Why Michigan would have beaten the 1997 Nebraska team...

[vs540husker]

Michigan failed to score 40 points the entire season. Nebraska scored 40+ 8 times that season, yet Michigan is going to shut down and stop the #1 rush offense and #1 scoring offense and somehow score points on Nebraska's top 5 defense?? Michigan defense was great, but it was best at stopping the pass, #1 in fact, too bad you weren't going to go up against a passing team if you faced Nebraska.
Lets also not forget the fact, Michigan needed the ref's to literally run off the field while Washington State was driving, to preserve the win for Michigan.
I also don't care about common opponents because the transitive property doesn't apply in football. Colorado literally basing its entire season around Nebraska, makes a little bit of a difference compared to Colorado facing Michigan. Just like Michigan playing against Ohio State mattered more to them than their closest game of the year, Iowa.

Nebraska:
#1 offense
#1 rush offense
#1 scoring offense
#5 defense
#3 rush defense
#12 scoring defense
#28 pass defense
Nebraska also had better net punting, better punt return and better kick return stats than Michigan.

Michigan:
44th offense
28th rush offense
44th scoring offense
63rd passing offense
(that mediocre offense would have literally been lucking to score 10 points, if that)
#1 defense
#1 scoring defense
#1 pass defense
#7 rush defense
Defense is what Michigan survived on, but they also only faced 1 top 20 offense, while Nebraska faced 4 top 20 offenses.


I'd argue Kansas State was a better team than Michigan in 97' the problem for them was that they had to go up against Nebraska and their only loss on the season was Nebraska, 56-26. K-state had a a top 5 defense and top 15 offense, but that didn't help them one bit against Nebraska, just like with weeks to prepare and for Osborne's last game, Michigan would have gotten pounded even worse than a Peyton Manning led 3rd ranked Tennessee.

 

[F5Tornado]

Michigan failed to score 40 points the entire season. Nebraska scored 40+ 8 times that season, yet Michigan is going to shut down and stop the #1 rush offense and #1 scoring offense and somehow score points on Nebraska's top 5 defense?? Michigan defense was great, but it was best at stopping the pass, #1 in fact, too bad you weren't going to go up against a passing team if you faced Nebraska.
Lets also not forget the fact, Michigan needed the ref's to literally run off the field while Washington State was driving, to preserve the win for Michigan.
I also don't care about common opponents because the transitive property doesn't apply in football. Colorado literally basing its entire season around Nebraska, makes a little bit of a difference compared to Colorado facing Michigan. Just like Michigan playing against Ohio State mattered more to them than their closest game of the year, Iowa.

Nebraska:
#1 offense
#1 rush offense
#1 scoring offense
#5 defense
#3 rush defense
#12 scoring defense
#28 pass defense
Nebraska also had better net punting, better punt return and better kick return stats than Michigan.

Michigan:
44th offense
28th rush offense
44th scoring offense
63rd passing offense
(that mediocre offense would have literally been lucking to score 10 points, if that)
#1 defense
#1 scoring defense
#1 pass defense
#7 rush defense
Defense is what Michigan survived on, but they also only faced 1 top 20 offense, while Nebraska faced 4 top 20 offenses.


I'd argue Kansas State was a better team than Michigan in 97' the problem for them was that they had to go up against Nebraska and their only loss on the season was Nebraska, 56-26. K-state had a a top 5 defense and top 15 offense, but that didn't help them one bit against Nebraska, just like with weeks to prepare and for Osborne's last game, Michigan would have gotten pounded even worse than a Peyton Manning led 3rd ranked Tennessee.

WINNER!

 

[Hail Michigan 1965]

Michigan failed to score 40 points the entire season. Nebraska scored 40+ 8 times that season, yet Michigan is going to shut down and stop the #1 rush offense and #1 scoring offense and somehow score points on Nebraska's top 5 defense?? Michigan defense was great, but it was best at stopping the pass, #1 in fact, too bad you weren't going to go up against a passing team if you faced Nebraska.
Lets also not forget the fact, Michigan needed the ref's to literally run off the field while Washington State was driving, to preserve the win for Michigan.
I also don't care about common opponents because the transitive property doesn't apply in football. Colorado literally basing its entire season around Nebraska, makes a little bit of a difference compared to Colorado facing Michigan. Just like Michigan playing against Ohio State mattered more to them than their closest game of the year, Iowa.

Nebraska:
#1 offense
#1 rush offense
#1 scoring offense
#5 defense
#3 rush defense
#12 scoring defense
#28 pass defense
Nebraska also had better net punting, better punt return and better kick return stats than Michigan.

