WhatDoIKnow

The weather forecast I saw does not look good.  Not sure who that favors.  Probably a low scoring game.

Like a volleyball spike going through blockers hands.  Except lower than that. 

I learned that this was pretty much an even matchup between two mediocre  B1G opponents.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I do agree with the posters that said we probably lose this game previous years which is a positive.    

I'm not necessarily against college athletes getting paid by private businesses for the use of their name and likeness.  I'm sure we have volleyball players that could earn some extra money around here.  I'm just not sure Nebraska could compete in the area.

We are a football crazy state with some big boosters, but do you really think we can compete private money-wise with the states of Texas, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Ohio, Michigan and Oklahoma?  You can probably add in South Carolina, Arkansas, Tennessee, Pennsylvania and a few others I'm just not thinking of right now. 

We don't have to split the pie like some of the other states I guess, but I believe we would still be at a $ disadvantage just based on population and alumni base.  A couple posters in this thread have mentioned donating, but I bet there are crazy fans in Alabama and Georgia willing to go into poverty to buy a championship. 

I can see this creating a bigger competitive divide.  Again, I'm not completely against college athletes getting paid by private businesses, I'm just not sure it benefits Nebraska.

ETA:  And I'm just thinking about football.  Could be huge money race in college basketball.

8 hours ago, walksalone said:

soooooo, if they get paid, that means we can expect an NCAA 24???

I wonder if EA will pay every player a flat rate or if it will be tiered based on their previous years performance.  I could see them only including P5 schools and a few others they have deals with.

1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

 

We'll probably get 2 or 3 more Gamedays between tOSU and Wisconsin. Heard ESPN may build a permanent set on the grassy knoll east of the stadium.

I've heard talk of them moving the Game Day headquarters to Lincoln.  Nice central location.  Bad weather and can't travel?  Just stay in Lincoln.  Kind of like Letterman's Top 10 list being based in Lincoln before moving to Wahoo because Lincoln tried to trademark the word "Top". 

8 hours ago, whateveritis1224 said:

Worst part of that review was giving the ball to Illinois. Guess they need to rewrite the rule to say that a clear recovery of a fumble has to happen within a certain amount of seconds after the play has been blown dead. Only ever seen this rule applied to those bang bang plays where a player clearly fumbled but was called down and the other team recovered it either before or as the refs are whistling the play dead.

It must have been in an NFL game I was watching yesterday, but the ref that gave the call on a similar situation said something like, "recovered in the immediate action of the play."  Not sure if those were the exact words but it was something similar.  Illinois did not recover the Martinez fumble "in the immediate action".  Maybe it's not clearing stated in the college football rules.

If one of our players had recovered a kick while out of bounds instead of Illinois we would be applauding it as a smart play.  Sometimes players from other teams make smart plays.  :shrug:

1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I learned there are a lot of people on the Game thread who rarely post on other threads, and most of them hate Nebraska football. 

Those threads are sad, amazing, and entertaining all at the same time.  Fun if you're a reasonable fan/person.  So many WILD swings and overreactions in games like this.

This whole "When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor" exchange is killing me.  Thank you.

The Illinois player touching the ball while he was out of bounds on the kickoff was just a smart play.  I was at a party so couldn't hear what they were saying about it on tv.  I was upset at the time but didn't know the rule.  Sometimes the other team makes smart plays and that was one of them.

I still don't know what happened on the Martinez pass/fumble.  Was there a whistle or not?  If there wasn't why didn't they give Illinois a TD since their player picked it up and ran into the endzone.  If there was, why wasn't it a dead ball?  Again, I couldn't hear what the announcers were saying.

On 9/5/2019 at 10:20 PM, HuskerInLostWages said:

"no I don’t want to do that. I just want to prosecute mo for sending it to me”.  Interesting statement from the victim on the sherrifs report when she was asked if she wanted to persue charges against the alleged rapist(s).

Do you know what page that is on?  ETA:  Nevermind.  Found it.  End of page 39 continuing onto 40.

2 hours ago, CapoValley said:

I wish people would stop saying that this was purposefully vanilla and they were looking towards CU. That probably wasn’t close to being the case considering Osborne used to preach constantly that each individually game was important, no red circles on the calendar, etc. I’m betting Frost adheres to that on some level. 

 

Saturday was probably combination of a team not quite deserving of the hype it’s getting having a bad day. All they can do is learn from it and move on. 

Osborne used to prep a little for Oklahoma each week.  Beating them was that important.  The source of that info is a former defensive player from the early 80s.  The team was good enough to do it back then and the schedule allowed for it.  We are not good enough to do that now.

I agree with your second point, the offense had a bad day.  Things usually aren't as bad as they seem after week 1, or as good.

