Norm Peterson

Allow me to suggest Knob Creek Single Barrel (aged 9 years.) But drink it neat; it's too good to mix. It's bottled at 120 proof, which is about 50% more alcohol than most regular bourbons but you really don't notice the extra alcohol. Unless you drink too much of it. Which I wouldn't recommend doing. Especially if you plan on driving.

maybe they could loosen them up some more next year and forget to lock the doors.

We would be in year 2 of the Riley regime. We would have gone 9-4 last year, winning the bowl game but losing to Iowa. This year, we would currently be 5-4, beating both Illinois and Purdue. We would have a serviceable freshman qb sitting out as a redshirt waiting for the chance to run Langsdorf"s offense, whatever the hell that is. We would be trying to recruit, mad as hell, linemen on both sides of the ball. And last but not least, we would be recruiting defensive backs faster than Andy Means. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Andy was all-Conference.And he took a vicious hit way out-of-bounds by the Okie State QB whom he'd just picked off and it went unflagged in the 2nd worst no-call in a Husker game I've ever seen. (Worst one was Eric Crouch doing the Linda Blair Exorcist head turn against Kansas State.) No Penn State Norm?I was talking about no calls on obvious penalties. As far as blown calls are concerned, the Penn State game belongs in the pantheon of the most impactful blown calls in the history of sport right up there with Jim Joyce robbing Armando Galleraga of a perfect game by incorrectly calling the 27th batter safe at first.

Coach Miles musta picked the "we're a year away" option in my poll.

So, John, the jerk, is he a closet Creighton fan? Or just some internet troll who got booted off 4Chan and had to find some other outlet for being an a-hole? Hey, maybe "John" is gtmoblue?

Seeing Ned Yost skipper the Royals to a world series title, I was just shaking my head again at that particular a-hole who thinks all of the world's problems can be solved by firing the current coach. (Except, now, his buddy told him that Riley was a great hire, so he has to defend it to the absurd.) Had he been the Royals' GM a few years back, Ned Yost would have been sent packing and we wouldn't probably be enjoying this championship right now. Had it been up to him, we wouldn't have let Tom Osborne hire Tim Miles. Had it been up to him, we'd probably have Craig Robinson guiding us to losing seasons about now.

We would be in year 2 of the Riley regime. We would have gone 9-4 last year, winning the bowl game but losing to Iowa. This year, we would currently be 5-4, beating both Illinois and Purdue. We would have a serviceable freshman qb sitting out as a redshirt waiting for the chance to run Langsdorf"s offense, whatever the hell that is. We would be trying to recruit, mad as hell, linemen on both sides of the ball. And last but not least, we would be recruiting defensive backs faster than Andy Means. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Andy was all-Conference. And he took a vicious hit way out-of-bounds by the Okie State QB whom he'd just picked off and it went unflagged in the 2nd worst no-call in a Husker game I've ever seen. (Worst one was Eric Crouch doing the Linda Blair Exorcist head turn against Kansas State.)

No. Don't remember seeing Nate shoot off the dribble. Nate was good driving the ball or catching and shooting in rhythm. Don't remember Nate so much shooting the ball in traffic. I would liken what I saw from Anton Gill more to that kid from KSU a few years ago, Denis Clemente. Dribble behind a screen and elevate for a (made) shot. I remember complaining a lot last year about guys on the team not wanting to take the shot. Passing up open looks. Maybe relying too much on Petteway, but certainly not being willing to attempt a shot if there's a defender within 10 feet. There were looks where our guys received the ball in rhythm and should have been able to catch the ball and shoot. But too many times they passed up those open looks. With a 30 second clock, that'll be even more of a problem because you might not get another look that's as good. And I don't think that'll be a problem with Gill. He seems to have a lot of confidence in his stroke and he gets up high enough and has quick enough of a release that he can get his shot off even with people around him. That's a skill that it's nice to have someone on your team possess.

That's a good question. If you did a poll on that, I wonder what kind of response there'd be.