Michigan:
44th offense
28th rush offense
44th scoring offense
63rd passing offense
(that mediocre offense would have literally been lucking to score 10 points, if that)
#1 defense
#1 scoring defense
#1 pass defense
#7 rush defense
Defense is what Michigan survived on, but they also only faced 1 top 20 offense, while Nebraska faced 4 top 20 offenses.


I'd argue Kansas State was a better team than Michigan in 97' the problem for them was that they had to go up against Nebraska and their only loss on the season was Nebraska, 56-26. K-state had a a top 5 defense and top 15 offense, but that didn't help them one bit against Nebraska, just like with weeks to prepare and for Osborne's last game, Michigan would have gotten pounded even worse than a Peyton Manning led 3rd ranked Tennessee.

What a bunch of crap! Nebraska was damn lucky to escape Missouri with the miracle deflection in the end zone.

Go ahead in love in your fantasy world but yes, you do look at common opponents and it is clear Michigam would have beaten Nebraska if the two teams met up. Ask Colorado and Baylor who the better team was and they both say Michigan.

 

[Hail Michigan 1965]

WINNER!

Loser!

 

[frankluv]

Big Red all the way!!!!!

 

[scarletred]

What a bunch of crap! Nebraska was damn lucky to escape Missouri with the miracle deflection in the end zone.

Go ahead in love in your fantasy world but yes, you do look at common opponents and it is clear Michigam would have beaten Nebraska if the two teams met up. Ask Colorado and Baylor who the better team was and they both say Michigan.

Ask Vegas, they had Nebraska as the favorite if the game were to be played...

 

[F5Tornado]

Loser!

Says the loser coming on a Nebraska site and being an idiot. Typical Michigan dipstick. Deal with it, your team dodged a major bullet by not having to play Nebraska, so you didn't have to see Nebraska kick your teams ass up to its ears. Pound sand, loser.

 

[Hastings4Huskers]

What a bunch of crap! Nebraska was damn lucky to escape Missouri with the miracle deflection in the end zone.

Go ahead in love in your fantasy world but yes, you do look at common opponents and it is clear Michigam would have beaten Nebraska if the two teams met up. Ask Colorado and Baylor who the better team was and they both say Michigan.

Idiot not even close look at the stats. In that game NU by at least 3 touchdowns. Coaching hands down goes to NU let alone how the units stack up against each other.

 

[Hawkeye_311]

If Phillip Fulmer doesn't vote Michigan like 5th or 6th in the coaches poll Michigan might have won it outright. Nebraska also had to escape Missouri on a lucky play that year. Iowa also led Michigan 21-7 at the half in Ann Arbor that year and lost 28-24.

 

[SOHusker11]

If Phillip Fulmer doesn't vote Michigan like 5th or 6th in the coaches poll Michigan might have won it outright. Nebraska also had to escape Missouri on a lucky play that year. Iowa also led Michigan 21-7 at the half in Ann Arbor that year and lost 28-24.

Wtf does retread iowa have to do with this? Go away.

 

[scarletred]

If Phillip Fulmer doesn't vote Michigan like 5th or 6th in the coaches poll Michigan might have won it outright. Nebraska also had to escape Missouri on a lucky play that year. Iowa also led Michigan 21-7 at the half in Ann Arbor that year and lost 28-24.

And if the Big 10 wouldn’t have thought playing in the Rose Bowl was more important than winning the national championship, Michigan would have had to prove it in Miami in the Orange Bowl..

 

[Hail Michigan 1965]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

 

[donahues17]

How can someone who knows anything about college football not understand the fact of NU and CU being hated rivals. That there helps explain the score of that game.

 

[saluno22]

What a bunch of crap! Nebraska was damn lucky to escape Missouri with the miracle deflection in the end zone.

Go ahead in love in your fantasy world but yes, you do look at common opponents and it is clear Michigam would have beaten Nebraska if the two teams met up. Ask Colorado and Baylor who the better team was and they both say Michigan.

You would think an undisputed national champion wouldn't be ranked by 4th by Sagarin (Nebraska #1) and 6th in S&P+ (Nebraska #2 behind FSU, like others point out were a juggernaut that year who lost narrowly late on the road to UF). Not sure what Congrove is, but Nebraska is #1 in that with Michigan #2. tJHowell.net lists Nebraska #1 and Michigan #2 .

