Cody Green

[huskerjack23]

That's one approach. I'm not sure it's the apprach I would take. Let's say Green wants to play and thinks he should. Bo says no and never puts him into the game. Green transfers to another team and is vocal about the reason he did. Most 4 and 5 star athletes want to come in a play right away. They shy away from Nebraska because the coach won't let true freshmen play. If this scenario plays out, then I believe we all better be prepared to be happy with a lot of 7-5, 8-4 records.

 

Meh. Not every quality athlete is a head case. We're not in the business of recruiting a bunch of Harrison Becks. I'd rather see a Husker team stocked solely with walk-ons who want to be here, want to do what's best for the team, want to learn from their coach, and who go 2-10 than have a bunch of 4- and 5-star prima donnas trying to run the show.

 

 

Whoa.

 

No you wouldn't.

 

Winning might not be everything, but it isn't nothing.

yeah...it's the only thing

[knapplc]

Whoa.

 

No you wouldn't.

 

Winning might not be everything, but it isn't nothing.

Winning is nice, but I'm a big proponent of winning the right way.

[billdozer15]

Whoa.

 

No you wouldn't.

 

Winning might not be everything, but it isn't nothing.

Winning is nice, but I'm a big proponent of winning the right way.

 

I would rather have a team full of LP's and Peter brothers, dominating all the way to the top. Than getting my face beat in every week.

[captain obvious]

Whoa.

 

No you wouldn't.

 

Winning might not be everything, but it isn't nothing.

Winning is nice, but I'm a big proponent of winning the right way.

 

You would rather see a bunch of walk-ons lose ten games a year than bare the grief of a good team being fielded by virtue of standard industry practices? College football is dirty.

[Vince from ShamWOW]

I'd like to think that Green gets a redshirt if at all possible; and just basing this on interviews I've seen/heard, Green does not strike me as a kid who'll go all prima donna on us by giving transfer ultimatums. He's very mature and team oriented. Not to say it couldn't happen, I just don't see it happening.

 

 

Nice post.

[captain obvious]

Whoa.

 

No you wouldn't.

 

Winning might not be everything, but it isn't nothing.

Winning is nice, but I'm a big proponent of winning the right way.

 

I would rather have a team full of LP's and Peter brothers, dominating all the way to the top. Than getting my face beat in every week.

 

Yeah no sh#t. I love Husker tradition and everything, but the program was definitely never wholesome.

[knapplc]

I would rather have a team full of LP's and Peter brothers, dominating all the way to the top. Than getting my face beat in every week.

That would be one of the ways you and I are different.

 

But we're not talking about kids with criminal tendencies. We're talking about kids who want to run the program instead of the coaches.

[billdozer15]

Whoa.

 

No you wouldn't.

 

Winning might not be everything, but it isn't nothing.

Winning is nice, but I'm a big proponent of winning the right way.

 

I would rather have a team full of LP's and Peter brothers, dominating all the way to the top. Than getting my face beat in every week.

 

Yeah no sh#t. I love Husker tradition and everything, but the program was definitely never wholesome.

 

Richie Incognito would have fit in well on that 95 team.

[captain obvious]

I would rather have a team full of LP's and Peter brothers, dominating all the way to the top. Than getting my face beat in every week.

That would be one of the ways you and I are different.

 

But we're not talking about kids with criminal tendencies. We're talking about kids who want to run the program instead of the coaches.

 

I think criminal tendencies can probably be considered just as big of a character flaw as a big ego.

[knapplc]

Winning is nice, but I'm a big proponent of winning the right way.

You would rather see a bunch of walk-ons lose ten games a year than bare the grief of a good team being fielded by virtue of standard industry practices? College football is dirty.

 

Brooke Berringer was dirty? Trev Albers was dirty? Ahman Green was dirty? Come on. One bad apple doesn't spoil the whole bunch. What you're better off saying is that college football isn't immune to the pressures of society.

 

But again, we're talking about the kids running the program rather than the coaches. This is a tangent, and that's not at all what I'm talking about with Junior.

[knapplc]

I think criminal tendencies can probably be considered just as big of a character flaw as a big ego.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you on that one.

[J_2_THA_BONE]

I'd like to see them redshirt Cody, that way after Zac has gone we got a good solid RS Sophomore coming in to start but that's just my thoughts.

[captain obvious]

I think criminal tendencies can probably be considered just as big of a character flaw as a big ego.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you on that one.

 

You done jumped the shark on this one, guy.

[knapplc]

I think criminal tendencies can probably be considered just as big of a character flaw as a big ego.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you on that one.

You done jumped the shark on this one, guy.

Criminal tendencies do not equal big egos. That's a pretty simple equation. Michael Jordan isn't a criminal. Tiger Woods isn't a criminal. There is no study of any kind anywhere that you could point to which shows that successful competitors are prone to committing crimes.

 

Not only have I not jumped the shark, I'm not even skiing. I'm not even wearing a cool leather jacket.

 

But I can turn on jukeboxes with a bump of my fist.

[captain obvious]

I think criminal tendencies can probably be considered just as big of a character flaw as a big ego.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you on that one.

You done jumped the shark on this one, guy.

Criminal tendencies do not equal big egos. That's a pretty simple equation. Michael Jordan isn't a criminal. Tiger Woods isn't a criminal. There is no study of any kind anywhere that you could point to which shows that successful competitors are prone to committing crimes.

 

 

You basically said you'd tolerate a team full of criminals, but anybody with a big ego can hit the road. That's what I was responding to. Either I misinterpreted what you meant, like 4 messages ago, or you are a crazy person.