Husker SquareOffs

35%
Yes

1

65%
No WINNER

5

35%
Yes

1 Comment
Keith Petrie
3
Keith Petrie

Made it last year...and they're better this year! Bats need to come around!!! +

Reply

65%
No

5 Comments
Tim Welling
2
Tim Welling

I believe they may make a regional but probably will fall short of the cws. They have a penchant for losing to teams that they should not lose to aka northwestern.

Reply
Carol Edmonds
1
Carol Edmonds

Nebraska has a lot of talent. They need to be more consistent. I hope they can at least make it to a regional, though. DeLeon and company deserve that.

Reply
Phil Coffey
1
Phil Coffey

you can't make the CWS losing to teams like Iowa and NW

Reply
Tyler R. White
1
Tyler R. White

they will make it further this year but still too inconsistent

Reply
Regan Zeller
1
Regan Zeller

good but not in the top 8 nationally.

Reply

15%
Yes

6

85%
No WINNER

16

15%
Yes

1 Comments
Chad Sheeks
0
Chad Sheeks

It is unfair to make others hundreds of millions and be offered an education which is maybe worth 50k. The best players leave early anyway, no education. Pool the D1 union money and split it evenly.

Reply

85%
No

16 Comments
Wm Salyers
4
Wm Salyers

unionization would change college football as we know it

Reply
Dan Marlatt
1
Dan Marlatt

Colleges are for educating students, not for running professional sports teams. If players want to be paid then they should skip college and go straight to the pros. I will ruin college sports.

Reply
Chad Sheeks
Chad Sheeks

This is not possible. You are not allowed to go straight pro.

Joel A. De Ford
0
Joel A. De Ford

because unions destroy competitiveness.

Reply
Richard Barnes
0
Richard Barnes

A stipend should suffice. We need to keep college sports as un professional as possible. Unions will only cause conflict and missed games, walk outs etc. A loss of fan support would follow.

Reply
Keith Petrie
0
Keith Petrie

They may not get everything...but they get more than than the average Scholarship student gets. They also have the opportunity for an education to fall back on if they don't play professional sports

Reply
vulgus regula
0
vulgus regula

because, while the NCAA does not handle everything correctly, these players are students with scholarships, not workers. Just because their is a buck to confiscate does not make them workers.

Reply
Chad Sheeks
Chad Sheeks

Not true at all. They are workers. They spend 40-50 a week with sports. More during the season. They make hundreds of millions of dollars for others.

James A Curtis
0
James A Curtis

Not paid employees and have all the benefits they need.

Reply
Chad Sheeks
Chad Sheeks

While they are part of the team sure. But none of the players receive physical therapy 20 years later. The players need a union they are being taken advantage of.

Dan Novak
0
Dan Novak

They get free food, free housing, free education, and a stipend. More and the common students will suffer.

Reply
Chad Sheeks
Chad Sheeks

Actually many Athletic Departments are an individual financial entity. Athletic department money is not funneled into academia.

Adam Fisher
0
Adam Fisher

It will hurt them more than they realize when they become a true 'employee'

Reply
Chad Sheeks
Chad Sheeks

Yeah because true employees get paid. That will really suck for them.

Eric Oates
0
Eric Oates

1) they are not employees. 2) unions SUCK. 3) the athletes are paid well enough with the opportunities they receive through the schools they represent. 4) nothing good has happened to athletics since

Reply
Arlie Rauch
0
Arlie Rauch

They are students.

Reply
Norman Curfman
0
Norman Curfman

Unionization will destroy college athletics. Unionization of anything in today's world destroy's any business entity, not only economically, but functional efficiency as well.

Reply
Mike Conyers
0
Mike Conyers

The threat of a union is good. The actualization of a union fails to address the problem.

Reply
Michael Morkert
0
Michael Morkert

Most have scholarships and/or great meal plans and other privileges others do not get...NO

Reply
Jerry Williams
0
Jerry Williams

Loss of too many benifits

Reply
Jim Jones
0
Jim Jones

Unions create an unnecessary bureaucracy that separates stakeholders

Reply

73%
Yes WINNER

11

27%
No

4

73%
Yes

11 Comments
Heather Carroll Mueller
1
Heather Carroll Mueller

He is the best option at this time. He has grown into a starting job.

Reply
David Christopher Cate
1
David Christopher Cate

Tommy was 8-1 as a starter for the Huskers. Tommy also has the "IT Factor," when leading the offense.

Reply
Michael Morkert
1
Michael Morkert

thinking like coach Pelini...however I would go with one of the other 2.

Reply
David W. Hanson
0
David W. Hanson

I believe it's a given,wheather he's the best or not.He is simply the most experienced.Like Osborn,Pelini always goes with the old timer,not necessarily the best.

Reply
Danny Baker
0
Danny Baker

More experience.

Reply
Alan J Farrell
0
Alan J Farrell

He has experience, he may not stay there but, he will start there.

Reply
Keith Petrie
0
Keith Petrie

because He was the starter most of last year...don't necessarily think He'll . remain starter. I think we've got some real talent at QB position & unless Tommie improves, He may share or lose spot!

Reply

27%
No

4 Comments
Joel Rodgers
5
Joel Rodgers

He threw a pick 3 plays into a spring game. Same throw that he was doing last year.

Reply
Burke Swenson
1
Burke Swenson

I think Fyfe is an immensley better passer, and can run the option close enough to Armstrong that he's the better overall choice for what Beck wants this offense to do.

Reply
dougnorman
0
dougnorman

He doesn't impress me with his decision making or passing. Too many turnovers.

Reply
Matthew Thomas Hergert
0
Matthew Thomas Hergert

Tommy ain't very good & Stanton is better.

Reply

About Husker

Debates and polls on Husker from the SquareOffs community. Vote on real questions, see how the public is split, and back your side with a defense.

We use cookies to ensure you get the best possible experience on our website. Learn more OK, GOT IT