fix. Zac's been a tough kid for us, so if he's in the doghouse because Bo doesn't think he's tough...well, I don't know. Maybe that's too big an if to talk about.

 

If you trust the coaching staff that's in place, this whole debate is pretty useless. The only reason this debate is interesting is if you don't trust the coaches to run the program the right way, and to make the right call.

 

The implication here is that as fans, we should.

 

I do by and large, but I don't like that implication necessarily. There are some things you decide over time to be critical of coaching staffs over. For example, trusting Callahan to come back from a halftime deficit. Is trusting the current staff to not hold silly grudges going to be added to that list? Well, I wouldn't say that yet, but I would say that it's not unfair to question it.

 

But we are on the eve of the season, and I just want to root for the Huskers. So I guess we can put this discussion off for until we start doing less well - since until then, I doubt I'd care too much personally about anything else. Basically, it is what it is, and let's just enjoy the game tonight.

I at no point suggested that Lee had a bad camp, or anything of the sort. NONE of us knows what kind of camp any of the QB's have had, because essentially every practice report has only praised the intensity of the competition at the QB position, and stated that each player has gotten better.

What I am assuming is that the coaches are fair. But really, I'm not even assuming that as much as I am just completely rejecting the message board hearsay where people try to validate their own views on the matter by starting rumors that the coaches have sinister intentions, that they're not fair, that they play favorites within their team. I'm offended by that because I'm a teacher myself, and idiotic parents make the same dubious claims against teachers when they don't know what they're talking about. I'm offended by that because there's been NO real evidence of that occurring within the Nebraska football program.

My problem is that you're not questioning Bo Pelini's decision-making, or his football knowledge. You're questioning and criticizing something you know nothing about - his motives.

1. Martinez would be the best running QB we've had since Jammal Lord.

 

He could also be the worst passing QB we've had since Lord. I don't get why we only focus on one aspect of a QB's skillset. If a RB has great hands, but can't run worth a lick, does he start at RB?

 

2. Jammal Lord nearly single-handedly beat Texas, even with a Craig Bohl defense.

 

Jammal Lord also got creamed by Texas, even with a Pelini defense.

 

3. Zac Lee couldn't get a TD on Texas even when Niles Paul gave him the ball at the 10 yard line. He only got a TD on Oklahoma when Prince gave him the ball at the 1 yard line.

 

4. Martinez will make mistakes. So will/did Lee. But Taylor can make plays with his legs that Lee simply can't make. The jury is still out on making plays with his arm.

 

If both players make mistakes, but Taylor is better at a secondary skill while worse at the primary skill of a QB, why does that justify his starting?

 

5. The offense last year was terrible. It was beyond terrible. It was one of the worst offenses I've ever seen. Anybody who isn't at least open to the idea of having a new QB is out of their mind.

 

I'd be open to the idea. It's Taylor Martinez being the challenger I'm real skeptical about. I mean, let's say we had a redshirt freshman Tyler Gabbert, or a healthy Kody Spano, or Pat Witt still with the program. Heck, even a rapidly developing Cody Green. I'd be open to all these ideas. But Lee came back from surgery to have a consistent and strong fall camp, and the guy who has been anything but consistent in fall camp, comes out of nowhere to jump from 3 to 1. I don't claim to know more than the coaches, but something does not add up here.

 

With all that said, it kind of seems like people are picking sides, and that's stupid too. It seems like some people here are actually hoping Martinez goes out and fails so their personal views are validated. Some people are ripping on Lee even though he played all of last year with a bum elbow. People are ripping on Green even though he was a true freshman. Stop picking sides. How do you not hope that Martinez is going to show up and be able to manage the game, and throw the ball well, on top of his crazy running abilities. How do you not hope that Lee hasn't come back from his surgery even stronger, a better leader, and a more able runner? How do you not hope that Cody's gotten a better grip on the offense?

