Moiraine

Maybe they can help on the edge? Anyone know anything? Dunno. It's kinda shocking with our complete lack of a pass rusher that we don't have at least one great player clamoring to join the team.

The 1st quarter was particularly shocking. Cook may have finished with decent numbers, but he did not look like himself that 1st quarter. Whether it was all on him or his receivers, they were missing on some throws. And on his receiver's behalf, there were a couple drops early in the game that were well thrown balls but they couldn't catch. It was definitely Cook. It was something like six of his first seven incompletions were just flat out missing open guys. Not pressured. Not tough throws. Just totally missed them. Once he got going, they had four straight 70+ yard TD drives. The only thing that saved us was them going conservative with the run game to burn clock at the end. Result of MSU possessions: Downs, Punt, Punt, FG, TD, INT, TD, TD, TD, TD, Punt. Early on - first four possessions - when Cook was struggling, we could stop them. Then they scored TDs on five out of six possessions with the lone stop being another terrible Cook throw. We're assuming his performance in the first quarter had nothing to do with the environment and was solely on him just out of the blue being awful. Environment may have played a role, but he's also a senior QB, no? Dude has played in some tough places. I'd personally lean more towards him being off than it being anything environmental, but that's just me. I just have a problem blaming things on a player being off. It's a part of the game and it happens to Nebraska plenty. I don't like blaming a loss on when it happens to Nebraska and I don't like blaming a win on it happening to our opponents. I'm not saying you're saying that, but it's been implied quite a bit.

Undecided about whether Collins will stay, imo or go, imo. Everyone in this thread seems to be ignoring those 2 twin DTs who will be redshirt freshmen next year. Mayhaps they're good.

It won't be considered a showdown to Iowa. Until they're heading home with a loss. IMO this feels like 2010 Texas vs. Nebraska except we're Texas.

The 1st quarter was particularly shocking. Cook may have finished with decent numbers, but he did not look like himself that 1st quarter. Whether it was all on him or his receivers, they were missing on some throws. And on his receiver's behalf, there were a couple drops early in the game that were well thrown balls but they couldn't catch. It was definitely Cook. It was something like six of his first seven incompletions were just flat out missing open guys. Not pressured. Not tough throws. Just totally missed them. Once he got going, they had four straight 70+ yard TD drives. The only thing that saved us was them going conservative with the run game to burn clock at the end. Result of MSU possessions: Downs, Punt, Punt, FG, TD, INT, TD, TD, TD, TD, Punt. Early on - first four possessions - when Cook was struggling, we could stop them. Then they scored TDs on five out of six possessions with the lone stop being another terrible Cook throw. We're assuming his performance in the first quarter had nothing to do with the environment and was solely on him just out of the blue being awful.

Yea,, why should anyone express displeasure in a below average product? Just sit there and take it. But it's nice to know that the opinions of the fans ( many of whom are alumni) aren't wanted. Instead, maybe we should just end the sellout streak. Why should anyone give a coach more than 9 games before deciding whether to fire him, the athletic director, and the chancellor????!!!oneone

I do what I want!

Some of those people shouldn't say, but I don't know that there needs to be an official "stance" on this stuff. I really don't like people saying stuff like: "That guy was raped" in sports or whatever. I feel like the word "destroyed" can be used to mean the same thing without bringing the sh#t that comes up with using a word like rape. When you're saying it related to sports, it's usually the guy's fault that he sucked bad enough to get "raped." So in a very subconscious way people are saying a person getting raped is their fault. Ya, I'm probably looking into this too deeply. I don't think anyone actually thinks about it that way. (Which is why I say it's subconscious). I feel the same way about calling someone a pu&&y. Ya, it's just a word you grew up with. But it also implies that women are weak. And calling someone a dick implies that men are jerks. It just doesn't make sense to me using a word related to gender as a diss, especially for a straight person who likes to get with the thing they're dissing. But pretty much every language is that way. If you're speaking french and talk about female cats there's a certain way you need to say it so people don't think you're talking about vaginas.

