The King

Nebraska post game vs UTC w/ Jamal Turner "We should put up 60 points per game, lets put it like that." Ha. I found someone less pessimistic It does have me thinking though, he said they didn't show much...

I believe that was the only time he got it, actually. A little false hope! I refuse to believe that we weren't using them as a guinea pig, as I said earlier, I believe they were treating this as a glorified scrimmage. They knew they would win, so they chose to work on specific things that needed to be worked on. There really isn't a better time to do it than against live competition!

If they load the box with 9 guys...fine T-mart, Turner, Enunwa, Kinnie (& Bell, or Baptiste or Reed), (Insert RB here)and sling it. Let em have it. 1st play of the game, PA deep ball.

To me, it wasn't the points, or racking up yards, but so much the continuity. The ability to adapt to when things weren't working, that's what was important to me. Makes sense. I completely understand that. How does Beck's quote about him [idiotically] running the same play until it worked, factor into that? Honestly, when I read that, I was relieved to know he wasn't just running the same play because it was our only hope, but because it appeared they wanted to work on that play. that's how I took it, and that was relieving for me. But... I will say, we will have to rely on the big play, more than we should, probably.

So essentially, what I gather from this is, virtually everyone had way too high of expectations for a first year offense under a first year offensive coordinator. If you thought we were gonna come out of the gates like Oregon, I can see where you're disappointed. For me, I figured our first game we would have around high 20's or 30's trying to work out the kinks of the offense. And some of you have proven your points, and I understand that. I completely misunderstood some peoples basis, and I'll eat my crow for that. But saying "we suck, nothing changes, blah blah" isn't much to discuss.

Oh. I hope I'm right too, but I think you're taking this wrong. I think the "sky is falling" stuff should wait until at least after one game, yes? Especially with such a new staff and offense. And did you see Oklahoma vs Utah State last year? Uh...

I'm not saying we played great or even good enough, but saying we are barely a top 25 team after one game is kind of pessimistic, is it not? The game wasn't even close, and we rely on the big play just as much as other teams. We got pushed around, a little, yes. Bottom line: Oregon played like garbage vs LSU (when teams prepare for their offense it isn't at hard to defend - refer to the last 3 bowl games). And we played mediocre vs a good FCS team and still trounced them. We didn't have the turnover issues or penalty issues. I don't see how their sloppy play is better than our simplistic play that didn't provoke errors such as flags and turnovers, regardless of opponent.

And I guarantee you that LSU wouldn't of scored 40 on us. And, you have no clue what differences we would have made in preparation for LSU. I love this thread. Oregon played crappy, but they are going to get better - they needed to break in some young guys. Uh hello? What's Nebraska doing? Ha. The exact same thing, except we are breaking in EVERYONE to a brand new offense. And FYI, penalties don't change because of who you're playing in such a drastic manner. They were sloppy. There is no way people honestly think Oregon looked like a top ten team. Even Oregon fans don't believe that! Not sure, seeing as to how I'm on my phone, the rules of posting another message board. But try oregonlive.com.

I fail to see where I said "we would crush/beat Oregon." Some people really really are selective readers I see. I said Oregon didn't look better than us, because they didn't. I can't tell if people are just tougher on Nebraska, as fans, or not. Because Oregon really, really played bad yesterday. If you knew their schemes, they missed a lot of calls on the O-line and Oregonians are already asking for Chip to find a way to get the newer receivers on the field because the WR yesterday dropped a few balls and ran shaky routes as well as missing a few blocks - which is significant in Chip Kellys offense. Not to mention, they are undersized on both lines and Darron Thomas doesn't have Jeff Maehl, a receiver that would catch anything thrown his way. So.. We won - they lost. They had more penalties. More turnovers. Gave up more points. Struggled on special teams. Got their O line pushed around. (people will say this is because it was LSU, well yeah, and they are small and inexperienced.) Yet, they looked amazing? Come on! And Stanford looks like the team to beat in the PAC.

Maybe you didn't notice, but I'm from Oregon, and I'm surrounded by Oregon fans. They would be the first people to admit (it also helps that I follow them quiet fanatically as well) that was a sloppy game and they wouldn't expect to beat anyone playing like that. They were constantly out of place, missing blocks, playing sloppy (penalties, turnovers) and out of place in general. Oregon fans expected a big win this game. They expected to put up 40+ and to allow significantly less, especially missing Shepard and Jefferson (mostly Shep). Oregon fans are FURIOUS that they lost to a team that played not to lose, in regards to their offense. So, sorry, yes, Nebraska looked better than Oregon. At least Nebraska didn't turn it over 4 times, get flagged 12 times, and lose to a team that had a horrendous offense that was just playing not to turn it over.

