Moiraine

This is the problem with today's society, it's the officers fault, not the girls fault, yet she's the one who is resisting the officers who are trying to get her to stay there and her actions escalated the situation. I'm not saying I'm a fan of spraying the girl in the back of the vehicle, but she refused to put her legs in the vehicle. It's possible that the department's SOP's state, officers can do this there and they've been trained that way with the Chief of Police supporting their actions there. It comes down to one simple word folks................comply. We're talking about a 15 year old girl who was just hit by a car. Here's another simple word: adapt. If you're a police officer you should adapt to the situation at hand. There were many actions leading up to the spraying that showed these officers were not using their brains.

In what universe is calling Trump unfit for the presidency an "unforced error" ? Regardless of how he behaves in the debate, it doesn't take away all the sh#t behavior from before. Or the stupid thoughts he's had and words he's said. The "narrative" is exactly what has happened, in real life.

Was that the Wisky game we had the duct tape names and numbers? I couldn't read names or numbers. It sucked. Illinois

Can we get rid of Lil Red yet?

Does anyone here think Kim or Kanye actually vote? I find it highly unlikely.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97. And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that. So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them? What saunders said. And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships. Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3. So if we have 20 more seasons never winning conference championships, never finishing ranked in the top 15, never playing in major bowls, and they continue to do all of those things routinely but don't win any more national championships, then we'd still be the better program? All of their all-time numbers are comparable to ours, and they've done a lot over the last 15 years that we haven't, and are poised to continue to be an elite program, whereas we either aren't, or we can't really tell one way or the other. Why did people complain about Osborne not winning a national championship? because people are generally ungrateful and lack healthy perspective. all it takes is looking through any alabama messageboard for a few minutes to see that - there's still constantly plenty of fans talking about how they suck and Saban should go. We just have different perspectives. To me, 12 wins isn't that different from 9 if you don't have a national championship to show for it. if Ohio State wins a couple more in the next 5 years then I would agree with what you've been saying. But if Nebraska continues with its post-Callahan win rate and Ohio State continues with its post-2002 win rate and neither win a national championship, I wouldn't in my lifetime trade our national championships for anything they've done.

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97. And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that. So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them? What saunders said. And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships. Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3. So if we have 20 more seasons never winning conference championships, never finishing ranked in the top 15, never playing in major bowls, and they continue to do all of those things routinely but don't win any more national championships, then we'd still be the better program? All of their all-time numbers are comparable to ours, and they've done a lot over the last 15 years that we haven't, and are poised to continue to be an elite program, whereas we either aren't, or we can't really tell one way or the other. Why did people complain about Osborne not winning a national championship?

OSU routinely won 9-11 games a year and finished in the top 15 from 1980-2000. Pretty similar to what Nebraska did all those years minus 94-97. And since then they've won two national championships, played for four, and had umpteen 11+ win seasons, conference championships, etc. Where we haven't had any of that. So sure, I guess they can't match our mid-90's run, but they've got 16 years and counting of better success from 2000 onwards. When does that catch up for them? What saunders said. And it never catches them up. Unless they win national championships. Also, does playing for national championships count for Nebraska too? Ok. Let's add 3.

Really? You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for 8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship? Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I hate to defend tOSU here, but yes they have and currently are. Their last 15 years are very comparable to our run, and honestly, I think they would have went undefeated in 2012. But regardless.. I don't agree with that. National championships matter. Almost doesn't count. They've had 2 in that span, and one of those was with a loss. Alabama has had a run like ours (and arguably better). OSU has not, yet. If in 5 years they've won 1-2 more NC then there's an argument. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. Their achievements in the recent are what is going to keep them atop of where NU wants to be. You can keep sticking to your guns but again. OSU is the superior program. More national titles, higher winning percentage overall. There's really no argument about "achievement". NU has more WINS, but has a 40 games played lead on OSU. OSU > NU OSU also has a coach that every kid would at least give some thought about playing for because of his name alone. NU doesn't. OSU is in a hotbed for recruiting. NU isn't. It's not that it isn't close, but c'mon you're acting like OSU has nothing on NU when it's actually the other way around. This has nothing to do with Oregon so lets not deflect either. You're not talking about the same thing Moraine is. How am I not? OSU achievements are > NU's Nebraska has more conference titles, and more legitimate (aka not tied garbage in the 40's) national titles. They've had more recent success (alot of it due to dominating a crap B1G), but that doesn't make them better overall. If you go over the entire program histories, they're roughly on par with no distinct gap.Thank you. Not sure why I've needed to explain this 3 times now. I've already explained I'd trade the last 13 years but not the programs' overall history. I think age might be a big factor here. Landlord and Coach are both under 30. So the fact Ohio State did nothing nationally from 1980-2000 and Nebraska won 3 national championships doesn't count for either program because they were barely alive.

