I think I'm gonna' be sick...

[TrueMizzou]

I hope like hell that OU smokes Missery's a$$ in the Big XII Championship game if they get there. All of the sudden Missery is an all-conference championship team when they haven't won anything yet? History is the all telling sign of a program and two good years doesn't show me that this is a good program. We'll be back so enjoy your time in the spotlight while you can Missery. I'll guarantee when we do come back we are going to run the score even higher on Missery and a few others than we ever did before. No disrespect to our resident Missouri fans, but this is ridiculous.

 

Re-read your own post and then look up the term "sportsmanship" and see how things line up.

 

Missouri is not our enemy. They are a neighboring state with fine people, fine fans, a very good University (just like NU) who happens to have a much better football program than us right now. Missouri did not run up the score against us. They held back --- they easily could have hit 70 pts on us. They showed some restraint. Thankfully --- I am not so sure that TTech will be so kind.

 

If ever NU gets to the point where they are superior to MU and can run it up on them I hope that they do not.

 

This notion that anyone who beats NU is evil is just wrong. Were we evil when we were beating everyone? When we used to pound the others were they somehow Ok but now they have degraded into bad guys just because their football program is currently superior to ours? Now that everyone is beating us, are all these other guys all of a sudden evil?

 

As for when Missouri plays Oklahoma --- I'll pull for Missouri, why not, their fans have never (I don't think anyway) had a championship before and OU has had tons --- so if it can't be us then why not Missouri or some other program that has not had the privilege of being on top before.

 

A tip of the hat to you sir...

[junior4949]

If our offense would just commit to something when it is proven to be effective after 1 or 2 drives, I think we could beat Kansas. They are not that good. It will be interesting to see where we go from here.

 

 

Where we go from here will depend upon team psyche --- if TTech beats us by 5 touchdowns or more, we are in trouble the reat of the way out. If the fans abandon them, if the stands clear out, the papers malign them, the boards jackslap them, and they hear boos then things will be much worse than they would be otherwise. Thus, it is important to stand behind these kids.

 

It is true that NU is very talent challenged --- but not so much so as to be an absolute doormat that can't in any way compete. It is more a talent problem that is a exacerbated by a team psyche --- the losing has them really down and w/o confidence. They need to get their head in the game an pull out 3 more victories this season --- they can do it. But they will not if the psyche gets more damaged. This game with Tech is important --- depending upon how bad we get beat, we can be Ok or beaten into oblivion and sent back into the dark ages. Lets hope we keep this within 21 points or less. NU cannot afford a major blow-out. If that happens, then seeing three more wins this season will be really, really unlikely.

 

I don't know if anyone else is getting sick and tired of hearing about all this talent challenged crap, but I know I sure am. Define talent challenged. Joel Wilks was a starting lineman in the NC days. This was before KState had really even come to their own. They didn't even want him according to his dad. The Mackovicka brothers were walk-ons meaning that big name schools must not have wanted them either. Jared Tomich was a friggin walk-on. Scott Shanle, another walk-on. During our 3 NC in 4 years run, we had a lot of players that were either walk-ons or were not heavily recruited by any other D1 schools. Even Brook Berringer though on scholly wasn't sought after by any D1 school for football, not even KU or KSU. TO and staff made a living taking unwanted players and molding them into something great. This is the problem with us today. Being talent deprived has absolutely zero, zilch, nada to do with it.

 

To say that talent has nothing to do with the problems at NU is absurd. Beyond absurd. It has a great deal to do with it. In the callihan era so too did bad coaching. And poor conditioning. And then the cumulative weight of losing and losing bad in terms of a poor team psyche. All are contributors.

 

Drawing from the Osborne days as a reference is only of modest value. That was then and this is now. Osborne had athletes at a level that was above all but the top 10 or so programs at the time --- and performed better than the talent level with great --- beyond great conditioning -- and a great system that few could contend with (even those with better athletes). Also the Big 8 was a week in week out cake walk then compared to the Big 12 now.

 

Now, we have talent that is top 35 or so (perhaps top 40) and in our conference alone there are 5 teams, maybe 6 that are better. DOes that matter? Yes it does. It is not everything. We also still have modest conditioning. And the psyche of the players is quite damaged (and do not under-estimate the role of team psyche --- as an ex-coach I can assure you that team psyche plays a huge role).

 

But to assert that our talent deficit relative to the Missouri, TTech, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and maybe even Kansas and Colorado (these two may be comparible in talent to NU) --- to assert that this is neither real nor meaningful is crazy.

