Hujan

The fact that Ohio State is ranked in front of us is a travesty. I know I sound like a broken record here, but their schedule is a joke. THEY HAVE NOT BEATEN ANYONE OF NOTE!!! If they run the table the next three games, maybe I'll give them some respect. But their entire schedule, top to bottom, is as easy as they come. http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/194/ohio-state-buckeyes Stanford also hasn't done anything other than beating #15 Arizona at home. Otherwise, their best claim to fame is not getting dominated by Oregon for the first half of that game. Really, I think this poll goes to show that, among the one-loss teams, who you beat is not as important as to whom you lose.

Utah played nobody---and I mean nobody---until they played TCU and they just got curb stomped hard . . . at home. Prior to TCU, their signature win was a 27-24 OT win over a 5-3 Pittsburgh team. Stanford hasn't played anyone of substance either, with the sole exception of Oregon . . . whom they lost to convincingly. But even Utah and Stanford's schedules are not as bad as Ohio State's. Holy cow is that an atrocious schedule: Marshall (2-6), Miami (6-3, but in ACC), Ohio (7-3, but in MAC), Eastern Michigan (1-8), Illinois (5-4), Indiana (4-5), Wisconsin (8-1), Purdue (4-5), and Minnesota (1-9). The only team of substance there is Wisconsin . . . and they drubbed Ohio State. The rest of those teams read like a who's who of the worst teams in college football. Throw in Washington State and the list would be complete. Oklahoma just lost to A&M, mooting that argument. This leaves only Michigan State and Wisconsin, both of whom I think are quality programs. When Nebraska is firing on all cylinders (basically only seen it in the first half against Mizzou), I will take them over either Michigan State or Wisconsin. Otherwise, I think it's a wash. LSU, to me, is playing good football right now and is the best one-loss team. I'd rank the teams as follows: 1. Oregon 2. Auburn 3. TCU 4. Boise State 5. LSU 6. Nebraska 7. Wisconsin 8. Michigan State 9. Stanford 10. Utah 11. Ohio State So as you stated NU has been hitting on all cylinders for 1/2 of one game this year and you are going to put them ahead of two teams -- hey NU is your team -- I just dont see it -- run defense is subject, and too many turnovers. Just dont see NU as the top 5 team in the country. But we will see, do think the win the north, a&m is looking better but not there. KU and CU just suck. Do want to see OSU NU rematch. You misunderstood what I said, which is not your fault because the way I wrote it wasn't very clear. When NU executes in both phases of the game simultaneously, we look unbeatable and can hang with Oregon, Auburn, Boise, and TCU, in my opinion. This happened during the Missouri game. I guess you could make the argument it happened against K State and Washington as well, but those teams are so-so. I think Nebraska has played a tougher schedule than either Michigan State or Wisconsin. Michigan State became hyped only because the expectations were low. But they have only one signature win to their credit in Wisconsin. Wisconsin has two quality wins: Ohio State and Iowa. Nebraska has two: The road win over Oklahoma State and the win over Missouri. Like I said, it's a wash. Obviously I can't rank them all the same, so I give Nebraska the slight edge because I think their back-to-back wins over ranked opponents after a disappointing Texas loss speak volumes. But if you insist that Michigan State and Wisconsin go ahead of Nebraska, I won't argue to stringently I guess. Agree that the rushing D and turnovers are concerning.

Not entirely true. The Wildcat is superior for pure downhill, north-south running than the zone-read. This is partially because there is some time lost in the handoff from the QB to the RB. The Wildcat obviously does not have this problem. (This is not to mention the reduced fumble risk; increased fumbles are an unfortunate side effect of the zone-read.) You also effectively swap out the QB for an extra blocker since the QB now takes the place of a WR. Now, you can argue whether the Wildcat's enhanced downhill-running effect is more productive than the misdirection of the zone-read. But I think it's nice to have both in the arsenal. Why? Because speed on defense stops the zone-read. But to be fast, a D must usually give up size, which makes them vulnerable to straight-ahead running. In other words, when one fails to work, the other should deliver.

