majech

I've never had a problem finding awesome Husker gear. I think there is a lot of awesome new stuff out there, especially with the move to the B1G.

He's still in the doghouse. :-) He'll get some rec yard time in the spring and probably some during the non-con. By the time B1G rolls around, he'll be in solitary confinement for making Marlowe look bad.

That was god awful bad.

Majech, please believe me that nobody is saying Tmart is better than Frazier was. That being said, the point many are trying to say is that football is a team sport. I can't imagine you not acknowledging that comparing those two is apples and oranges in many ways. I'm a Lincoln native and I assure you I've watched both but where it gets muddy is when we consider the "team" they played with. I would argue that Tmart, Lee, Ganz or "any" qb we've had lately would have performed much, much better with the Oline, rbs, wrs & OC Frazier played with. Having a vicious, attacking mid-90s defense that crushes opponent offenses wouldn't hurt either. In summary I think it's grossly unfair to compare Frazier's "WATCHED" results with Tmart's. We're talking two very, very different "teams" in terms of quality. I certainly hope they are not saying he is better, as that is just lunacy, but the comparison keeps getting made, lol. Frazier clearly had a better O-Line, but Tmart has had pretty damn good WR and RB's imo. Burkhead is a machine and Helu was a game changer and is doing well in the League. I'd even say that TMart's WR's have been better than Fraziers. The OC is the biggest difference imo. TO's offenses were focused, consistent, and maxed out execution due to a structured system that had been in place for seasons. Our offensive philosophy is pretty much a train-wreck imo. Towards the end of the last 3 seasons, our offense has gotten worse. That is totally opposite of how it should be. I think that is because we have no "system" or core philosophy. Beck referred to our offense as a "mutt". How many times have you ever seen a mutt win a dog-show? NONE. They can make nice pets and can be cute to look at or play with, but when facing the elite, mutts don't get it done. THAT really hinders TMart, and our team, imo. The biggest measure of a QB, imo, is their ability to make plays and run their offense. When does TMart make "that" play? When does he make "that" throw? I just don't see it. It seems to me that he would make a great scramble for a big 1st down, but he doesn't. Actually, imo, his running is not very good. Straight line speed? Great, but that doesn't really get showcased much at the QB spot. Regarding running the offense, our offense has had many, many underachieving efforts with TMart taking the snaps, and yes I know there are many other factors involved, but it just does not seem to be working to me. That are also many times that TMart does things that are just not good, like when he threw the ball to K Reed who was like 7 yards behind the LOS in the bowl game. Just throw the ball away. Where is the gamesmanship and awareness? Too many plays like that out of a 2-year starter imo. Wow. Well, we'll agree to disagree then. Roy & Rex are damn fine backs but neither is in the same galaxy as LP (on the field). Saying Frazier's Oline was "better" than Tmart's is like saying a brand new Maserati is "better" than a 20 year old used Pinto. While 100% true, that sure doesn't paint a picture at all of the truly MASSIVE difference in quality between the two. Lastly, I don't recall wrs C. Johnson, R, Baul, J. Vedral, etc being pass dropping machines and they blocked wayyyyyyyyy better than Bell, Turner or Reed. The bottom line is that it's about 10,000 times easier for a qb to make plays and run their offense when their Oline is consistently steamrolling people into the dust, the wrs catch the ball and your OC has the opponent DC chugging down Jim Beam by halftime. Also, in the unlikely event you do get stopped, so what? Punt the ball, let the defense totally destroy the offense and get the ball back in four plays. Heh...you really don't think those things make much difference, huh? Well, that's ok. It would be so boring if we all agreed on everything, right? GBR!! I never stated that TMart's RB's were as good as Frazier's, they CLEARLY were not. That being said, it is not a fair statement to say TMart has not played with good RB's and WR's. If RB and Helu are not good enough for TMart to succeed, then then there is a TMart issue as RB and Helu are both VERY good RB's. Are they LP and Ahman? Hell no, but they are good. Do TMart's WR's drop passes? They certainly do. Pretty much all WR's we've had for seasons have dropped passes which, imo, points to coaching. Frazier's WR's basically never dropped passes, but I think if you look at strictly talent eval, I'd give Paul, Kinnie, JT, K Bell, and Enunwa the edge. Now this staff comes nowhere near getting everything out of those guys, but again, I don't think it is fair to say that TMart doesn't have the WR talent to succeed. There are also some major issues with the scheme of our O-line. I think the talent is better than the results, tbh. Re-watch the Michigan game as an example. Their D-line scheme DESTROYED our blocking scheme. It wasn't so much that our linemen couldn't block, it is that our scheme didn't have them block. Michigan would line up 1 guy in the middle, overload 2 guys on the edge over our right tackle, and one guy on our left tackle. This pretty much stymied our oline as our two OG's and C would basically triple team their NT or not block anyone, while our RT would unsuccessfully attempt to block two guys. This happened a lot and has happened in many other games.