 

 

 

The Big 8 was weak? Year in and year out, there was always one other contender besides NU. For a long time, it was OU. In the latter years of the Big 8 it was CU. We've over the past 4 years been recruiting players that other top 25 teams wanted. TO didn't have that many players on his team that anyone wanted. We've had so many walk-ons become bigtime playmakers, that it's absurd to think talent is our biggest problem. How highly sought after was Crouch? Yet, he went on to win the hypseman. Frazier was really only heavily sought after by Notre Dumb and us. Most of the time, nobody had ever even heard of any of our receivers. Our OL was developed, not recruited for the most part. I don't remember the Zatecka(sp) brothers receiving 4 stars and accolades coming out of Lincoln. Terry Conneally might have received a scholly offer from Wyoming or CSU. It would be pointless for me to list all of the players that became great players that went unrecruited by other teams.

 

Top to bottom, we probably have better talent on this year's team than we did at any time from 1986-1990. I don't think things have really changed much from TO's era to now. What worked then still works today. Great conditioning then carries just as much weight as great conditioning now. With scholly limits, conditioning now actually carries more weight than back in TO's day. I don't ever remember TO having many/any top 10 recruiting classes, so there were several programs with better talent.

 

What this team has that TO teams didn't have for the most part is being undisciplined. TO's teams didn't make stupid personal fouls. They didn't get several delay of games or false starts. We're one of the most penalized teams in all of D1. We can't run the ball because nearly every play one OL has a brainfart. TO's OL was typically always on the same page. They knew who they were blocking each and everytime they lined up over the ball. On defense, it's really the same story. Our DB's and LB's have missed so many assignments that if I had a dollar for each time they do I'd be able to retire for a year. These are the real problems, not talent.

[clone]

ISU almost beat KU which if ISU would have been a second half team they would have won..

 

 

almost-- never counts. KU came back from a three score deficit ON THE ROAD.

 

That says something to me about their character as a team.

 

BTW... I never wrote this team off....

 

every game is winnable

 

they were merely predictions made last january. predictions = guesses.

 

just what I expected of a 5-7 team with a rookie HC and new staff.

 

opinions vary

 

BEAT TT!!

[zE bOp]

Agree ttly w robsker's posts 22-23.

Look, like every GBR devotee I am hugely bummed about the MO game, but I am not going to escape into some blame game or remeniscence of past greatness or projection of future glory. BIG

RED GOTS ISSUES FOLKS! The most pressing, as per the 1st 5 games, is that the O-line can't run block and that our pass coverage is like a very very very leaky faucet--the leakiest of faucets!

We've looked like a decent team except vs MO. So I dunno how it's gonna play out from here...

[cmb23]

There are no gimmies whatsoever left on this schedule. If you believe that you are blind. Or if you say you believe that, then you don't believe your own "Any given Satruday....That's why we play the game" you've been muttering going into the past couple of games.

 

The only ones I would have considered gimmies before the past couple of weeks would have been ISU and Baylor. ISU showed that they could hang with KU (even if KU may be overrated for who they are right now). Baylor has one of the best athletes at QB that nobody has seen or heard of. He is going to keep the defense on their toes.

 

I don't recall saying (typing...whatever) anything about "Any given Saturday...", but as a stated above the KSU game is "close" to a gimme. But just to be clear...I don't consider that game a gimme either...

 

I do think it MAY be the only game in which we are favored the rest of the way...

 

And while I DO wear glasses...I AM NOT blind... Well...unless you ask my wife...

 

I wasn't saying 'YOU' in particular. I'm referring to the 'You's' that give Nebraska the benefit of the doubt at winning against a Missouri, but then turn around and say "There's no way we lose to KSU".

[clone]

The Big 8 was weak?

 

uh...

 

yes. it was.

 

It was often referred to as the big2 and little 6.

 

Year in and year out, there was always one other contender besides NU.

 

you are right, typically there were two good teams. That meant there were SIX bad ones.

 

get it?

 

weak conference.

 

 

BEAT TT!!

[junior4949]

In 90 & 91, CU was playing for a NC. In 93, 94, and 95 NU was playing for a NC. Last year, which Big 12 team played for a NC? Before the Big 12 was formed in 96, the Big 8 won or shared the NC 3 out of 5 years in the 90's. No, I wouldn't call it a weak conference. I would call it the conference of the NC. Since the inception of the Big 12, only three times has a Big 12 team won or shared the NC in the past decade. The Big 8 was weak through the 80's after Switzer derailed the stage coach, but the 5 or 6 years prior to the end of the Big 8 it was pretty stout. get it?

[huskered17]

The Big 8 was weak?

 

uh...

 

yes. it was.

 

It was often referred to as the big2 and little 6.

 

Year in and year out, there was always one other contender besides NU.

 

you are right, typically there were two good teams. That meant there were SIX bad ones.

 

get it?

 

weak conference.

 

 

BEAT TT!!

 

 

And the Big Ten was the big-2 and the little 8, whats your point. SWC only had Texas and Ark, Pac Ten was USC and UCLA, and the SEC had Ala and maybe every 3 or 4 years LSU or Aub. The big-8 was just as good as any conference in the Nation. Ever see any of them have the top 3 teams in the nation, at season's end.

 

GBR!!!

[junior4949]

Don't worry, we just don't "get it".