Add a rule that you cannot be part of the 8 if you lost to one of the other 7. No. Please explain your reasoning why not. My logic is you already had a shot at that team and failed. Also think of the team that already played and beat that team and how it is very difficult to beat a team twice in the same season. To me, it is rewarding the LOSER. Losing a game in the first few weeks is not indicative of how good a team is toward the end of the season, and imo the teams that should make the playoffs should be the ones that are the best at the end of the season (given they're undefeated or have 1 loss). Furthermore if a team has only lost to the #1 team in the country how can you put other teams above them who've lost to crap teams? The exception to this which I kind if indicated above is if said team loses to that team during the end of the season. If Iowa only loses to OSU, they shouldn't go because it should be pretty clear they're not going to beat them 3 weeks later. But if that game got played week 1 they should have another chance if it's their only loss.

Add a rule that you cannot be part of the 8 if you lost to one of the other 7. No.

Worlds better? My thoughts playoff committee is pretty much equal to BCS. What planet are you from? With BCS FSU or Alabama would have won the NC this year, and they didn't get past the semifinals.

The commentor saying it was on 4th down on the final drive also said it was on the touchdown scoring play. But I just watched the play 3 times and there wasn't enough time for holding and definitely wasn't a headlock on anyone. It was made out to be some game changing hold but it could have happened in the 1st quarter on a 3rd down play we failed to convert for all we know.

Notre Dame would definitely be in. Their loss was to the #1 team and they will have beaten Stanford. Iowa's loss would be to a 4-7 or 5-6 team. I don't see much controversy there. Beating Ohio State would be impressive but although they are defending champions they haven't looked stellar this season. (But you could say that for last season too before their game against Wisconsin).

I get tired of people saying teams' schedules are a joke. It's hard to go undefeated, period. (I'm not counting teams that don't play power 5 teams). If Iowa goes undefeated they will have beaten the defending national champion. That should be good enough to go to the playoff. They're not going to be undefeated going into that game, though.

IMHO, no neighborhoods in Lincoln are all that dangerous. Of course there are some poorer areas but nothing terrible. I lived in the highest crime area in Lincoln for 4 years and really liked it there. *shrug* i didn't think lincoln would have any areas like baton rouge, i assume the whole city is fairly safe. i'm just looking for something to live in for football seaason and later just for home game weekends. House or apartment? It might be cool to live in one of the new Haymarket apts. You're going to get completely opposite suggestions if you're not more detailed though. For instance I'd prefer not to live east of 33rd street or south of South street. But I like old houses and being able to buy things from local stores that I can get to on a bike. I'm sure there are people here who would never have any interest at all in living where I like to live.

I obviously know nothing about this kid but I have known of students with rich parents who couldn't get a lot of the financial aid they needed because they were still considered dependent but their parents refused to help them pay for it. So they weren't getting help from home and they weren't getting grants because they came from wealthy families. (That was kind of a big segue and might not even apply here).

A pass rush would make them look even better.

IMHO, no neighborhoods in Lincoln are all that dangerous. Of course there are some poorer areas but nothing terrible. I lived in the highest crime area in Lincoln for 4 years and really liked it there. *shrug*

I don't think you know what eye test means.

I don't think so but they should be scared.

Yes it's safe.

Iowa better freaking beat Minnesota. I don't want Nebraska to be the 2nd team they lose to.

It's not really a break when it's a 50/50 judgement call. Breaks are when it went your way and really shouldn't have. that wasn't a 50/50 judgement call... Agree. Again there is no clarity in the rule regarding any such force as some have stated. I don't recall who said it, but someone used the word "FORCEFULLY" and that isn't even in the rulebook and NEVER has. Here is the stated rule from the 2015 manual... "Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds and returns in bounds during a down shall touch a legal forward pass while in the field of play or end zones or while airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R. 7-3-4-I, II and IV). [Exception: This does not apply to an originally eligible offensive player who immediately returns inbounds after going out of bounds due to contact by an opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-III)]. If he touches the pass before returning in bounds, it is an incomplete pass (Rule 7-3- 7) and not a foul for illegal touching." There was contact on the play and DB's are taught to use the sideline to "squeeze" the space between him and the sideline, forcing the receiver to go out of bounds. However, and I have always had an issue with this. If you are in contact with that guy even if it's a graze. It should not be a penalty to the receiver if he goes out and comes back in. It does not require a DB to forcefully push the guy out. So you agree with walks. Just in the opposite direction

It's not really a break when it's a 50/50 judgement call. Breaks are when it went your way and really shouldn't have.