 

I agree on the picking sides thing, but I want to point out that though I criticize Martinez and Green, I don't tear them down or rip them. I simply am of the opinion that they are not (or were not, in Green's case; I don't know about now) ready for prime time. I defend Lee because he's been at the butt of all the real ripping and criticism, while Martinez is being put up on a pedestal already at Lee's expense. Sure, I hope whoever starts at QB kills it this year. But I'm seeing a situation where a guy is inexplicably not factoring into a QB race at all, and some seem to be relishing this. I know that's an overreaction on my part, but this whole thing just has me throwing my arms up in the air in frustration.

 

We have had people close to the program coming here and saying that Lee is in a doghouse; that he's getting 'punished'. I don't know how this can be not alarming to people, because it means that we are not starting the guy that gives us the best chance to win; rather, we are starting the guy that's not named Zac Lee that gives us the best chance to win. Now, you guys may have your own different opinions of how good Zac Lee is, but I'm all about a competition to determine the winner. If Zac, Taylor, and Cody had an open competition and Taylor flat out won, I would be ALL for this! Don't get me wrong. But if Zac is in the doghouse, then he's not part of this competition. His skillset and ability to run the offense are taken out of the equation. That's what concerns me: that the best between Taylor and Cody may not be the best among Zac, Taylor, and Cody.

First of all, YOU JUST DID claim to know more than the coaches. You said, "But Lee came back from surgery to have a consistent and strong fall camp, and the guy who has become anything but consistent in fall camp..." Where is that coming from? You weren't at every practice, watching every drill live and then again on film. How do you know Lee had a consistent camp and Martinez didn't? How do you know it's not the other way around? Nobody truly knows anything except for the coaches and the players.

You assume the same thing in the last paragraph of your response, saying that the coaches haven't held a true competition, that Zac has had some sort of disadvantage by being in the "doghouse." I don't care what guys with any kind of ties close to the program have said here, nobody knows anything. If people were coming on here with that kind of information, why didn't they just leak every little detail about the QB race? Why are we still not really 100% sure who's starting? Furthermore, nobody really knows what the "doghouse" is. Philip Dillard was in the doghouse, and when he earned his way out of it, he was a better player for it.

Anyways, that's what bugs me about this whole discussion, is the idea that we really know anything about it, especially anything more than the coaches do. If you trust the coaching staff that's in place, this whole debate is pretty useless. The only reason this debate is interesting is if you don't trust the coaches to run the program the right way, and to make the right call.

1. Martinez would be the best running QB we've had since Jammal Lord.

 

2. Jammal Lord nearly single-handedly beat Texas, even with a Craig Bohl defense.

 

3. Zac Lee couldn't get a TD on Texas even when Niles Paul gave him the ball at the 10 yard line. He only got a TD on Oklahoma when Prince gave him the ball at the 1 yard line.

 

4. Martinez will make mistakes. So will/did Lee. But Taylor can make plays with his legs that Lee simply can't make. The jury is still out on making plays with his arm.

 

5. The offense last year was terrible. It was beyond terrible. It was one of the worst offenses I've ever seen. Anybody who isn't at least open to the idea of having a new QB is out of their mind.

 

This whole argument is stupid, because no one participating has seen Zac Lee or Taylor Martinez or Cody Green all fall. It's been a competition that only the coaches have been able to evaluate. For anyone here to question their judgement without seeing a single practice is just ridiculous. Whoever's in the lead in the competition will get the start tomorrow, and that will be our first chance to evaluate anything on our own. And within the next few weeks, I'm sure it will all sort itself out, and by the end of the Washington game, it'll be pretty clear who we want at QB. Until then, just chill out.

 

With all that said, it kind of seems like people are picking sides, and that's stupid too. It seems like some people here are actually hoping Martinez goes out and fails so their personal views are validated. Some people are ripping on Lee even though he played all of last year with a bum elbow. People are ripping on Green even though he was a true freshman. Stop picking sides. How do you not hope that Martinez is going to show up and be able to manage the game, and throw the ball well, on top of his crazy running abilities. How do you not hope that Lee hasn't come back from his surgery even stronger, a better leader, and a more able runner? How do you not hope that Cody's gotten a better grip on the offense?

