Yoo-hoo... huskerlaw...!

[Zomby Woof]

What was that you were saying last week? :P :evilgrin:

You all never really had a chance. ;-)

[GOPisEvil]

1. Is it me? Am I crazy? Do I not understand football?

If you're the coach of a team, should you not call plays that generally attempt to maximize your team's chance at winning the game? Seems Mr. Callahan was coaching not to get blown out instead of to win. Well, it worked. Sort of.

But what do I know? My team needed a last-second goal-line stand to beat Army (!!!!). (Speaking of overrated coaches. :eyes:)

[huskerlaw]

3. Don't get me started!

It was like Callahan was being controlled by the ghost of Frank Solich (yes, I know he's not dead, but he coaches at Ohio now, so he might as well be).

The play-calling was VERY atypical. And I'm sure HuskerNation is a very unhappy lot this morning.

[GOPisEvil]

4. Yeah, nothing like calling plays to protect a lead you don't have.

Do you think we can start marketing the A&M/Nebraska game as "The Hot Seat Bowl"?

[huskerlaw]

5. Naw...Callahan's not going anywhere

in fact, this may work FOR him, in a way. Now people will be begging him to use the West Coast offense instead of whining and waxing nostalgic for the golden days of the running game.

[GOPisEvil]

8. Interestingly, even though I don't think A&M is that good of a team...

...there's a good chance we could be 9-1 or 8-2 by the time Nov. 11th rolls around. To say our schedule is soft is a bit of an understatement.

[huskerlaw]

15. Damn, it must be!

Are you playing South Texas State College for Girls 9 times?

...or is it Colorado? (oh...snap!)

:P

[GOPisEvil]

16. OK, here's the rest of schedule...

9/23 - LA Tech
9/30 - TX Tech (since this is a home game, I think we can win this one)
10/7 - @ Kansas (if this were basketball, I'd be more worried, but KU is getting better; a loss wouldn't shock me)
10/14 - Misery (thank goodness Brad Smith finally graduated)
10/21 - @ Okie State (who knows?)
10/28 - @ Baylor (these used to be automatic wins, but nowadays...)
11/4 - OU (now things get serious, but the game is at home...)
11/11 - :)
11/28 - Our annual loss to Texas :eyes:

I'd love to feel confident about those games in October, but with Fran as your coach...

Oh, and as for Colorado: :rofl: Why can't they be on the schedule THIS year?

[huskerlaw]

19. Ours looks like this:

9/23 - Troy (in Lincoln, no problem) 3-1
9/30 - Kansas (in Lincoln, no problem) 4-1
10/7 - Iowa State (in Ames, which makes me nervous, but they lost to Iowa, so I'm not worried) 5-1
10/14 - Kansas State (in Manhattan, again nervous...I hate those road games, but we if we lose this, it's our own damn fault) 6-1
10/21 - Texas (in Lincoln, this one will be sporting. Too close to call.) 7-1 or 6-2
10/28 - Oklahoma State (damn away games, but I think we're fine) 8-1 or 7-2
11/4 - Missouri (homecoming, no problem) 9-1 or 8-2
11/11 - :) 10-1 or 9-2 ;)
11/24 - Colorado (hahah, uh, please.) 11-1 or 10-2

Not a bad year, overall. Unless we shoot ourselves in the foot, which is possible.

[GOPisEvil]

30. Well, just to be sporting, we should place a wager on that 11/11 game.

Loser buys @ Tommy's or something.

[mduffy31]

10. The unhappiness of Huskernation is nothing compared to...

...the pain of the Notre Dame nation this morning.

[huskerlaw]

13. That's no lie...

I actually heard that on the walk back to the car last night... "Well, that sucked." "Yeah, but it could have been worse. Could've been like Notre Dame..." "True dat."

[huskerlaw]

14. Dupe

Sorry. Stupid internets.

[huskerlaw]

2. Only a UCLA fan

would think that 28-10 meant we never really had a chance. :eyes:

Frankly, I don't think either team will be looking back at game film from last night with any sort of pride.

(meanwhile, USC fans SUCK!)

[nini]

7. well, you can't spell SUCKS without U.S.C

:-)

a Bruin fan here. :P


However, while it pains me to defend USC. they were pretty much in control all night. Certainly, it wasn't a blowout - like Notre Dame getting spanked haha -- but I don't think there was a way they were going to lose either. They are simply a better team all around - especially on defense.


Sorry it didn't turn out the way you wished.

[huskerlaw]

11. Honestly,

both teams were playing on a wing and a prayer last night. Neither of us looked very good, imo. USC got daaaaaym lucky a couple of times. Nebraska was daaaaaaym unlucky a couple of times.

The thing is, USC's defense looked good because Nebraska's play calling was atrocious. Any asshole can block a run up the middle, particularly when it's the only play being called. We did actually get yardage when we FINALLY changed it up a little.

Meanwhile, Nebraska's secondary is for shit. We know this. And yet, USC didn't much capitalize on it. Makes me wonder how good 'da Booty really is.

Had our play calling been better, it certainly could have been an entirely different game. Nebraska winning? Probably not. Never really thought we would, but it certainly could have been much, much closer.

[nini]

17. Booty's stats

"John David Booty was 25-for-36 for 257 with no interceptions and three touchdown passes for USC " uh.. that sounds like he capatilized a bit. Not so bad for his second start.

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/recap;_ylt=AiT2XYNV6YT8C_azW_uAF3wcvrYF?gid=200609160062

It is true, USC is not as sharp as last year's crew on offense. However, the season is new and they have to gel. Both teams played like teams that are getting used to new teammates etc. The game was pretty much what was expected this early in the season.