Really? You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for 8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship? Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I hate to defend tOSU here, but yes they have and currently are. Their last 15 years are very comparable to our run, and honestly, I think they would have went undefeated in 2012. But regardless.. I don't agree with that. National championships matter. Almost doesn't count. They've had 2 in that span, and one of those was with a loss. Alabama has had a run like ours (and arguably better). OSU has not, yet. If in 5 years they've won 1-2 more NC then there's an argument. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

Really? You wouldn't trade 5-6, 8-4, 9-5, 5-7, 9-4, 10-4, 10-4, 9-4, 10-4, 9-4, 9-4, 6-7 with no top 10 finishes, no major bowl appearances, no major bowl wins, no conference championships, and no national championships, for 8-4, 10-2, 12-1, 11-2, 10-3, 11-2, 12-1, 6-7, 12-0, 12-2, 14-1, 12-1 with 9 top 10 finishes, 7 major bowl appearances, 5 major bowl wins, 5 conference championships, 3 national championship appearances and 1 national championship? Is that what I said? I said I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I didn't say I wouldn't trade the past 13 years. Did the two teams come into being in 2003? OSU has never had a run like the one we had, which I lived through and was cognizant of. So of course I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs.

The problem with them is they look like Miami.

They spelled her name wrong

It's not that amazing when you think about it. Just do the math. Most people who said they wanted 8-4 or 9-3 or they would be disappointed were assuming Oregon was one of those 3-4 losses. Now, since Oregon wasn't a loss, those predictions automatically change to 9-3 and 10-2. If we win a game I expected us to lose, then going forward I expect us to win one more game than I originally expected. It's just logical, not amazing.

Clinton did Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/an29?_ccid=dc59e744-fca6-4312-804e-a3bb97c6164d&_cc=__dbbl

Ohio State has superior recruiting but it's netted them 1 undefeated national championship season in my lifetime. I wouldn't trade our achievements for theirs. I also don't care what someone from their stuck up fanbase says. We aren't back, whatever that means, but I don't care about their opinion.

My Thoughts? Yeah, we're not back. Can't compare winning 3 games (or even going undefeated this season) as being back. Iowa went undefeated last year in the regular season... They still are most irrelevant. We're not back. After a decade of 90% participation in the CCG and 4-5 dates added to memorial stadium under Conference champions and a one or two national titles, then we are back. But we're winning. So that's nice (Y) I find the bolded part a bit comical. First of all, Ohio State is just one heart murmur away from what is now Florida football. Second, I read an article the other day from a Sooner beat writer who asked how OU with their three and four star recruits were expected to compete with Ohio State and their four and five star recruits. Considering Notre Dame is 1-2, yeah it will be difficult to achieve their success. Ya. He picked some weird teams as examples.

Oh good. A Trump is talking about a "statistical thing." Well Jr., that picture is completely inaccurate. If you multiplied the number of skittles in that bowl by 1,000,000 and there were still only 3 bad ones it'd be more like it. Also, have you heard of food poisoning? I mean, it's unlikely with skittles, but people eat hamburgers every day and the likelihood of getting a deadly disease from them is probably higher than dying in a terrorist attack in the U.S.

Whatdya mean? The only question at this point is if we're going to threepeat 2 years from now or if it will only be back to back nattys. Pump the brakes....pffffft. I'm assuming he's one of those "If we talk about games other than the one next week, our players are going to take the next victory for granted and lose" people.

He's right about one thing. He's never seen anything like it. Literally. As in, not even now.

Still on Parks & Rec. I didn't realize what a good actor Chris Pratt was until I saw him in it.

Iowa lost the Rose Bowl. This isn't relevant to the discussion. And I'm not asking which game people would rather us go to. Obviously we all would pick the Playoff game. Sorry, forgot the I of course knew you were being sarcastic and weren't wondering how we could get rings like Iowa last year but the response still doesn't make sense since I'm not asking whether people would prefer to go to the Rose Bowl or the Playoffs.

I don't want him to play but I think we discussed this last week.

Iowa lost the Rose Bowl. This isn't relevant to the discussion. And I'm not asking which game people would rather us go to. Obviously we all would pick the Playoff game.

My God, relax people. I don't particularly care about it being the Rose Bowl. It just happens to be the best bowl Nebraska can go to outside of a playoff game and knowing we would lose the playoff game makes the decision something to think about, imo. Losing the last game is always hard. Being a 1 loss team and winning our bowl game sounds pretty great to me. I still pick the playoff loss though.