Let me give you an analogy to help illustrate my point in the post above. Let's say the Husker football program is your all-time favorite restaurant. In 1963, it was just a little hole-in-the-wall greasy spoon diner. And then a new Chef came on board and started turning out culinary masterpieces that made your mouth water just telling your friends about it. The place became the most celebrated and talked about eatery in the mid-west and people would travel from other states just to eat there. Chef Bob retired in 1970 after being awarded his 2nd Michelin Star, and brought his esteemed protégé on to take over as Chef de Cuisine. And the joint didn't miss a beat. If anything, they were even better. Over the years, they spruced up the place, added on, expanded, but maintained the high quality of meals they prepared and remained in their original location just so that they never forgot that there was a right way of doing things -- a "Nebraska" way. After 28 years and three more Michelin Stars (nearly 5 more), Chef Tom was ready to retire. And he handed the reins over to his somewhat less inventive but still very precise Sous Chef, Frank. Chef Frank was good. And the food was still pretty darn good. But it wasn't quite as exceptional as it once had been and, y'know, it was just, well, not quite as good. But you still went because it was still your favorite place and it was still the best place around for miles and you could still find the best foie gras there and they did great things with locally sourced produce. And then new management took over. They didn't want the place sliding toward mediocrity. They assumed the public wanted stuff like haute cuisine, with west coast influences. The kind of stuff you might find in some highbrow joint in San Francisco. And they brought in a new chef who was trained in all the best places and studied under some of the masters. And, while the food was still mostly pretty darned good it lacked the sort of familiarity it once had. You almost felt like they were feeding you not the style of food you wanted but the style of food they felt you should want. Because they knew better than a bunch of hillbillies from flyover country. But you still went because they still had the same artwork on the walls that you always had admired and they still served some of the same old standard, traditional fare. Although, it just didn't taste quite the same and there were nights that you left disappointed and swore you wouldn't return. But you did come back, because it was hard at first to convince yourself that the place had gone down hill a bit. And you felt a sense of nostalgia for the old restaurant and what it had been built up from and the greatness it had achieved. Even though there were times you left without waiting for the desert cart to come by and times you didn't even finish your meal. And then, when Chef Bill got canned, and they brought in a guy who had worked with Chef Frank, you felt, OK, we're getting back to business here. They want to please ME, not some dude from San Francisco who might be passing through. And, you felt a renewed sense of energy about the place and you were happy to keep going back because things seemed, for awhile, to be getting better. But, while Chef Bo certainly did an admirable job those first few years and things seemed to be heading in the right direction, there were some ... problems. Chef Bo was a bit of hot-head. He once yelled at a patron who had dared to send back his meal. (Rumors of this angry confrontation in the basement of the Cornhusker swirled around the internet and took on a life of their own.) He seemed to be unconcerned about the food critics once declaring that HE would decide how many stars to award his signature dishes. And when he was on as a cook, he was verrrrrry good. But when he was off, his dishes were catastrophes. (I mean, who tries to serve badger with a port wine reduction? Seriously?) It was clear, toward the end of his tenure that Chef Bo was on edge. He once flung his chef hat at a food critic who then gave him a very bad review. And he was forced to apologize. Which he sorta did. While almost daring the new management to can his ass. And that's the thing about new management. Don't tempt them to fire you. They feel no loyalty to you. And so it was with Chef Bo. He's gone. And they replaced him with some guy who has never had a Michelin Star. Never published a cook book. Once worked in a fantastic restaurant in San Diego but got fired after two years. Spent the last decade or so at some moribund hotel restaurant in Corvallis, Oregon. And now he's been hired to run the restaurant you still want to love, but maybe we'll eat in tonight, dear. Or go to Brewsky's and watch the Royals on TV. The results, so far, have been ... disappointingly disappointing. You wonder if they'll even renew his contract. Perhaps even fire the guy. Word is the manager is on the outs. And they've just written to me wanting to know if I'd like to renew my exclusive membership to the private lounge. Eh. Maybe not this time around.

I realize it's tough to do...I'm guilty of it...but you shouldn't let your hate for someone cloud your judgment when posting. 1. We will not be a +20 point dog to Mich St...not even close actually. We may lose by 20+...but the actual line...highly doubtful. 2. The sell out streak would have ended years ago if we let it....and we wont let it end next year either. We still do very well filling the stadium, and will continue to do so...but there were plenty of games I went to under Callahan and Pelini where there were quite a few empty seats. Nothing like you're going to see in the future. Nah, Nebraska fans will continue to show up and support their program. Maybe a couple more 3-9 more seasons and you may be correct...but Riley won't last if that's the case and then the fans will come out in bunches for the new coach again. Not sure you're right about that. Never saw fans leave early in droves under the Bobfather or TO, for obvious reasons: We rarely lost at home; (and there were far fewer seats to be sat in.) Solich played a more mediocre brand of ball but we still had butts in the seats. When futility started raising its ugly head against T Tech and Okie State during year 4 of the Callahan regime, you saw people streaming out of Memorial Stadium like it was the HMS Titanic. It takes longer -- a more sustained period of time with enduring feelings of futility -- for people to stop coming back than to get them to leave. So, at the outset, people bail on a couple of Callahan losses but show up the next week for more punishment. Had Callahan continued another season with similar results as his last, we probably would have ended the streak then. But Pelini comes in and starts winning 9 games/year from the very get go. And so the barrel of enthusiasm fills up a little bit. Not as much as it was during the Osborne era, but it certainly recovers somewhat. The fans and their willingness to hang in there and support the team by their presence is strengthened by some success on the field. But it's still a bit tenuous compared to where it was 10, 15, 20 years ago. The enduring controversy over Pelini's job security didn't help strengthen fan support. And bringing in a somewhat-less-than-homerun-hire didn't rejuvenate fan enthusiasm the way Pelini winning 9 games his first season helped us with the post-Callahan hangover. So the fan support remains, but it's lost its endurance. And a season like the one we're having can certainly put that sellout crowd streak in jeopardy. I already know at least one major corporate sponsor that has notified the athletic director not to call them any longer to buy up available seats in order to keep the streak alive. If the fans don't start seeing glimmers of hope for the future, the streak is as good as over.