I'm not going to whine over the first game (other than 2 very short posts I already made) but I have to say I see this comment a lot and it always irritates me. It just isn't relevant for this game. We had trouble running the basic stuff we did with lots of messed up assignments and messed up pitches. Those things will happen in an opener, so I'm not complaining about them, but they make the "offense was very basic" argument not work very well. You can't use that as an excuse when the actual problem in the game was mental errors. If it's basic those things should be limited because there are less plays to think about. Also, the team we were playing is not Division I. Shouldn't we have been able to run it on them regardless of how basic or complicated the play calling was? I think that is the biggest issue people are having and I understand the concern. Sans the huge runs, obviously. It was very basic - we were clearly working on specific plays. Maybe we were running those plays consistently to get the mechanics figured out and to let the youth get familiar with it in a game environment. Whatever it is, our playbook was not completely exposed. Just because it isn't good, doesn't mean its not basic. True, but James Madison beat VA tech, who ended up being a pretty decent team - its not like we lost and the game wasn't even that close. I seem to remember a certain Moc's fan on here saying they would score over 20 and he was fairly confident. That didn't happen. Sure it is enough to be a concern, but to think we look like a team that shouldn't be near the top 10? Overreaction by a fan base, but hey, what are message boards for! I'm also kind of curious as to what the people that are highly disappointed thought the score would be, I'm curious as to what there expectations were for a game, that we were told pretty much before the game was pretty much an audition to see how people reacted.

Why is everyone so worried about our team after this game? It was essentially a glorified scrimmage in which we were obviously working on specific things. I need to get a few things out on the table that need to be said. 1) Do you really think our defense is the same without Dennard? Dennard allows us to do many different things on D, with different defensive packages, because you know he'll lock down his side of the field. Our defense was very basic. We were obviously trying to get as many people reps as possible. Against more experienced teams, I don't think we see nearly as many people on D, or O. 2) We went away from our #1's frequently to try and provide experience for younger players. We did this before the fourth quarter. I highly doubt we see that many substitutions against, say, Wisconsin. This shouldn't be surprising as Bo or possibly Carl said, they need to get people game reps to see how people react in games vs. practice. 3) Offense was very basic. I struggle to believe thats our entire playbook. Beck, was obviously, trying to perfect plays. After the game, he admitted he stuck to the same play to execute it correctly. Which was dumb. But like I said, thats something you do in practice, and it appears the staff was using this as a scrimmage more than a game to crush the opponent. 4) Both teams were rusty. We got the win, yet people are complaining we didn't score 40+. LSU, Oregon, tOSU, Wisconsin, are all better than us because they (Wiscy and OSU) just reamed their opponent. - whoever thinks Oregon looks better than us is kind of silly... 4 turnovers, multiple penalties... At least we didn't get flagged left and right. LSU - Look at that offense... even ours looked better than that. They clearly play offense to not lose... 5) POSITIVES. Our penalties looked to be fixed, our turnovers fixed as well - those fumbles on the pitches were obviously sloppy - a work in progress, which I believe is something Beck wanted to work on. The option seemed to be huge. 6) Our D looked good. Our secondary is only going to get better with Fonzie, which I mentioned above. 7) Our WR played well. They didn't -lose- the game for us. Which is huge. 8) Wish we saw more Carnes and the 3 RB's, but oh well. 9) Stafford is a baller.

Not watching the game - who fumbled?

I think a pick and a couple fumbles sound about right, So...OVER O/U defense allows 250 total yards Tricky question because you never really know when we're gonna start putting in our 3 stringers, but I'm still going with under. Over/under 225 rushing yards? Over. between Magic, Burk and the 3 frosh. I think we run for around 250ish. Especially once the game gets out of hand, I don't think Carnes is gonna be throwing a lot. Over/under defense scores 1.5 tds (fumble, int return for TD)

I am a college student right now, so I wouldn't really mind that. I'll look into it, thanks!

Just outside of Portland. Yup. The game being so close to Thanksgiving is one reason I thought it may lower the price a little, with all the travelling and what not.

