[Husker] BC on Wiki

[David Strong]

> I don't have the transcript of the press conference in front of me, and
> frankly I don't think all this argument amounts to a hill of beans (there's
> an old fogey phrase if I do say so myself!) because its done and over, but
> Dr. Tom did say that the Kansas loss was a big factor.  That it was more
> than just losing, but a factor was how they played.  I believe he figured if
> they lost all of their games, they weren't being competitive, and I doubt
> we'd disagree with that.  If they played hard but lost narrowly, there might
> be some give in the evaluation.  K State was an ugly win - an old fashion
> butt kick.  But Kansas was a meltdown, Okie State was a meltdown, aTm and CU
> were complete 2nd half meltdowns.  The benchmarks were clear; they were
> evaluated not only on wins and losses, but also how they won and how they
> lost.  Ugly is the only word that comes to my mind.
> 
> Nick
> 
Another thing Tom said which I think is pretty important was that if you are getting blown out, and you have reasonably good players, then something is wrong.  An example was last nights Missouri - Kansas game.  I think the score was 14-0 at half.  Are Missouri's defensive players so much better than Nebraska's that they could hold Kansas scoreless in the first half while Kansas hung about 40 on us in the first half?  Hardly.  I think Tom referenced this twice...about having reasonably good players and still getting killed way beyond any talent disparity.  I think this may have been his biggest evaluation criteria.

Dave

_________________________________________________________________
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.Download today it's FREE!
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_sharelife_112007