lets just get one thing straight.

[RedGixxer]

 

 

LOL !

[melscott62]

when you have your starters in with a 30 plus point lead, 69 points on the board, and its the 4th quarter. that is the very definition of running up the score. i'm not getting into if it was right or not. but no one can argue that fact. that is exactly what it is.

 

and I will also put forth this fact. TO never did that. he never had his starters in the 4th quarter.....ever.

 

 

Bull crap on that. When an offense is on the field their job is to score points. Is Mangino supposed to tell his players to just fall down? I don't give a crap if they are the starters, they earned the right to play. I would expect the Nebraska offense to do the same thing if they had the ability. It's not the Jayhawks fault Nebraska is coached by a loser of a defensive coordinator. And if the defense didn't play like crap with their missed tackles and missed assignments, the beatdown wouldn't have been that bad...

 

 

I was unaware the KU only had 22 players on the squad..... my bad.

[HuskerCuse]

when you have your starters in with a 30 plus point lead, 69 points on the board, and its the 4th quarter. that is the very definition of running up the score.

 

and I will also put forth this fact. TO never did that. he never had his starters in the 4th quarter.....ever.

 

I joined just to comment on this thread. You, sir, are soooo wrong in thinking Kansas was running up the score.

 

And who cares if they were, they have every right to because they've gotten the crap kicked out of them for years by Nebraska, and the Big 12 powerhouses.

[Foppa]

I wonder if Cosgrove has discovered just how much of a loser he really is.

 

I wouldn't let him plan a Play-doh party for a clay kiln.

[junior4949]

I have no problem at all with what KU did. How many points did we hand them with the 4 INT's and the fumble? It's not KU's fault that we allowed them to run the score up. We suck hind tit. We have way too many problems right now to spend our time crying and whining about a team running the score up on us.

[Husker8up]

I remember going to an NU/ISU game in 1995 or 1996 I believe and the score was 77-0. Now do you call that not running up the score? That was the case of one of the best football teams ever against a horrible ISU team and defense. Same principle applies today. Also keep in mine how many short fields KU had today....many!

But when the water boy scores the last three touchdowns in that ISU game it really shouldn't be considered running up the score, although KU's waterboy could probably score on coz.

[melscott62]

I remember going to an NU/ISU game in 1995 or 1996 I believe and the score was 77-0. Now do you call that not running up the score? That was the case of one of the best football teams ever against a horrible ISU team and defense. Same principle applies today. Also keep in mine how many short fields KU had today....many!

But when the water boy scores the last three touchdowns in that ISU game it really shouldn't be considered running up the score, although KU's waterboy could probably score on coz.

 

 

which begs the question... is everyone going to be ok with it when we get back to being old nebraska? because we would have beat some of those teams by much more than 100 playing starters that long......so then thats ok, right?

[TrumanBD]

I remember going to an NU/ISU game in 1995 or 1996 I believe and the score was 77-0. Now do you call that not running up the score? That was the case of one of the best football teams ever against a horrible ISU team and defense. Same principle applies today. Also keep in mine how many short fields KU had today....many!

But when the water boy scores the last three touchdowns in that ISU game it really shouldn't be considered running up the score, although KU's waterboy could probably score on coz.

 

 

which begs the question... is everyone going to be ok with it when we get back to being old nebraska? because we would have beat some of those teams by much more than 100 playing starters that long......so then thats ok, right?

 

I'm not denying that some teams (Mizzou included) have run up the score on Nebraska this year, but I think teams like Mizzou and Kansas have done it to make a national statement and get national attention. Not having a tradition of a good team means we often struggle to get noticed by the national media, and running up a big margin on a team like Nebraska at least gets us press, which helps with recruiting. I also think the difference between Nebraska running up the score in the past and teams running it up now has a lot to do with the different dynamic of a passing game versus the power running game Nebraska had. One is obviously better at eating up the clock than the other. Mizzou has gotten into trouble in the past with safe leads that evaporated once we started trying to run the clock down.