1) Taylor Martinez for 3 quarters of football. How he has developed as a player and leader. Although an inferior opponent, is he making the correct reads? Is he throwing the ball away? 2) I want to see just exactly what the new offense is and how it will be played. Oregon didn't "hide" their offense last year, and we shouldn't this year. If you're good at what you do, it doesn't matter if people see film. 3) Brion Carnes for the 4th quarter, with the 1st team O (minus Burkhead - long season ahead of us) 4) Which freshman stand out at skill positions. This is geared towards Jamal Turner + the 3 rb's. 5) A special teams TD. Punt or kick return. And who is gonna be our #1 return guy. 6) WR's. Kenny Bell, Enunwa. Pretty much know what we're gonna get from Reed + Kinnie. 7) No sacks and a tight O line. - This game won't show me much until they play a legit team. However, if they suck, that shows me something. I hope to not be underwhelmed this game. 8) The defense. Not worried about it really, but would like to see some younger guys get some snaps and impress. Also, Stafford needs to get on the field. Also, who steps up for Dennard while he is out. 9) FUMBLES. 10) PENALTIES. 11) INJURIES. 12) BONEHEAD PLAYS. (Dropped passes, stupid mistakes such as blown assignments, refer to 9&10 as well.) 13) 9-12 better not happen. Although its the first game, so a LITTLE room for timing penalties. But I swear...more delay of game penalties I will kill myself. Other than that, I just want to enjoy the start of football season... and our path to the national championship. GBR.

Thank you all for the feedback. And I would be fine paying $200..at the time it was like $280 a pop. Ha ~.~

Not sure if this is where this belongs, and it was gonna be too long for anyone to see in my status. Feel free to move/delete if necessary. Seeing as I'm obviously from Oregon, and have not seen a Nebraska football game in a long, long time. (Live, of course.) I was looking into going to the Iowa game. However, the prices seem to be quite outrageous from what I have seen. (Over $200 a ticket..insane) I was wondering, whats the best place/way to get cheaper tickets? This may be a dumb question, but seeing as how I'm in Oregon, I really haven't looked into tickets at all and don't really know the ins and outs of Nebraska tickets.

Lache was unhappy with his role on the team, thus he transferred. On Friday, it became apparent that he wasn't going to make the travel squad and become the 5th string, possibly 6th string running back. At practice he was visually frustrated with the way he was being used on the field. Once he learned that incoming freshman DeAnthony Thomas and Tra Carson passed him on the depth chart, there was no reason for him to stay. Once I find the link, I'll edit the post.

Don't think we lose twice to the same team...especially since if we played Wiscy twice the second game wouldn't be @ Camp Randall. Don't get why people are so scared of Penn State

Chattanooga - Easiest win. Fresno State -Easier win. Washington -Easy win. Wyoming - Easy win. Wisconsin - Win by 2 TD's. Big game, first B1G game + night game + road in Wisconsin. I think we'll try and ruin the party at Camp Randall. Ohio State - Win. Solid team, but we'll ride the momentum from the Wisconsin game. Minnesota - Let down, but a win. Closer than people think. I think we'll kind of coast due to going from Wisconsin to Ohio State to a bye week followed by an easy Minnesota team. Bo needs to try and keep the team focused. Mich. State - Win. Northwestern- Dan Persa joins Bo Pelini's QB graveyard. Win. Penn State - Easy win. (Struggle to see why anyone fears this team. Michigan - Toss up game. If Michigan's D improves and Denard Robinson is healthy, could be very tough at the big house. I'll lean Nebraska, but its close. Iowa - Win. CCG - Win. Natty/Rose Bowl (depending on Mich game): Rose Bowl vs Oregon. Close, good game. Natty vs IDK. NOTE: I think T-Magic gets hurt this year, probably misses some time, but it is a minor injury. I believe Carnes can fill in for a limited time for Martinez.

LeBron is the greatest player we have in the NBA today. It is comical and idiotic how he has been treated as a basketball player this year. People who say he isn't a closer, need to check up on their clutch stats. LeBron is the best closer in the league, shoots the best percentage and averages the most points in "clutch" situations. LeBron is at around 38% while the amazing closer in Kobe, is around 33%. I would also point those same people to the Celtics and Bulls series, who say that Wade is the engine of this team. Hello, look at the first 3 rounds. Wade was horrendous against the Bulls and wasn't dominate against the celtics either. LeBron closed out both those teams himself. LeBron, however, is not Michael Jordan. He is a hybrid of MJ and Magic. LeBron, is the best defender in the league, rebounds, passes and scores. That is a complete rarity; and for the people who say he isn't closing them out, its because he is deferring to Wade in this series because of matchups. Jason Kidd can't guard Dwyane Wade at all, thus they are playing the matchup game. I like Wade over Kidd more than I like LeBron over Marion (Marion is a great defender). I also think its funny people aren't giving Dallas' D respect this series, they've essentially loaded up on LeBron to force him to make pass the ball. The mavs are trying to force Wade to beat them with his scoring and aren't doubling him. When LeBron gets the ball in his spots they send an immediate double. It's actually a really good scheme, that hasn't gotten any credit at all so far.