Ameer Abdullah

[MadRat]

Based on most of the RB's that you believe were "great" for us, I believe you lack knowledge of Husker history and perspective.

So basically when your in a debate and the evidence goes against you then in your opinion you've already won so it doesn't matter. Facts constantly undermine your arguments around here. But your modus operandi speaks for itself. I get the idea that Scott Baldwin's history is tainted. The truth is his teammates supported him getting help and considered him a brother to the end. Statistically, there was evidence that suggested in his two years, especially the partial one cut short when he beat that woman, that he could have been something extremely special as a player. And I've pointed out another player that earned championship rings as a backup that had solid history in all of his playing time. And I mentioned another guy that was underplayed, but found success in the NFL. And I counterpointed the badmouthing of Damon Benning as a player. That's being destroyed in your book. The truth is I know fifty years of Husker football quite well.

In addition, you just keep spinning tales after you've been destroyed in discussion.

Considering you don't like rebuttals with facts, maybe people's arguments are not so destroyed as you believe. I've simply put facts from the Husker history in my arguments to quantify my argument. Your rebuttals are about your opinions.

You can't be reasoned with because you already believe your distorted views and seem only here to flaunt them in others' faces. We have a few others like you around here, so enjoy their company. BTW, you can't redeem yourself in a thread where you've posted repeated nonsense just by posting a few decent comments at then end of the thread. Try harder next time. The guys you just listed in the first sentence of your post were good players, but do not belong on any list of great NU backs.

I'll accept your ad hominem as a consolation you've run out of argument to make.

 

[Huskerthom]

So basically when your in a debate and the evidence goes against you then in your opinion you've already won so it doesn't matter. Facts constantly undermine your arguments around here. But your modus operandi speaks for itself. I get the idea that Scott Baldwin's history is tainted. The truth is his teammates supported him getting help and considered him a brother to the end. Statistically, there was evidence that suggested in his two years, especially the partial one cut short when he beat that woman, that he could have been something extremely special as a player. And I've pointed out another player that earned championship rings as a backup that had solid history in all of his playing time. And I mentioned another guy that was underplayed, but found success in the NFL. And I counterpointed the badmouthing of Damon Benning as a player. That's being destroyed in your book. The truth is I know fifty years of Husker football quite well.


Considering you don't like rebuttals with facts, maybe people's arguments are not so destroyed as you believe. I've simply put facts from the Husker history in my arguments to quantify my argument. Your rebuttals are about your opinions.


I'll accept your ad hominem as a consolation you've run out of argument to make.

A fact is something that is true based on evidence. Your opinion is not evidence. The players you are touting are not on the all time rushing list top 5. They were not heisman winners or All Americans. So the FACTS are not on your side. So you have not presented any facts that counter GFOA's choices.

Also touting him as TOs favorite again IF true does not make him a great back. I am sure there are 1-2 ND coaches who had Rudy as a favorite player. That does not make him a great DE.

 

[Greatest Fan of All]

So basically when your in a debate and the evidence goes against you then in your opinion you've already won so it doesn't matter. Facts constantly undermine your arguments around here. But your modus operandi speaks for itself. I get the idea that Scott Baldwin's history is tainted. The truth is his teammates supported him getting help and considered him a brother to the end. Statistically, there was evidence that suggested in his two years, especially the partial one cut short when he beat that woman, that he could have been something extremely special as a player. And I've pointed out another player that earned championship rings as a backup that had solid history in all of his playing time. And I mentioned another guy that was underplayed, but found success in the NFL. And I counterpointed the badmouthing of Damon Benning as a player. That's being destroyed in your book. The truth is I know fifty years of Husker football quite well.

That you think you've provided facts that somehow place Scott Baldwin, Correll Buckhalter, Dehrin Deidrick, Clinton Childs, Leodis Flowers, etc. in the top 5 or top 20 of all-time Nebraska backs is comical. As I have mentioned, these players were good. Nebraska doesn't play bad RB's. But they are not great in any way. You don't have to worship every RB that ever worn the uniform.

Considering you don't like rebuttals with facts, maybe people's arguments are not so destroyed as you believe. I've simply put facts from the Husker history in my arguments to quantify my argument. Your rebuttals are about your opinions.

Oh, your arguments were destroyed one by one, and you know this. That is why you keep spinning and changing your narrative.