Those are results #2, #4, #6, and #8 in a Google search for "1997 college football computer rankings". Other first-page results are as follows:
#1: Wikipedia with just the AP and Coaches polls
#3: NY Times preseason rankings with graduation rates
#5: Football Outsiders with a list of the top 100 teams over the last 100 years
#7: Whatever the heck this site is with AP and Coaches polls
#9: This SB Nation Alabama site talks about how the BCS is calculated
#10: Deadspin Michigan better than Nebraska for the 1997 season based on conjecture

A few other things...
- You do realize any time people say that the 2005 Alamo Bowl determined the 1997 national champion, they're just dicking around because you came here looking for a fight and that will piss you off, right?
- You're coming to a Nebraska board to tell us that we suck not now (which we do), but 21 years ago and should bow down to you. You're acting like a dick.
- Michigan and the Big Ten chose not to partake in the Bowl Alliance and induced a split title in 1997, just like Penn State and the Big Ten chose not to be party to the Bowl Coalition and caused Penn State to be denied any major national title honor in 1994.

 

[F5Tornado]

If Phillip Fulmer doesn't vote Michigan like 5th or 6th in the coaches poll Michigan might have won it outright. Nebraska also had to escape Missouri on a lucky play that year. Iowa also led Michigan 21-7 at the half in Ann Arbor that year and lost 28-24.

Iowa lost to Michigan because they sucked.

 

[Hail Michigan 1965]

And if the Big 10 wouldn’t have thought playing in the Rose Bowl was more important than winning the national championship, Michigan would have had to prove it in Miami in the Orange Bowl..

That was the system at the time and Michigan was the Big Ten champion who goes to the Rose Bowl. The BCS started in 1998.

 

[Gimmered]

Nebraska has faced Michigan 4 times since that season in what has been a dark time in their history and still has managed to beat them 3 out of the 4.
Woodson would have been the top Cornerback in the nation laying flat on his back getting steamrolled by the Husker ground game.

 

[PeliniTheCrutch]

The Alamo Bowl had none of the 1997 players in the game. The 2005 Alamo bowl means nothing about the 1997 teams.

See this is seriously what we’re dealing with in this argument...

 

[scarletred]

That was the system at the time and Michigan was the Big Ten champion who goes to the Rose Bowl. The BCS started in 1998.

It was at the time called the alliance.. Only the Big 10 and PAC 10 chose not to participate and play for the National title they elected too go to the Rose bowl..

 

[husker2612]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

Unless you are UCF, then you can just say you are National Champions and it must be so.

 

[F5Tornado]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

The guy hated Nebraska, like most cu players of his era. You're reaching big time with that garbage. He was 1-3 vs Nebraska as a player, but once a buff, always a buff and Nebraska hater. And when the hell did Embree ever play Michigan? NEVER.

Your 60 IQ is really shining through for you, dipstick.

 

[scarletred]

And Vegas put a line out if the game were to be played and they favored Nebraska...

 

[saluno22]

Did TO get a retirement gift? Could be.

Could also be said that Michigan got sympathy votes from the media because they hadn't won a national title since 1948 at that time.

 

[Hail Michigan 1965]

It was at the time called the alliance.. Only the Big 10 and PAC 10 chose not to participate and play for the National title they elected too go to the Rose bowl..

Again, not Michigan’s fault. The abig Ten and PAC 10 wanted to have their champions meet in the Rise Biel which is the best Bowl game hands Diwn!

 

[HuskerLegion]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

Keep dreaming. NU was top 5 both offensively and defensively. MU was 1st in d and in the 40s I believe in offense. Nu would have stuffed Michigan's offense all day and wore down there d to pull away in the 4th if not earlier. Jon embree doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

 

[Hail Michigan 1965]

Could also be said that Michigan got sympathy votes from the media because they hadn't won a national title since 1948 at that time.

Please list all the sympathy votes and provide evidence to back up your ignorant statement?

 

[scarletred]

Again, not Michigan’s fault. The abig Ten and PAC 10 wanted to have their champions meet in the Rise Biel which is the best Bowl game hands Diwn!

Wut?

 

[saluno22]

Again, not Michigan’s fault. The abig Ten and PAC 10 wanted to have their champions meet in the Rise Biel which is the best Bowl game hands Diwn!

Congratulations, I guess.

 

[saluno22]

Please list all the sympathy votes and provide evidence to back up your ignorant statement?

I guess it came from a Nebraska site that AP voters in Big Ten country favored Michigan over Nebraska more so than in other parts of the country, however, AP votes weren't public at the time. So you got me, oh no.

Edit: Turns out in the AP poll Nebraska beat more ranked teams by more points, beat higher-ranked teams, and played a better bowl opponent than Michigan. Strange that in such poll that thought Nebraska played and beat better teams (EDIT: and win more convincingly), they would rank them behind Michigan.