Utah played nobody---and I mean nobody---until they played TCU and they just got curb stomped hard . . . at home. Prior to TCU, their signature win was a 27-24 OT win over a 5-3 Pittsburgh team. Stanford hasn't played anyone of substance either, with the sole exception of Oregon . . . whom they lost to convincingly. But even Utah and Stanford's schedules are not as bad as Ohio State's. Holy cow is that an atrocious schedule: Marshall (2-6), Miami (6-3, but in ACC), Ohio (7-3, but in MAC), Eastern Michigan (1-8), Illinois (5-4), Indiana (4-5), Wisconsin (8-1), Purdue (4-5), and Minnesota (1-9). The only team of substance there is Wisconsin . . . and they drubbed Ohio State. The rest of those teams read like a who's who of the worst teams in college football. Throw in Washington State and the list would be complete. Oklahoma just lost to A&M, mooting that argument. This leaves only Michigan State and Wisconsin, both of whom I think are quality programs. When Nebraska is firing on all cylinders (basically only seen it in the first half against Mizzou), I will take them over either Michigan State or Wisconsin. Otherwise, I think it's a wash. LSU, to me, is playing good football right now and is the best one-loss team. I'd rank the teams as follows: 1. Oregon 2. Auburn 3. TCU 4. Boise State 5. LSU 6. Nebraska 7. Wisconsin 8. Michigan State 9. Stanford 10. Utah 11. Ohio State

Didn't Burkhead fumble both last week and this week, but NU recovered both? I don't remember him fumbling last week- last fumble I remember was Texas and that was unusual of him. He's a really,really tough kid he dropped a for sure touchdown pass on a wheel route against texas. he is a hell of a player tho. Yeah, that is the one big mistake I can think of. I don't remember him fumbling against Texas; the only fumble I recall is Helu's. But the Burkhead drop was terrible and very uncharacteristic for a guy that is typically money.

Didn't Burkhead fumble both last week and this week, but NU recovered both? I don't remember last week, but I'm not pinning this week's on him. It was a zone-read and Green pulled the ball out of Burkhead's hands. If you watch the replay, Green pulled that ball out LATE. Burkhead must've been like, "WTF?!" when it happened. Can't put that on him, IMO.

Burkhead is reliable as hell. Helu is an exciting back, but will put the ball on the carpet from time to time. Paul cannot be trusted to return any kicks or punts, and should be looked at skeptically on offense in general. Green is an okay game manager, but will never be a star QB at Nebraska. Gomes whiffs on tackles.

He and Henery are tied in my mind as my favorite Huskers. I have loved Burkhead since the Missouri game. He's just such a fighter and has the attitude you wish for every player. If I wasn't afraid of jinxing him, I'd also point out that he hasn't made many, if any, mistakes that I can recall.

Cody is a great kid. He has a lot of heart and is a hard worker, I'm sure. (Wait for it . . . ) BUT, he just doesn't have that "it" factor. You are just nervous with the ball in his hands, moreso than any other player I've ever watched. You just don't expect him to make the big play to win the game. Having said all of that, he did a good job of making a couple of key 3rd down conversions. He didn't fumble, which is huge. Hopefully he accepts his role as a lifetime backup QB and continues to improve so that when and if he has to step in, he's a serviceable QB who can manage the game and handoff to the playmakers. (Looking at you, Burkhead.)

Welcome, HH! As my name might suggest, I, too, follow the Trojans despite being a die-hard Husker fan. (Born and raised in SoCal, Nebraska alum, currently living in SoCal again.) As someone who came to Nebraska totally immersed in USC football, I should warn you that you will be addicted to Nebraska's program and will eventually find USC taking a backseat to Nebraska your mind. To answer your question, it really depends on how Martinez is feeling. Martinez is still relatively inexperienced and could benefit from the reps, so ideally I'd like to see him play at least a half. Even if he was 100%, I'd probably pull him at the half, assuming the game is relatively in hand. If he is really hurting, though, it's probably best to keep him out. It's always so hard to tell how hurt the players really are since Bo keeps such a lid on everything.

I recall hearing that USC had the fourth-ranked offense at the time. In any event, they are now ranked 13th in total offense. That's no joke. The problem with USC is their atrocious D which makes the 2007 Nebraska D look like world beaters. Even so, USC has two losses (Stanford, Washington) by a combined 3 points; the only other loss was getting steam rolled by a quality Oregon squad. Having said all that, I agree that the smart money says Oregon will fold like a lawn chair against a solid D. Fact is, the only Pac-10 team that has actually shown up in a major bowl game in recent history is USC. The other teams are choke artists.