I'll accept your ad hominem as a consolation you've run out of argument to make.

Well, if you want to keep arguing that these RB favorites deserve top ratings, just throw some more of your made up facts out there, and I'll knock them down too.

 

[MadRat]

Wait, Thom and GFOA allied together? Strange.

Not so strange that reading comprehension for both of you is once again a fail. I have consistently said the top guy - the man - should get the bulk of the carries. And all of this offshoot from the post listing 'top 20'-ish best of all-time Husker runningbacks was always open to discussion. If Baldwin didn't have an incident that forced him out of football he would have had two years and the remainder of his season to pile on accomplishment. That's an opinion. Never claimed it as fact. Here is the post, because your memory is faulty:

Scott Baldwin was our wrecking ball before the incident in Omaha. I'd of ranked him in the top 10 as an underclassman.

And guys like Clinton Childs were under-rated. He was an all-around talent, just a step off in the top gear. But inside the 10 he was great.

Ken Clark so high and Roy Helu Jr so low? No mention of Cornell Buckhalter? Kind of dates you. And where is Marlon Lucky on the list? I guess once you get past the top 3 it's all debatable.

Roy Helu Jr had a 300 yard game. Both Buckhalter and Lucky went to the NFL via the draft and implied they were worthy of consideration somewhere in the group listed. But I never claimed a single one to be top 10.. Clearly I questioned Ken Clark's and Helu's placement on the list. Hell, I should have questioned why Kieth Jones wasn't worthy of top 10 consideration. But honestly, don't put extra words into my posts. I can speak fine for myself.

 

[Power of Corn]

no disagreement with Rozier, Green and LP being the best 3 RB in husker history, of course they and had championship caliber OL in front of them. Green was the best of the 3 to be looked at as the "face of your program", as can be said for Ameer, Ameer had huge talent, marginal OL help, but was possibly as good an off field influence as our program has ever had, certainly top tier there.

 

[SoCalRed]

So basically when your in a debate and the evidence goes against you then in your opinion you've already won so it doesn't matter. Facts constantly undermine your arguments around here. But your modus operandi speaks for itself. I get the idea that Scott Baldwin's history is tainted. The truth is his teammates supported him getting help and considered him a brother to the end. Statistically, there was evidence that suggested in his two years, especially the partial one cut short when he beat that woman, that he could have been something extremely special as a player. And I've pointed out another player that earned championship rings as a backup that had solid history in all of his playing time. And I mentioned another guy that was underplayed, but found success in the NFL. And I counterpointed the badmouthing of Damon Benning as a player. That's being destroyed in your book. The truth is I know fifty years of Husker football quite well.


Considering you don't like rebuttals with facts, maybe people's arguments are not so destroyed as you believe. I've simply put facts from the Husker history in my arguments to quantify my argument. Your rebuttals are about your opinions.


I'll accept your ad hominem as a consolation you've run out of argument to make.

Man oh man, this is perhaps the best response to his unmitigated nonsense I've ever read. Bravo!

You just made an enemy. Be prepared to be attacked!

 

[SoCalRed]

Ahman Green was faster than Phillips, but there was a reason Phillips was the man. We like to decide playing time on one intangible. Unfortunately football is about many different intangibles. Ultimately one guy will get a great discrepancy in the number of touches compared to his teammates. I don't think Tre Bryant is that guy now. But he has potential to be really good. Under Langsdorf we just don't have 'that guy' defined. He's always playing by committee. Unfortunately he's using a professional level organization of an offense to dictate his college level organization. In college you usually have a super star define your team. The backups get reps, but when the game is on the line everyone knows whom to depend upon.

Rat, you're kind of ignoring the fact that Green was a freshman forced to step in for LP Mid-season. Was LP better? Potentially, I suppose, but the facts remain that he simply couldn't do it at the next level, while Green owns records in Green Bay.

 

[SoCalRed]

Nah, IMO, it's a lot more like this:

1. LP
2. Ahman
3. Rozier
4. DuBose
5. Abdullah
6. Ken Clark
7. Redwine
8. R Craig
9. Kinney
10. C Jones
11. Rick Berns
12. Bobby Reynolds
13. Burkhead
14. IM Hipp
15. TIE
----K Jones
----D Brown
----H Wilson
----F Solich
----T Davis
----B Jackson
----R Helu
----C Ross
----J Smith

I have never understood the love affair with Lawrence Phillips. He was good, but if you're going to assess any player against another, don't you have to consider all aspects of his career?