It won't look anything like that when the games are played.

Looking at those highlights, how many players do we have who, when they get the ball, have the ability to score in some fashion? Well, OK, all players can score in some fashion but how many do we have that you feel that if, for example, they had an open look from three that they not only would take it but could make it often enough to be a threat from that distance? In other words, how many scoring threats do we have? How many scoring threats can we put on the floor at one time? Two years ago, we had Terran, Walt (who was on that year), Shavon, Ray (at times) and, really, that was it. Last year, we had Terran, Shavon (at times) and (at times) Tai. Walt was off his game basically the whole season (or maybe the year before was the anomaly) and neither Benny nor David were what I would call reliable scorers. But look at that film: We were getting points from all over. Even Bakari was hitting shots. Jack McVeigh was hitting shots. Benny was driving and alternately dishing or finishing. When Benny dished, it was Ed Morrow who was hitting shots. Shavon, of course, was hitting shots. We know from the "box score" that Andrew White was hitting shots. We have a lot more guys who are threats to score this year. That means bench points. That means when the starters go out, we still have guys who can keep us in the game. Last year, we got very little in the way of bench production. That should change a bunch this year.

Just the tip? That's not what she said.

We won the opening tip!

Anton Gill can. Did you see him at the scrimmage? Dude is nails. I could go on, but he possesses a skill that we haven't had much around here in many years, that I'm glad to see us have again. He's the guy I've been complaining we didn't have: The guy who can elevate and get a shot off in traffic. Everybody probably remembers my constant refrain after games last year, which was that we didn't have guys willing to take shots. The offense would generate open looks and then no one would take the shot but pass the ball instead. If there was any defender in within their zip code, they were passing the ball off. Gill doesn't need a lot of space. He showed that several times during the scrimmage. He gets terrific elevation on his jump, he has a very nice, smooth, high release, he gets to the spot quickly and can elevate on a dime. He might have been the best player at the scrimmage due to his ability to shoot off the dribble and also slash to the basket. Gill. He's that guy.

His seat is hot now. It wasn't in March. If I bet on a horse because of the color of silks the jockey is wearing, and that horse wins, does that mean my rationale was right?

In fairness, HB has been pretty consistent about redirecting the discussion from anything about Pelini to more of a "well, now what?" kind of thing. That's oftentimes my approach in life: We can't worry about why we are where we are; we need to worry about getting where we want to be. How we got here is in the past and is no longer within our control because it's happened already. What we can control is what we do from now on out. So, in that vein, is there anything to salvage with this program right now (other than the players with remaining eligibility?) The only backwards glance you really need to take is to look at whether the results we're seeing on the field are commensurate with the hand that Riley was dealt in terms of the players he inherited. Personally, I don't think recruiting was great under Pelini, but I don't think it was "get shellacked by Purdue" bad.

We're ranked 39 right now, and haven't gotten a commitment in 6 weeks. Good luck with that. bo had 8 recruits signed last year at this time. riley has 15. I don't think anyone had any recruits signed last year at this time.

and just to be clear here, I am not saying that we are going to be world beaters this season. What I am saying is that the upgrade in talent is readily apparent.

By the looks of things, this should have been two fairly evenly-matched teams. Wyoming is ranked fairly middle-of-the-pack in the nation by Kenpom (180th) as are we (137th). They finished 4th in the Mountain West last year and had 25 wins, so they certainly weren't bad. Looking at the rosters, we have similar size. The biggest difference is that we have 3 top-100 recruits/transfers now eligible that we didn't have last year. And we've shed ourselves of some of the locker room issues that might have held us back a bit last year. I take this as a very good sign for us.

Just curious what people think.

Getting closer to that, 49r.

Near as I can tell, Nebraska was 40% for threes on the day, across both the morning and the afternoon scrimmages. Morning: Shavon, 18 pts on 3-4 from three Andrew, 16 pts Morrow, 14 pts (take note, those who think Ed is just a glass cleaner) Watson, 13 pts 52-35 rebounding advantage (fantastic for a "small" team) and 23 assists. In the afternoon, Watson was 8-11 shooting. Is he the Day 1 starter at point? He ran the reds in the public scrimmage. I am GEEKED!

When I posted the above, there were 47 total votes and 11 of them were for 2 years or more to make the dance.Now, there are 48 votes and 12 for 2 years or more. After what I saw tonight, I'm more confident than ever. And someone who waited until now to cast a vote was obviously unmoved by the newbies' performance at the scrimmage tonight. Personally, I was blown away. Norm, you do it every year. Actually, this isn't true. I looked it up. Last year, when we went into the season ranked but didn't make the dance, I was very optimistic. The year before when we did make the dance, I had been rather pessimistic. The year before that, I was pessimistic and, turns out, I was right. So, I've been wrong two of the last three years. Which means I'm due.