[melscott62]

I remember going to an NU/ISU game in 1995 or 1996 I believe and the score was 77-0. Now do you call that not running up the score? That was the case of one of the best football teams ever against a horrible ISU team and defense. Same principle applies today. Also keep in mine how many short fields KU had today....many!

But when the water boy scores the last three touchdowns in that ISU game it really shouldn't be considered running up the score, although KU's waterboy could probably score on coz.

 

 

which begs the question... is everyone going to be ok with it when we get back to being old nebraska? because we would have beat some of those teams by much more than 100 playing starters that long......so then thats ok, right?

 

I'm not denying that some teams (Mizzou included) have run up the score on Nebraska this year, but I think teams like Mizzou and Kansas have done it to make a national statement and get national attention. Not having a tradition of a good team means we often struggle to get noticed by the national media, and running up a big margin on a team like Nebraska at least gets us press, which helps with recruiting. I also think the difference between Nebraska running up the score in the past and teams running it up now has a lot to do with the different dynamic of a passing game versus the power running game Nebraska had. One is obviously better at eating up the clock than the other. Mizzou has gotten into trouble in the past with safe leads that evaporated once we started trying to run the clock down.

 

 

I really didnt think MU ran up the score. they subbed in players and all that. the fake FG was a bit of a slap in the face. but thats it

[Jim Thorpe's Ghost]

I have never seen one poster argue so long and hard on a message board that it was the responsibility of the other team's offense to stop themselves.

[DCHusker]

They have voters to think about...Nebraska was still scoring pretty easily on them. It was the third quarter when they scored the majority of their points. Sitting there at 55-31 in the beginning of the third quarter you have to worry about Nebraska scoring a bunch of points and making it look closer than it really was, since it's a game most voters probably weren't watching.

 

The bottom line is you can't call it running up the score when they don't score a single point after the 11min mark in the 4th quarter.

[melscott62]

I have never seen one poster argue so long and hard on a message board that it was the responsibility of the other team's offense to stop themselves.

 

 

AGAIN I have NEVER said they should stop scoring... never ever ever... if you can find where I said that, please do

I NEVER called it bad. I NEVER said they shouldnt do it. I NEVER said it was unsportsman like. I simply stated that it was running up the score.

 

running up the score: "Running up the score" is a term used in American sports to describe the activity of scoring more points than are necessary to win a game. It is a technique that is mostly used in team sports, such as high school and college American football.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_up_the_score

 

I can not believe how many people have come into this thread and tried to put words in my mouth.

[newenglandhusker]

melscott62, sorry if I missed this because I skimmed most of the posts...but what was your response to the Nebraska Minnesota game? I think in your original post you had said Nebraska never had their starters in in the 4th quarter with a game like that, etc. While it's not always the case it did happen, making your position faulty because you're arguing in absolutes.

 

Do I like the fact KU put up so many points? No. I'm not sure if I would call it running up the score or not. I tend to look at this from the perspective of 'what could Nebraska do to ensure this doesn't happen' which I believe has been pointed out adequately in this thread.

[Laterbeals]

Ill agree that we could have pulled on the reins and held off but we only had 11 pass attempts in the second half and don't forget how gay the bcs is. Mangino knows for us to get into a bcs game we need to beat teams to the best of our ability.

[maryland husker]

Nebraska 84 - Minnesota 13 (1983)

 

 

Nebraska 77 ASU 28 (1995)

 

...and they paid us back the next year by breaking our winning streak.

 

Here are two points to ponder...

 

KU scored more points in one game yesterday than we allowed them to score on us the entire decade of the 80s. They totalled 67 points from 1980 to 1989. As as many times as we opened up a can of whup a@@ on them in the past, they deserved to get as many points against us as our defense would allow - using starters or not. Poor sportsmanship? Maybe. Years of pent up frustration? Definitely

 

KU's shot at a conference title is partially a result of favorable scheduling - and temporary in nature. Who else in the north removes OU, Texas, and TT from their schedule every two years? No one but KU. Enjoy it while it lasts