Frankly, when he went out Ahman Green (a freshman) stepped in and we never missed a beat.

Ahman had a better career at Nebraska. So did Mike Rozier. For that matter, so did Ameer.

I realize your personal lists are based on little but your personal preferences, but most of us prefer to use reality and production as a gauge.

 

[SoCalRed]

Scott Baldwin was our wrecking ball before the incident in Omaha. I'd of ranked him in the top 10 as an underclassman.

And guys like Clinton Childs were under-rated. He was an all-around talent, just a step off in the top gear. But inside the 10 he was great.

Ken Clark so high and Roy Helu Jr so low? No mention of Cornell Buckhalter? Kind of dates you. And where is Marlon Lucky on the list? I guess once you get past the top 3 it's all debatable.

Marlon gets overlooked because most of his yardage came catching the ball. Kind of ironic since we're about to see a redux of that style of football.

 

[SoCalRed]

No but if you had taken time to watch that video you would have seen that Rozier did a lot on his own. That third play on the video is a fine example. He did that against UCLA not a weak FCS team. Which was AA only memorable play.

ONLY? Ridiculous! AA made many memorable runs in his career. That just happens to be his most memorable because he did most of it on his own and saved DONU from a potential humiliating loss.

 

[Adam Carriker]

I'll be right back, the microwave just dinged, my popcorn is ready.

 

[Huskerthom]

I'll be right back, the microwave just dinged, my popcorn is ready.

lol

 

[akweasel]

Funny someone asked where Marlon Lucky was. He was last spotted running into the back of a NU lineman would've been my reply. Though I will concede he was one of the best ever at NU for setting up, catching and getting yards on bubble screens and screens in general. He just had NO wiggle or speed to him at any level. To list him in your top 10...........would be hilarious. Dahrran Diedrick..........not likely.

1) LP
2) Rozier
3) Green
4) Ameer
5) Dubose
6) Clark
7) Helu
6) C. Jones
7) Burkhead
8) Brown
9) K. Jones
10) Buckhalter

Next in line for top 10: Evans (and imo would've been top 2 if not for the groin injury) or my next one would've been B. Jackson or Ross.

As for basing Green being better than LP because of what he did in the pros..............means nothing. Rozier didn't do jack in the NFL either, so what. Ask ANYONE on the 95 team who was better. LP will win easily.

Oh and anyone that thinks Green was faster than LP................might want to check that when they got in pads. I'd hear often how Green would get caught in practice.....LP, not so much back in the day. I'd still pick LP in pads, any day.

 

[Greatest Fan of All]

I have never understood the love affair with Lawrence Phillips. He was good, but if you're going to assess any player against another, don't you have to consider all aspects of his career?

Frankly, when he went out Ahman Green (a freshman) stepped in and we never missed a beat.

Ahman had a better career at Nebraska. So did Mike Rozier. For that matter, so did Ameer.

I realize your personal lists are based on little but your personal preferences, but most of us prefer to use reality and production as a gauge.

Back in the mid-90's you must not have got the NU games out on the West Coast.

 

[Greatest Fan of All]

And all of this offshoot from the post listing 'top 20'-ish best of all-time Husker runningbacks was always open to discussion. If Baldwin didn't have an incident that forced him out of football he would have had two years and the remainder of his season to pile on accomplishment. That's an opinion. Never claimed it as fact.

Roy Helu Jr had a 300 yard game. Both Buckhalter and Lucky went to the NFL via the draft and implied they were worthy of consideration somewhere in the group listed. But I never claimed a single one to be top 10.. Clearly I questioned Ken Clark's and Helu's placement on the list. Hell, I should have questioned why Kieth Jones wasn't worthy of top 10 consideration. But honestly, don't put extra words into my posts. I can speak fine for myself.

LOL...so basically you are saying that your response to a question about who the greatest NU backs in history were is to list a bunch of guys that maybe could've or should've possibly been good enough for consideration...but, you aren't claiming they were good enough for the list. Cool answer. Regarding whether a few of your favorites were worthy of consideration...THEY WERE and they got considered, they just weren't quite good enough. Thanks again! Keep them coming!