Jump to content


General cfb Questions for Husker fans from a buckeye


Recommended Posts

Hey Huskers! Happy offseason in the greatest sport there is.  Outside the SEC national championship to snooze through.

 

Let me start by saying I think you guys are some of the greatest fans of any sport.  You dont deserve the product that was on the field.  Not just record, but soul crushingly way in which it went down.  Maybe Scott Frost does but we can save that for another time, lets not ruin the good vibes of the new year.

 

Anyways Id love to get your unfiltered takes on a few things if youve got the time.

 

First, an issue close to me: opt outs.  For the sake of avoiding hot button issues, I will say not talking about opt outs of last season (thank you guys for saving it btw! Clemson game was probably the highlight of my sports viewing life), more talking about bowl opt outs.  I get injuries in what some would view as "meaningless" bowl games happen, but didnt your entire team play its a$$ off for two "meaningless" games once u already lost 7? Would love to know how you guys will treat players opting out once you get back to bowling.

 

What do you guys think of the current big ten divisions, do we need to shake them up again?

 

Should the big ten go to 8 conference games like the SEC?

 

What do you guys think about expanding the playoffs?

 

Are you excited about not playing us every year? I know I am.  You guys are always tougher than your record so its all risk, no reward.  Although ill miss welcoming you great people in the Shoe.

 

Have a great year everyone (except tonight)

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

Divisions: I think they're fine the way they are personally but wouldn't have much of an opinion if they were to shake it up again. I'm just happy that it's east and west instead of leaders and legends 

 

8 conference games: whether conferences play 8 or 9 games I think is less important than uniformity. The sec has a huge advantage only playing 8 games, plus padding the November schedule typically with an FCS team. All conferences need to go to the same # of games

 

Playoff: I'm all for expanding the playoff. This year isn't a great argument for that, but most years there's more than 4 teams that deserve to be there. Ideally I'd choose 8 teams with higher seed getting a home site for both 1st round and semifinal, then neutral site for the natty. I'm not opposed to 12 either but it depends on how it's done.

 The primary issue that needs fixed is the subjectivity of who gets in. They need to do away with the committee entirely and do auto bids based on concrete criteria:

5 power 5 conference champions get in automatically

 Any undefeated group of 5 schools get next spot(s)

 Any leftover spots get filled by highest ranked power 5 schools

 

Us playing: it seems like we play just about every year anyways. Nebraska has definitely not had the easiest strength of schedule much since joining the conference. Compare our schedule with Iowa and it's pretty ridiculous... Of course, we can't complain about that too much because we haven't had winning teams recently anyways, but hopefully that changes soon

 

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

1. The divisions are fine, the west is balanced. The east is top heavy and bad at the bottom. You could try to even them out but good teams are cyclical and who knows maybe Nebraska will be good again someday and it will be more even.

 

2. I think 9 conference games is good. I wouldn’t mind doing an SEC type cream puff weekend later in the year so teams can heal up.

 

3. I am a fan of bigger playoffs. I’m an alum of an FCS team so I like the 24 team format. 
 

4. It sucks when we lose, but I wouldn’t want to avoid OSU just for an inflated win total. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

I guess opting out of one’s final game in prep for NFL tryouts seems logical, assuming a nagging injury or something.   But opting out of playing any game otherwise is grounds for a demotion to the bottom of the depth chart surely.  It’s not fair to the team for a given team member to decide if and when he will play or not.  Imo.  Money or not, you commit to join the team to help the team be successful.  It’s cheating your teammates to not give your best effort.  Taking plays off or games off or not following team rules if not being a good member.  
 

I hope DONU is fully committed to every recruit they welcome in and recruits return that as well.  
Too many recruits join the team for personal and selfish reasons   The commitment they sign is their pledge to the school and their fellow teammates.  Every recruit should be well aware that coaches come and go.  Things happen but the team, program and school remain.  College itself is a means to a better future, financially and otherwise.  It is sad that loyalty and commitment don’t have much value by schools, coaches, players and even fans it appears. But this seems to be the world we live in these days.  Call me nostalgic and old fashioned all you want.   

Link to comment

Mississippi's qb got hurt in their bowl game and luckily its nothing too serious but if he breaks his ankle and is out for his rookie year in the nfl that would cost him in the draft. IMO these athletes give a lot to their university and if the want to skip the final game of their career in order not to jeopardize their draft status that's their call and no big deal. Coaches leave all the time before bowls head coaches included and nobody cries about that. 

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
1 hour ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

I guess opting out of one’s final game in prep for NFL tryouts seems logical, assuming a nagging injury or something.   But opting out of playing any game otherwise is grounds for a demotion to the bottom of the depth chart surely.  It’s not fair to the team for a given team member to decide if and when he will play or not.  Imo.  Money or not, you commit to join the team to help the team be successful.  It’s cheating your teammates to not give your best effort.  Taking plays off or games off or not following team rules if not being a good member.  
 