[huskerlaw]

18. Stats are fine, but

it didn't LOOK pretty...and the USC fans agreed with me. :shrug:

And, more importantly, all those yards only equaled 28 points. You can run or pass up and down the field all day, but if you can't score, stats don't matter.

[Zomby Woof]

21. That is because Trojan fans have a similar sense ..

...of win entitlement. Which is why ultimately I favor the liberal UCLA over the private school snobbery of USC.

Who cares how many points the stats equalled? They obviously passed and ran up and down the field more times than the corn-fed team. The Win column doesn't care about the margin of victory. All wins are equal. :7

[huskerlaw]

23. The win column doesn't

care about points, but the BCS poll does.

Oh, right. UCLA doesn't have to worry about that one...

[Zomby Woof]

24. UCLA cares more about hoops

Besides, no one here ever made a claim that UCLA should be ranked. :shrug: Bringing up a team that didn't play last night is the kind of non sequitir fallacy I expect in GD. ;-)

But having said that, USC is a lock for #2 this week. Nebraska will be lucky if they stay ranked in the Top 20. :P

[huskerlaw]

25. Best to keep it that way...

UCLA (and their fans...cough...) need to stick to basketball. ;) Trust me, come basketball season, you won't be hearing the word "Husker" come out of my mouth. Unless it's discussing how truly badly we SUCK. I've long ago accepted our suck-itude in basketball.

I hope USC does get #2 this week. I'm not entirely convinced they earned it, but hey. I'd rather have lost to the #2 team than anything lower. Plus, if they can beat us by that slim a margin and still move up, that means the pollsters don't think we suck too bad.

I'm not concerned about staying in the top 20. It's early. We started out at 21, there's no shame in that. We've got some decent teams left on our schedule, we can easily move up. Besides, nobody ever claimed we were in the running for the national championship. We're still rebuilding, we know that. Our goal is a BCS bowl game and we're still well on course to get it. No worries.

[Zomby Woof]

27. 18 points is a slim margin?

I would hold that definition to single-digit deficits. :D

We're on our way to Costco... can we get you anything? :hi:

[huskerlaw]

28. It is when

the team you beat might as well not have brought the offense for the first half.

Ooooh...Costco! How about a flat screen TV and a digital camera? ;)


:hi:

[Zomby Woof]

20. You all couldn't get into the end zone until the 4th

And even then, you had to claw and scrape your way into it. The domination by the #4 team over the #19 team was about on par.

Just from an objective point, the Trojans dominated and controlled the game. Like I said last week, running up the score is fascist, and the PAC-10 is just not as fascist as red state teams.

And using terms like "HuskerNation" is the kind of entitled, obnoxious tripe that makes it a pleasure to mock teams when they lose. ;-)

The Notre Dame loss was more gratifying though. They were by far the most overrated team in the Top 10. Their fans make the Husker fans look humble and meek. But thank baby jebus they don't call themselves "FightingIrishNation". :P

[huskerlaw]

22. That's the thing though..

28-10 does not "domination" make.

Domination comes only when the team you're playing is trying everything in their arsenal and they still can't get anywhere. If the team you're playing is only running one play, stopping them doesn't make you dominant, it makes them stupid for not changing up the play. This is evidenced by the fact that when we actually did use more than one play, we got into scoring position. The clawing and scraping you discuss was because we went BACK to the aforementioned one play. Like the stupid fuck play callers we were.

Similarly, if your offense is "dominating," you score more than 28 points. Now, I don't expect a UCLA fan to understand this, but teams who dominate score well over 40 points against teams to which they are superior. You know, like how many points most teams score when they play UCLA...

As for HuskerNation...don't be a hater just because both UCLA football fans can't come up with a catchy name to call themselves. If you'd ever been to a Husker game, you would understand that we are, in fact, like a nation. Deal with it.

I don't blame you for thinking that scoring 28 points should be considered "controlling" and "dominating"...after all, if UCLA had done it, the Earth would be spinning the wrong way on its axis. Also, having one good team does not a decent conference make. PAC-10 sucks. Always has, always will.

I will agree with you on the happiness of the Notre Dame loss. They weren't the most overrated team in the Big 10 though, they were the most overrated team PERIOD. As they are every year. But, like every other year, they quickly proved that their rating was unearned. A happy, and yet unsurprising moment.

:P

[Zomby Woof]

26. Having seen Riefenstahl films...

... I do understand what a fanatical "let's all act and dress in unison" fan base acts like. :scared: It IS like a nation, but not one I would want to be a part of! Besides, when your team nickname is the "Cornhuskers", I would be scrambling for an alternative to take my mind off of that too. :D Again, the Bruins did not play last night, so nice job trying to deflect from your LOSS. You are showing your law school creds there. ;-)

You can rationalize your frustration all you like, but you LOST. Period. No amount of rebuttals by you changes that elemental fact.

As for the PAC-10, Oregon beat Oklahoma, and the rest of the conference, save Stanford, went unbeaten yesterday. :D

[huskerlaw]

29. I haven't claimed

that we didn't lose, dear ZW. We did lose. But we were NOT dominated. In fact, for the most part, we beat ourselves.

I didn't claim that USC wasn't the better team. I didn't claim we were robbed of a win. In fact, our loss was nobody's fault but our own. And I never said otherwise.

[Capn Sunshine]

6. Post-game Pic of Omaha

I'm just sayin'.......

[nini]

9. Hey there

:hi: Good to see you.

[huskerlaw]

12. Who are you kidding?

Omaha looks like that all the time!

:P