The "Outrageously Idiotic Past the Point of Comprehension" Statements Thread

Id say both units played well at times but lacked the overall focus to ultimately be in championship contention. Had the offense showed up in one game the defense did them no favors in another game. The give and take wasnt where it needed to be, one of Billys biggest flaws, team chemistry.

 
1995 Redux said:
Id say both units played well at times but lacked the overall focus to ultimately be in championship contention. Had the offense showed up in one game the defense did them no favors in another game. The give and take wasnt where it needed to be, one of Billys biggest flaws, team chemistry.
Click to expand...
This makes too much sense. It doesnt belong in this thread, and is very unlike you.

 
1995 Redux said:
Id say both units played well at times but lacked the overall focus to ultimately be in championship contention. Had the offense showed up in one game the defense did them no favors in another game. The give and take wasnt where it needed to be, one of Billys biggest flaws, team chemistry.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, and maybe this is what true has been trying to get at, but I would add the contextual disclaimer that it was the defense that showed up against Auburn (top 10 team) and against Oklahoma, contending for the championship, as it were.

 
That was my point from the beginning. My original statement can be found and quoted. I said "by the end of the year, the defense was playing championship caliber football". held Colorado to 14 points, and frankly, kept us in that game against a 1-win team while the offense sh#t the bed the entire first half, and then needed and amazing array of trick plays to not only get the lead, but make the win look halfway respectable on the scoreboard. And then that Oklahoma game. We gave them the ball on the two yard line on the first play of the game. A long TD pass, and one long drive (99 yards). Other than that, our defense pretty much dominated. Not to mention they can easily be credited for our only points of the game. The Cotton Bowl was pretty much the same scenario.

It was just my point as to why Cosgrove was not fired after '06 as people said "we dont know what woulda happened had Callahan fired Cosgrove". There was no reason to do so. And there was as more hope for the future after '06 than there was at any other point in the Callahan era. that's all i was sayin.

 
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
If you listen close you can still hear the ghostly echos of the 2007 fall camp unit breaking huddles with, "national championship"
Click to expand...
I very clearly remember a show on ESPN a few weeks before the start of the season where 2-3 analysts talked pretty extensively about Nebraska being a darkhorse National Title contender as well. KoolAid was pumpin pretty hard that summer. Flood-tide as they say.

 
Count 'Bility said:
That was my point from the beginning. My original statement can be found and quoted. I said "by the end of the year, the defense was playing championship caliber football". held Colorado to 14 points, and frankly, kept us in that game against a 1-win team while the offense sh#t the bed the entire first half, and then needed and amazing array of trick plays to not only get the lead, but make the win look halfway respectable on the scoreboard. And then that Oklahoma game. We gave them the ball on the two yard line on the first play of the game. A long TD pass, and one long drive (99 yards). Other than that, our defense pretty much dominated. Not to mention they can easily be credited for our only points of the game. The Cotton Bowl was pretty much the same scenario.

It was just my point as to why Cosgrove was not fired after '06 as people said "we dont know what woulda happened had Callahan fired Cosgrove". There was no reason to do so. And there was as more hope for the future after '06 than there was at any other point in the Callahan era. that's all i was sayin.
Click to expand...
Yeah that year's Blackshirts were pretty salty. I remember that Big XII title game against OU and being so dang frustrated with the O, when the D was keeping it very close. The wheels fell off the next year though as Cosgrove lost some really key contributors on D and the D-staff's lack of development of the younger players reared its ugly head.

 
So to sum up, if the offense would've scored more points than every opponent, we'd have won some sort of a championship.

Conversely, if the defense would've allowed fewer points to our opponents than our offense scored, we'd have won some sort of a championship.

Does that sound like a fair assessment?

 
Ah, going back and editing your comment to support your baseless argument. You sir, are the definition of a tool LOMS.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedRedJarvisRedwhine said:
So to sum up, if the offense would've scored more points than every opponent, we'd have won some sort of a championship.

Conversely, if the defense would've allowed fewer points to our opponents than our offense scored, we'd have won some sort of a championship.

Does that sound like a fair assessment?
Click to expand...
That was the point from the beginning. I'm not the one who said "national championship caliber defense". They did. Including Landlord. He's just gone back and altered ever point he's made in an attempt to keep his argument hangings by a thread. He'd rather do that than just admit he may have misspoke or overstated his position a bit. That is pathetic.
But yes, RRJRW, that is correct. It went both ways for that team, but neither side,was national championship caliber.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top