 

Pelini's going to start the guy who he thinks will help the team win. Bo Pelini knows more about football then anyone on this board. He knows more about what it takes to win football games than anyone on this board. And he hates losing way, way more than anyone on this board. So please, everybody just CHILL OUT.

 

 

In your five points above you make it seem very clear to me that your opinion is that we should go with TMart, but then in the next three paragraphs you tell us not to pick sides.

 

You also state some things about Lee making it appear that you are blaming all of the offensive issues on him last year, but then proceed to say that people get all over him even though he played hurt. If you would have posted the bottom couple of paragraphs it would have been okay, but the first five points don't mirror what you said in the last three paragraphs.

The first 5 points were more about defending Martinez against claims that Zac Lee is clearly the better choice at QB, which at this point don't really have any foundation. The arguments that Green or Martinez are clearly the right choice don't have any foundation either, but since I had just read about 5 posts ripping on Martinez, I decided to use that as my example.

All I said about Lee were, I think, pretty agreed-upon facts. The offense sucked. REALLY SUCKED. So it's ridiculous that anyone, at this point, before seeing anyone play, would be 100% behind Lee.

It's also ridiculous for anyone to be 100% behind Martinez. He hasn't played a down of college football yet.

It's also ridiculous for anyone to be 100% behind Green. He looked bad last year when we saw him.

And just as ridiculous for anyone to be 100% behind any of these guys, is for anyone to be 100% against any of these guys.

Everyone on here is just taking a side. They're going 100% behind whatever guy they chose, for whatever reason. This might be why my post is confusing to some of you. I'm not trying to take an absolute position. It's not "you're either with us or against us." My position is "Why don't you all shut up because we don't really know anything about any of these players anyways. Lee sucked last year but he was hurt. Green sucked last year, but he was a freshman. Taylor Martinez is really fast, but that's about all we know about him." My post is confusing because I'm not arguing about who should be the starter. I'm arguing about how stupid this entire argument is.

This seems fishy... Where are all the quotes about Pelini needing to be "nicer and show some respect?"

1. Martinez would be the best running QB we've had since Jammal Lord.

2. Jammal Lord nearly single-handedly beat Texas, even with a Craig Bohl defense.

3. Zac Lee couldn't get a TD on Texas even when Niles Paul gave him the ball at the 10 yard line. He only got a TD on Oklahoma when Prince gave him the ball at the 1 yard line.

4. Martinez will make mistakes. So will/did Lee. But Taylor can make plays with his legs that Lee simply can't make. The jury is still out on making plays with his arm.

5. The offense last year was terrible. It was beyond terrible. It was one of the worst offenses I've ever seen. Anybody who isn't at least open to the idea of having a new QB is out of their mind.

This whole argument is stupid, because no one participating has seen Zac Lee or Taylor Martinez or Cody Green all fall. It's been a competition that only the coaches have been able to evaluate. For anyone here to question their judgement without seeing a single practice is just ridiculous. Whoever's in the lead in the competition will get the start tomorrow, and that will be our first chance to evaluate anything on our own. And within the next few weeks, I'm sure it will all sort itself out, and by the end of the Washington game, it'll be pretty clear who we want at QB. Until then, just chill out.

With all that said, it kind of seems like people are picking sides, and that's stupid too. It seems like some people here are actually hoping Martinez goes out and fails so their personal views are validated. Some people are ripping on Lee even though he played all of last year with a bum elbow. People are ripping on Green even though he was a true freshman. Stop picking sides. How do you not hope that Martinez is going to show up and be able to manage the game, and throw the ball well, on top of his crazy running abilities. How do you not hope that Lee hasn't come back from his surgery even stronger, a better leader, and a more able runner? How do you not hope that Cody's gotten a better grip on the offense?

Pelini's going to start the guy who he thinks will help the team win. Bo Pelini knows more about football then anyone on this board. He knows more about what it takes to win football games than anyone on this board. And he hates losing way, way more than anyone on this board. So please, everybody just CHILL OUT.

Remember the other day, when Bo Pelini said he wasn't announcing a starter because he didn't want it to become a circus?