I hope DONU is fully committed to every recruit they welcome in and recruits return that as well.  
Too many recruits join the team for personal and selfish reasons   The commitment they sign is their pledge to the school and their fellow teammates.  Every recruit should be well aware that coaches come and go.  Things happen but the team, program and school remain.  College itself is a means to a better future, financially and otherwise.  It is sad that loyalty and commitment don’t have much value by schools, coaches, players and even fans it appears. But this seems to be the world we live in these days.  Call me nostalgic and old fashioned all you want.   

Your going to demote a guy to the bottom of the depth chart after his last game on the team???  Boy that will teach him lol.

 

Some of these kids are protecting multi million dollar contracts by opting out of an exhibition that means literally nothing.  Anyone judging them for that is it of touch imo.

 

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Opt outs stink. I get why and while I can understand the players reasoning, in the spirit of sports eliciting competition, it just goes against the grain. When money is involved, I hate how that changes people (and my tv/internet bill lol).

 

Divisions are fine, scheduling is not. I dislike the number of teams in the conference(s) and how crossover games are established, so….

 

The 3-6 year series of playing the same

team gets tiresome. Outside of dismantling our OU rivalry, I thought the B12 scheduling of H/A and then 2-year break was good. something similar would be preferred. 

 

Go back to 8 regular season conference games. Crossover games are used to account for 3-way tie breakers, not as a conference record. To continue the radical opinion, reduce season to 11 regular season games. 12th game is similar division record crossover game (no rematches except title game). 
 

Current conference landscape - 16 team playoff with auto bids for *division* winners. At-large bids for group-of-whatever-conferences and division runner-ups.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, ActualCornHusker said:

Divisions: I think they're fine the way they are personally but wouldn't have much of an opinion if they were to shake it up again. I'm just happy that it's east and west instead of leaders and legends 

 

8 conference games: whether conferences play 8 or 9 games I think is less important than uniformity. The sec has a huge advantage only playing 8 games, plus padding the November schedule typically with an FCS team. All conferences need to go to the same # of games

 

Playoff: I'm all for expanding the playoff. This year isn't a great argument for that, but most years there's more than 4 teams that deserve to be there. Ideally I'd choose 8 teams with higher seed getting a home site for both 1st round and semifinal, then neutral site for the natty. I'm not opposed to 12 either but it depends on how it's done.

 The primary issue that needs fixed is the subjectivity of who gets in. They need to do away with the committee entirely and do auto bids based on concrete criteria:

5 power 5 conference champions get in automatically

 Any undefeated group of 5 schools get next spot(s)

 Any leftover spots get filled by highest ranked power 5 schools

 

 

If there's no committee, which rankings are you using for the bold?

 

 

 

33 minutes ago, Savage Husker said:

Opt outs stink. I get why and while I can understand the players reasoning, in the spirit of sports eliciting competition, it just goes against the grain. When money is involved, I hate how that changes people (and my tv/internet bill lol).

 

Divisions are fine, scheduling is not. I dislike the number of teams in the conference(s) and how crossover games are established, so….

 

The 3-6 year series of playing the same

team gets tiresome. Outside of dismantling our OU rivalry, I thought the B12 scheduling of H/A and then 2-year break was good. something similar would be preferred. 

 

Go back to 8 regular season conference games. Crossover games are used to account for 3-way tie breakers, not as a conference record. To continue the radical opinion, reduce season to 11 regular season games. 12th game is similar division record crossover game (no rematches except title game). 
 

Current conference landscape - 16 team playoff with auto bids for *division* winners. At-large bids for group-of-whatever-conferences and division runner-ups.

If you did just division winners,  would you have opt outs of conference title games? What's the incentive for winning your conference then? No bye in 16 teams, so a home game versus road maybe?

 

 

The SEC playing a different number of conference games and replacing it with an FCS game is such a joke. The B1G, Pac 12 etc have screwed themselves with that.  Free leg up to a conference that needs no extra help.

Link to comment
 
 
5 hours ago, Spartybuck said:

Hey Huskers! Happy offseason in the greatest sport there is.  Outside the SEC national championship to snooze through.

 

Let me start by saying I think you guys are some of the greatest fans of any sport.  You dont deserve the product that was on the field.  Not just record, but soul crushingly way in which it went down.  Maybe Scott Frost does but we can save that for another time, lets not ruin the good vibes of the new year.

 

Anyways Id love to get your unfiltered takes on a few things if youve got the time.