Seriously, if it's not going to be "East/West," I like the "Frontier/Horizon" idea.

Are there not two legendary Big 10 commissioners that we could name it after? For example, Griffith and Reed divisions, in honor of the two commissioners who died in office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference

The two have very different roles, IMO. Helu has a bit of tendency to put it on the carpet, but is the faster back and can turn a miscue by the D into a long, long run. You saw this against Washington, K State, and Mizzou. Rex is more of a short-yardage back. I'd rather see him carry on third and short or out of the goal line. He also has better hands IMO (except for that one horrible drop in the Texas game) and I don't remember him fumbling much if ever. Rex will be a nice compliment to Green next year. Rex will the the thunder to Green's lightning. I think we can use Rex a lot like USC uses Stanley Havili.

The author ignores that we have handed three then-undefeated teams their first losses. LSU and Oklahoma are horribly overrated and have been all season. If this author thinks Texas is so bad, then what big wins does Oklahoma have? A blow out over a horrible FSU team? Meanwhile, our loss to Texas sucks, but we've also beaten two excellent teams in Okie State and Missouri. I don't know why people are giving so much credit to Alabama for losing to South Carolina. IMO, Bama's loss to South Carolina is not that much better than our loss to Texas. Anyone with a brain would see that the Texas loss was an aberration is not at all reflective of this team's potential. I think if we play that game 10 times, Texas might win 3 or 4 of them at the most.

Great story. A very inspiring young man. Unfortunately, Bebee and Ed "I wish we talked more about our feelings" Cunningham are meeting on Wednesday to determine whether Fahie's IMPACT constitutes "targeting" and therefore deserves a one-game suspension.

Hehe...I just watched this about 20 times in a row and smiled the whole time. The one undeniable thing in this whole situation is Osborne frickin' laid Gabbert out. LOVE IT!!! Wow. This angle seals the deal. It could not be more of a clean hit. In fact, I actually lost a little respect for Osborne. He took it easy on Gabbert. I bet if you sent this angle to Ed "You haven't said anything about my hair yet!" Cunningham, he would publicly turn in his testicles and apologize to Nebraska fans and players everywhere.

If the Big XII suspends Osborne, it will be 31-0 Nebraska at the end of the first quarter.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say there will be no suspension of Osborne. Why? The hit was extremely clean and does not suffer from any of the aggravating factors you saw with Martin's hit (leaving his feet, flexing after the hit, laughing on the sideline (regardless of the reason), etc.). If a second Nebraska player is suspended in as many weeks, all the national media will perk up and want to see the tape to decide for themselves. What they'll see is a textbook hit and a fumble that should have---but mysteriously didn't---go to Nebraska. I guarantee it will bring the whole "what's going on with the Big 12 officiating and Nebraska" question into the mainstream. Bebee & Co. will be under a microscope and if they dare lay a questionable call on Nebraska in future games, the conference will never live it down. I think they leave this one alone, for their own sakes.

That is hilarious. Also screenshot (shotted?) it. To the people e-mailing ESPN/ABC, there is no sense in arguing the validity of the hits in question. They are ambiguous, especially Martin's. The point you want to get across is that Cunningham's preaching is unnecessary, excessive, and is alienating not only Husker fans but also any casual football fans who happen to have testicles. The idea that Ed "Does this dress make me look fat?" Cunningham's preaching might alienate viewers will hit home for the execs who have the power to either re-assign him or tell him to STFU. It's all about $$$.

Great point. Someone ought to make a video of that hit, which clearly demonstrates targeting with the crown of the helmet, and hits in which the players are vertically upright and happen to make incidental contact with each others' facemasks (e.g., Osborne's hit), and send it to Ed "I wanna be Jessie's girl" Cunningham.

Overrated.

That is weird. I couldn't hear what happened at the bar. I just assumed that they ruled that Gabbert was down when the ball came out.

You're looking at Oregon and Boise State in the MNC. Should be a good game. I would be pulling hard for Oregon, even though I am a Trojan follower. Can't wait till next year since Boise State and TCU will be in the same conference and Utah will be in the Pac-12. Say goodbye to this "BCS-buster BS." So tired of it.

Is it possible they thought Gabbert might stay down, so they cut to commercial so that Cunningham couldn't drone on and on about the hit like last week? Again, something tells me that ABC/ESPN isn't pleased with Cunninghman.