This is what he was talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdEqQpm9Gus

I'm going to go ahead and steal the 2nd comment on this video from YouTube.

"The black plague.

The holocaust.

Cross-Atlantic Slavery.

The potato famine.

Scott Stapp.

....all of these tragic and terrible. But only one of them continues today."

10/1- @Wisconsin

10/8- Ohio State

10/15- Bye

10/22- @Minnesota

10/29- Michigan State

11/5- Northwestern

11/12- @Penn State

11/19- @Michigan

11/26- Iowa

 

Wow. There must have been some maneuvering on our part to get the easier conference schedule rotation for 2013 when we play non-con Wyoming, Southern Miss, and UCLA. Can you even imagine that non-con with that conference schedule?

 

Pretty elite strength of schedule there.

Next year's non-conference schedule is Fresno State, Wyoming, and Washington... That's not exactly a walk in the park either.

Next year's schedule might be the toughest we've ever had... Play the true freshman this year. We're going to need them ready to go.

Check out the front page of www.bigtennetwork.com. It shows different divisions than what ESPN announced. Could they have leaked so wrong info? Or are they upset about info being linked so they posted this picture to create some doubt? Either way, I am excited about hearing our 2011 and 2012 schedules!

 

Very interesting picture on the home page, but does it actually say that the pics reflects the new divisions? Or is it just a bunch of helmets on a table?

 

Pretty sure it's just a bunch of helmets on a table. Those divisions make less sense then the ones ESPN reported.

Tom Shatel writes that a QB rotation throughout the Western Kentucky game is likely. Not only that, but that we shouldn't expect to have a clear cut starter until the Washington game? I don't know about the rest of you, but I think it's time for our coaching staff to evaluate this position and stick with the guy that gives us a the best chance to win. Why should that be changing each week? Somebody has to be better than all the others. There is purely no way that these 3 our equally capable of accomplishing our offensive goals. Now if it's Zac Lee, then put him out there for his senior year and let him take the reins. If they are actually willing to make the change to Cody Green or Martinez then it has to be because these guys have earned the chance. It isn't helping Zac Lee's mentality if these coaches continually pull him and see if another guy can do it better. I mean, how would you feel if you went to work every day and your boss keeps testing another guy in your place to see if he can do your job better than you? So if he doesn't do better, then the boss says 'nope, he's not the guy, I'll let you keep your job til' I find the next guy to replace you with'. You could say the same for Martinez. If Martinez gets the "starting job" and he makes a mistake or two and we yank him out of there......what does that do for his confidence. How would he feel about the coaches confidence in him.

 

Many different sports radio stations are viewing this QB debate as a sign of weakness. Most are saying that it's ridiculous to think that we haven't had a decision because they are all just so darn good. Most think we are heading into this season with high expectations but can't even find someone to play QB? I think we do have someone that can take this offense and not only make Nebraska competitive, but can probably take us to the top. But I am afraid if we do too much "ring around the rosy"........how will this QB and his teammates settle in and adapt to each others style. I'm hoping the decision is already made and we have "THE GUY" to get it done.

I don't think it's a sign of weakness, or really even indecision. I think Bo knows who the guy is, but he's been saying over and over again, "We compete every day, the depth chart is fluid, no spot is safe." If he comes out a week or even a couple days before the game and says, "___________ is the starting QB," then he is directly contradicting the philosophy that he champions.

I agree with Manhattan.

 

I don't like the split. The divisions look good, but I don't like the split.

 

Geographically would have been the best way to go, but the Big XII should have found a way to keep Nebraska-Oklahoma the day after Thanksgiving just like the SEC does with their cross-over games.

 

Maybe that seems hypocritical because we could have played Oklahoma in back to back games, but there was never an opportunity for that. Could have kept Nebraska-Oklahoma at end of October or beginning of November for a cross-over game or even a divisional game if Oklahoma was put in the North and Oklahoma State in the south, even though Stillwater is north of Norman, they are very close together still, and kept the Red-River Rivalry in the same spot it's always been. Oh well, that is a moot point now.