 

First, an issue close to me: opt outs.  For the sake of avoiding hot button issues, I will say not talking about opt outs of last season (thank you guys for saving it btw! Clemson game was probably the highlight of my sports viewing life), more talking about bowl opt outs.  I get injuries in what some would view as "meaningless" bowl games happen, but didnt your entire team play its a$$ off for two "meaningless" games once u already lost 7? Would love to know how you guys will treat players opting out once you get back to bowling.

 

What do you guys think of the current big ten divisions, do we need to shake them up again?

 

Should the big ten go to 8 conference games like the SEC?

 

What do you guys think about expanding the playoffs?

 

Are you excited about not playing us every year? I know I am.  You guys are always tougher than your record so its all risk, no reward.  Although ill miss welcoming you great people in the Shoe.

 

Have a great year everyone (except tonight)

 

As others have said the divisions are fine as they stand. Tweaking them would affect the annual rivalries that the B1G holds dearly. It would help a lot more if Nebraska lived to its potential as a program.

 

I absolutely think the B1G should go to an 8 game conference schedule if it values staying competitive with the SEC. Really no reason to play 9 if the SEC and ACC only play 8 with nothing them making them move off of that.

 

I think the playoffs need to be expanded. How much remains up for debate. If there are going to continually be 2 SEC teams in current format then they need to expand the field some.

 

On one hand I wish we didn't play OSU every year but on the other to be the best you have to beat the best so ultimately it doesn't bother. Its a great way to gauge where you are as a program. Its a little disheartening that some teams in our division seem to avoid you guys most years but it is what it is. However, the Nebraska brand still hold more weight that the schedule makers pair them against the top B1G teams despite Nebraska not holding its end of the bargain.

 

Just my thoughts

Link to comment

What would the Big Ten do?  Move Michigan to the west and put Nebraska in the east?   That way, the power is rebalanced somewhat, putting another strong team in place of a weak one.  Give the Rutgers, Indiana and so on a easy win every year?   
I’m guessing west folks like NU right where they are.   

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, runningblind said:

If you did just division winners,  would you have opt outs of conference title games? What's the incentive for winning your conference then? No bye in 16 teams, so a home game versus road maybe?

 

 

The SEC playing a different number of conference games and replacing it with an FCS game is such a joke. The B1G, Pac 12 etc have screwed themselves with that.  Free leg up to a conference that needs no extra help.

I would imagine there could be opt-outs regardless. I would venture to guess less players would opt out of a CCG knowing there is something on the line yet - not 100% logically sound, but just my hypothesis. Conference winner is for seeding, bragging rights, and/or for love of the game. FCS has no issue with campus games in December, playing a December campus game would give northern teams more parity, too. 
 

I agree about the SEC scheduling being a joke, that would also have to be addressed. With that said, that’s the difference between scheduling to win a championship and scheduling to make money (Delaney’s main quality). The thing is, with championships comes the $$$ and our conference has less titles and contenders to show for it. 

Link to comment
33 minutes ago, Savage Husker said:

I would imagine there could be opt-outs regardless. I would venture to guess less players would opt out of a CCG knowing there is something on the line yet - not 100% logically sound, but just my hypothesis. Conference winner is for seeding, bragging rights, and/or for love of the game. FCS has no issue with campus games in December, playing a December campus game would give northern teams more parity, too. 
 

I agree about the SEC scheduling being a joke, that would also have to be addressed. With that said, that’s the difference between scheduling to win a championship and scheduling to make money (Delaney’s main quality). The thing is, with championships comes the $$$ and our conference has less titles and contenders to show for it. 

Playoff games on campus would be awesome. That would be some kind of atmosphere in Lincoln if it ever happened.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, runningblind said:

If there's no committee, which rankings are you using for the bold?

 

Personally, I'd prefer it to be concrete, something like, power 5 non conf champs with 1 loss, then with 2 losses, etc till they're filled. If you need a tie breaker between 2 teams with the same record, use the tougher ranked SOS.

 

Again, that's just me. That tells teams every single year exactly what they need to do to get in and doesn't leave room for interpretation. But if you must, then use the committee or AP rankings for the other spots

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
15 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Personally, I'd prefer it to be concrete, something like, power 5 non conf champs with 1 loss, then with 2 losses, etc till they're filled. If you need a tie breaker between 2 teams with the same record, use the tougher ranked SOS.

 

Again, that's just me. That tells teams every single year exactly what they need to do to get in and doesn't leave room for interpretation. But if you must, then use the committee or AP rankings for the other spots

I agree with guaranteed spots, that's what I like about the NFL. There is zero doubt what you need to do to qualify. College football has always had so much subjectivity and I dislike that. I was mostly curious on your thoughts for those last few teams really.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
  • Create New...