Do we know if the half-game suspension was for this legal issue or the drug paraphernalia?

Also, how old was Maurice when all of this took place?  Sorry, I'm not clear on all the details.

ETA:  Nevermind.  I found the timeline.

2 hours ago, Undone said:

 

As units and defined by high school recruiting rankings, yeah. I am sure.

 

Wouldn't be surprised if their starting center has a leg up on ours, though.   

We sure do get beat by a lot of teams we beat in recruiting.

I'm starting to come around to the vanilla offensive game plan talk.  I rewatched the first series of (probably scripted) plays and the offense looked great.  Hit TE Stoll a few times for nice gaines, got Spielman and Robinson involved early.  I'm guessing we see more of that in the future.  Did we go back to the TE at all in the 2nd half?

Martinez went down in the first game last year.  He may have been on a short leash as far as what they wanted him to do running the ball in this opener.  He was still able to dance out of some pressure pretty easily.  

Not going to overreact after 1 game, but can't say I wasn't disappointed with Martinez play.  He wasn't making any reads.  He knew he was going to Mo on the INT.  On one of the other earlier near-INTs he had Spielman breaking open to the sideline but tried to force it to his first read.

Felt a lot different after his first game last year.  

Can our offense just punt on first down the next time they see the field?   

I have no problem with someone saying they want Washington to stay because he will help the team win football games.  Or people that say they want him to stay because he is talented and they don't want another team to have him.  I may not agree with those opinions, but I can respect the honesty.

Are people going to stop cheering for the team if he IS removed?

9 minutes ago, Enhance said:

Personally, no. I think it's harsh but honest.

 

If someone thinks he should be kicked off the team, but is going to have little to no problem cheering for him in the fall if he isn't kicked off the team, that's fairly hypocritical. It has an air of trying to sound morally incorruptible while ultimately being the exact opposite.

Posturing sure, but elitist?   

ETA:  And the team is bigger than 1 or even a few players.  You can cheer for a team and hope they do well without necessarily being happy about a few individuals on that team.  (see C. Peter)

20 minutes ago, Enhance said:

 

It boils down to elitist posturing.

Wow.  Do you think that is a little bit of a stretch?

1 hour ago, Enhance said:

I can name you about 20 Huskers from the last 20-25 years who should've never played a down at Nebraska if we're saying what Mo is accused of doing constitutes as low enough character to be removed from the team. And those are just the ones I can name.

 

Absolutely, so can I, but it's not the 90s or even the 00s anymore.

I'm not saying he should go to jail or not play football again.  What I'm saying is that in my opinion IF he is guilty of what he is accused, he should not play football at the University of Nebraska again.  Doesn't matter to me if the legal penalty is only a slap on the wrist.

59 minutes ago, Enhance said:

At the risk of beating a dead horse or feeding a fed horse (sorry PETA)... I don't think there's any substantial reason to hold this opinion, at least not yet. Let's get the low-hanging fruit out of the way first and say this is all alleged. Innocent until proven guilty.

 

Second, legal precedent and the circumstances surrounding what he's accused of doing suggest the very plausible outcome that he would likely only receive probation/diversion if he were to do something like take a plea deal.

 

Lastly, the university has chosen so far to stick with Mo, despite being well within their right to back away from him and provide distance. This suggests they're going to wait and see what the legal system says. If Mo gets what amounts to a minor penalty or slap on the wrist, he will probably be back on the team. The only thing that would likely remove him from the team is if the legal system causes it.

Again, I do not completely disagree with what you're saying.  There are still a lot of IFs.  IF he held onto the video for two years, or obtained it again from someone he knew still had it, that shows some poor character IMO.  He had plenty of time to do the right thing and delete it.  Why would you hold onto a video of your current GF engaged in acts with someone else?  Again, all IFs.

The university can support Washington through the process, and I would hope they would do so.  Even if he does get what amounts to a slap on the wrist, it is my opinion that he shouldn't be a member of the team if he used the video for revenge.  At some point character matters.

All IFs.

8 hours ago, SouthLincoln Husker said:

Funny how new individual see this post of 23 pages and automatically think Washington will not be on the team in 2019.  Let's forget about court and throw him in jail.  There is no way he may be innocent.

I agree with part of what you are saying.  It's a different story if he did not send the video after holding onto it for two years.

I said nothing about throwing him in jail.  There is a huge gap between being in jail and not being a member of the football team. 

1 hour ago, Husker03 said:

Yes. 

Thanks.

ETA:  I will be surprised if he is a member of the football team in 2019.

I have not been following this story that closely.  Can someone please verify this very basic timeline? 

The video was originally sent out to many people in 2016?

In 2018 Washington sent the video to the female involved?