 

Besides, wasn't there always a chance to play Oklahoma twice in a possible bowl game or National Championship game anyway in the Big 8? I'm too young to remember, the only Big 8 I remember is Nebraska dominating, nothing prior to that was I alive for.

 

And Nebraska-Oklahoma was not called "The Game", so us playing each other twice would not seem as bad as Michigan and Ohio State do because of the name of the rivalry. It is singular. It doesn't scream September either.

Nebraska and Oklahoma played each other twice in one year in 1978. Nebraska upset OU, and then the Orange Bowl decided to have a rematch. Osborne wasn't a fan.

I understand wanting to keep the Michigan OSU game the way it was... But you can't. It's not possible. The conference is changing, and everyone in it will have to adapt. They could have kept OSU-UM at the end of the year and in the same division, or end of the year in opposite divisions, or they could have moved the game. But they can't be the last game on the schedule, and they can't always play each other for the Big 10 title. The rivalry will change.

The reason that most Nebraska fans on here right now are annoyed is because we actually have some perspective. If the Big XII had done ANYTHING to keep the OU-NU game an annual event, we're not even having this discussion right now. Nebraska is still in the Big XII. It doesn't even matter how they did it, whether it was day after Thanksgiving or the first game in October, whether it left open the possibility of a rematch later in the year, it wouldn't have mattered.

If OSU and Michigan play each other twice a season some years, will it cheapen the rivalry? Yeah, a little bit. But don't come on this board and act like Husker fans don't understand. We understand, we've just seen way worse.

 

They say The Game will still be at the end of the season, which is a good compromise, but I cannot fathom the possibility of playing M*ch*gan twice a year. It is like the one thing that Ohio State and M*ch*gan fans wanted. Don't mess with the best rivalry in college sports. Keep it on the third Saturday of November and make sure it is once a year. That is what makes it so special. It's like a religious event in the region.

 

The divisions are good competitively, but the split is really bad.

 

Next, assuming Michigan does get back to being a top 10 team(probably will, look at us), wouldn't it be great to be able to avenge a loss if both teams were undefeated when the meet the end of November?

 

 

No. That is the worst. It is The Game, singular. Not The Game(s). It is once a year at the same time every year. It is what makes the rivalry special and part of the fabric and traditions of the region. Two games would cheapen the rivalry. This isn't a rivalry of the dress rehearsal. It is one shot that each team, each fan base prepares for every year and endures 364 days for.

 

Nebraska fans don't get this though. There is more to this rivalry than simply playing each other on a frequent basis.

Cry me a river. Nebraska's great rivalry was completely destroyed. So stop with the teenage girl "you'll just never understand us" crap.

Bo seemed pretty friendly on the Jungle with Jim Rome today. Maybe our reporters should take a page out of Rome's book.

Or... maybe it's just that Rome only pesters Bo once or twice a year.

Oh, COME ON. Everybody wants to see T-Magic. You know it. I know it. Don't try to hide it.

Rittenberg Post

Apparently, protected crossovers include Michigan-Ohio State, Wisconsin-Minnesota, and Illinois-Northwestern.

This leads me to believe our crossover will be Penn State.

I like it. I'm guessing PSU will be our cross-over rival. I hope our last regular season game will be either Iowa or Michigan.

 

I don't think so, it will probably be Wisconsin. Or at least I hope so.

Not sure... As badly as Wisconsin wants a rivalry with Nebraska, I'd guess their fans would rather try to keep their rivalry with either Minnesota or Iowa alive.

 

They say The Game will still be at the end of the season, which is a good compromise, but I cannot fathom the possibility of playing M*ch*gan twice a year. It is like the one thing that Ohio State and M*ch*gan fans wanted. Don't mess with the best rivalry in college sports. Keep it on the third Saturday of November and make sure it is once a year. That is what makes it so special. It's like a religious event in the region.

 

The divisions are good competitively, but the split is really bad.

Don't worry, Manhattan. Bo Pelini will make sure Michigan and Ohio State only happens once a year.

Division 1

Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota.

Division 2

Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois.

Link?

Also, any word on crossover games, or when the ohio state michigan game will be played?