 

[F5Tornado]

The guy hated Nebraska, like most cu players of his era. You're reaching big time with that garbage. He was 1-3 vs Nebraska as a player, but once a buff, always a buff and Nebraska hater. And when the hell did Embree ever play Michigan? NEVER.

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

And the AP voters are never biased? And where the hell do you get the accuracy crap? Not all those writers go to the same games. I've heard writers from papers from a lot of states talk about regional bias when voting for teams in the polls. Your 60 IQ is really a detriment to your feeble argument.

 

[kaz36]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

How many of these stupid ass threads are you going to start. Who cares? Get lost.

 

[HuskerLegion]

Washington st averaged 40 points a game!!! that year and the Michigan defense held Washington St to a season low 16 points!!!

Washington st scored 483 points in 12 games which averages out to 40.25 points a game!

Nebraska fans scolding Michigan for a 21-16 victory over a very potent Washington St offensive juggernaut.

Two common opponents in Colorado and Baylor and Mi hogan beat them both in convincing fashion 27-3 vs Colorado and 38-3 can Baylor. Michigan was clearly more dominant vs the two common opponents they played.

I think Nebraska had a fine team but the Michigan defense would be the difference vs Nebraska.

Nebraska wins that game end of story.

 

[F5Tornado]

Funny as hell, a 60 IQ Michigan fan coming around and looking for some kind of validation that Michigan was better. The only thing they would have been better at had they played Nebraska was scoring fewer points and losing the game.

 

[newAD]

We kicked Peyton Manning's @$$. They escaped on beating Ryan Leaf. Enough said.

 

[JohnRossEwing]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

You are a virgin...Vegas...who knows more about sports than anyone...did a line for the game if it would have happened...go check it out and let me know what they thought...I can save you the suspense if you want.

Also...there is still 1-2 seconds left in that game vs WSU.

 

[NorthWillRiseAgain]

Please list all the sympathy votes and provide evidence to back up your ignorant statement?

Must really hate osu to use the letter o so little

 

[JohnRossEwing]

Oh, I bet that got your attention didn’t it? Yes, The 1997 National Title that will forever be argued about of who really was the better team.

Point#1. One of the Best defenses ever! Led by Heisman Trophy winner/cornerback/return man/wideout Charles Woodson, the 1997 Wolverines put up a statistical wall, finishing the year No.1 in total defense, scoring defense and passing defense. Six of Michigan’s opponents -half- were held to 7 points or less. The Wolverines allowed foes only 9.5 points per game on the season.

Point.#2 Charles Woodson

Woodson was dominant in all phases,

Two common opponents that Michigan and Nebraska played that year were Colorado and Baylor and Michigan whipped Colorado 27-3 and Baylor 38-3 and Nebraska has to hold on vs Colorado 27-24 and beat Baylor 49-21.

Michigan’s defense is the #1 reason I believe Michigan would have defeated Nebraska if the two teams ever got to play.

I’m sure Nebraska fans will disagree and it is a shame Michigan vs Nebraska didn’t get to be settled on the field.

Nebraska gave up 214 points to its opponents and Michigan gave up 114 points. 100 points less!!! That’s why I believe Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in a game. What say you?

We get it...you have never had sex but this isn't about that.

Didn't NU score like 300 more points than Bitchigan?

 

[K_Y_E]

“I think it would’ve been a good game, but I would have to give the edge to Michigan,” notes former Colorado coach Jon Embree, who as an assistant on the 1997 Buffs staff. “They had the talent and ability on defense to handle the physical style of football that the Nebraska offense played with.”

Well there you have husker fans. Michigan would have beaten Nebraska in 1997!

The associated press poll is without question carries more prestige and clout than the tainted biased coaches poll where the coaches don’t even have to disclose who they voted for. Coaches are biased and fat Ohil Gulmer cites Michigan 4th in the final poll because his golden boy was beat out by Charles Woodson for the Heisman trophy. Michigan lost the coaches poll by 4 points. AP poll carries more weight and the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift.

Michigan was robbed of the outright National Title by the coaches poll and the lobbying by Scott Frost on the Orange Bowl telecast. Nebraska knew they had to blow out Tennessee to have any shit at a split title and that’s what they did.

The coaches poll is biased and not as accurate as the AP poll. It’s common sense folks. Thank God we have a playoff to determine the National Champion today.

I can’t believe a CU coach would say something like that about the Huskers.

By the way, you’re gonna cry your stupid little eyes out when the Huskers beat your overrated team and coach this weekend. We have nothing to lose and are not as bad as we have looked.

 

[saluno22]

Did you seriously start a new thread on this topic?

 

[scarletred]

Did you seriously start a new thread on this topic?

Ya he did