Majech, please believe me that nobody is saying Tmart is better than Frazier was. That being said, the point many are trying to say is that football is a team sport. I can't imagine you not acknowledging that comparing those two is apples and oranges in many ways. I'm a Lincoln native and I assure you I've watched both but where it gets muddy is when we consider the "team" they played with. I would argue that Tmart, Lee, Ganz or "any" qb we've had lately would have performed much, much better with the Oline, rbs, wrs & OC Frazier played with. Having a vicious, attacking mid-90s defense that crushes opponent offenses wouldn't hurt either. In summary I think it's grossly unfair to compare Frazier's "WATCHED" results with Tmart's. We're talking two very, very different "teams" in terms of quality. I certainly hope they are not saying he is better, as that is just lunacy, but the comparison keeps getting made, lol. Frazier clearly had a better O-Line, but Tmart has had pretty damn good WR and RB's imo. Burkhead is a machine and Helu was a game changer and is doing well in the League. I'd even say that TMart's WR's have been better than Fraziers. The OC is the biggest difference imo. TO's offenses were focused, consistent, and maxed out execution due to a structured system that had been in place for seasons. Our offensive philosophy is pretty much a train-wreck imo. Towards the end of the last 3 seasons, our offense has gotten worse. That is totally opposite of how it should be. I think that is because we have no "system" or core philosophy. Beck referred to our offense as a "mutt". How many times have you ever seen a mutt win a dog-show? NONE. They can make nice pets and can be cute to look at or play with, but when facing the elite, mutts don't get it done. THAT really hinders TMart, and our team, imo. The biggest measure of a QB, imo, is their ability to make plays and run their offense. When does TMart make "that" play? When does he make "that" throw? I just don't see it. It seems to me that he would make a great scramble for a big 1st down, but he doesn't. Actually, imo, his running is not very good. Straight line speed? Great, but that doesn't really get showcased much at the QB spot. Regarding running the offense, our offense has had many, many underachieving efforts with TMart taking the snaps, and yes I know there are many other factors involved, but it just does not seem to be working to me. That are also many times that TMart does things that are just not good, like when he threw the ball to K Reed who was like 7 yards behind the LOS in the bowl game. Just throw the ball away. Where is the gamesmanship and awareness? Too many plays like that out of a 2-year starter imo.

I know you are being facetious, but there are many time when it IS Taylor's fault. He runs into blocked players quite often, he panics and leaves too soon sometimes, and he often does not "feel" pressure coming. The O-line clearly has it faults, but TMarts pocket presence, or lack there-of, compounds the problem. True to the Red has made some very good points in this thread. Some of his posts are brass, but there is a lot spot on assessment there. I'm not trying to bashing Taylor, just saying it how it is. I REALLY want Tmart to succeed and win us championships, but I just don't see it At the same time, the oline's shortcomings compound Taylor's problems. It goes both ways. It is a team sport afterall. He skewed the thread into a Taylor bashing session. I don't care how many good points he had in doing so. If you're waiting for a QB to come in and win us a championship, I hope you're patient. Teams win championships. Not quarterbacks. A lot of things need to improve to reach that level. The QB position on this team is far from the top of that list. Don't get me wrong, it's on the list. Everyone on the team needs to improve to reach that level. Hyper-scrutinizing the QB position is easy, but it's lazy and to do so is failing to see the big picture. It's not like Taylor's goofy throwing motion is losing us games and keeping our defense from playing at a championship level. It didn't seem like he skewed this thread to me. He voiced an opinion and made many valid points, imo. Now he did come across as brass and I'm sure he rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. I totally acknowledge that teams, not QB's, win championships. That being said, teams rarely win championships without elite QB's, and Nebraska has NEVER won a championship without an elite QB. I also agree that we have much bigger problems than TMart, but this thread is about TMart, not those other issues. I personally think he has developed a lot and I think he often takes too much of the blame. That being said, I don't think he is close to being an elite QB, despite being a 2 year starter, and I don't think we use him in the most advantageous way. I'm also doubtful that he'll become what I consider an elite QB. What surprises me though, is when someone points out obvious weaknesses of TMarts, they are often ridiculed, have their fandom questioned, and are just generally bashed. I'm amazed how honest criticism of a QB gets some people so fired up.

People that talk about how good TMart is because of his all-time yardage ranking crack me up. Since when did stats like that really matter? He passed Tommie Frazier. So? Do you honestly think he is anywhere close to as good as Tommie was at running his offense? Tommie made huge plays, game changing plays, national championship game changing plays. Tmarts numbers are better because we use Tmart WAY more than we used Tommie. I think Tommie was like 14% of our offense while I believe Taylor has been close to 70% of our offense. That is a fault of our coaching imo. Just because someone has done more of something than someone else, does not make them better. Vinney Testaverde has more NFL passing yards than Fouts, Brees, Montana, Unitas, Brady, Kelly, Young, Simms, Aikman, Warner, Bradshaw, and Eli. So what? All those guys are or were better than Vinny, he just played longer and had more opportunity. I don't see how anyone in their right mind can WATCH Taylor run his offense and watch Tommie run his offense and put them in the same sentence. It's not ever close. We are not talking fantasy football, we are talking actual football.

I know you are being facetious, but there are many time when it IS Taylor's fault. He runs into blocked players quite often, he panics and leaves too soon sometimes, and he often does not "feel" pressure coming. The O-line clearly has it faults, but TMarts pocket presence, or lack there-of, compounds the problem. True to the Red has made some very good points in this thread. Some of his posts are brass, but there is a lot spot on assessment there. I'm not trying to bashing Taylor, just saying it how it is. I REALLY want Tmart to succeed and win us championships, but I just don't see it

Dunno about that--for every South Carolina, we had an Ohio State where the offense was able to bounce back and forget/overcome their errors. And the Michigan game was chock full of denfensive choke-jobs, if we want to be honest with ourselves here. We have? I seem to remember WAY more South Carolina type games than I do tOSU type games. Could you give some examples?

That's kinda why it is fun though.

Agree. This is actually a lot closer to "what we do" than is some of the stuff that we do...if that makes any sense, lol. It is closer to our "standard" offense than when we have our RB take snaps under center and pitch the ball to our QB.

I actually like that a lot. I never saw the RB taking snaps from under center, though. Can you find a video that leads with that and then if followed by the ski-gun so it would get Becks attention?

My question to this is, what good is a qb that throws a post ball when he's supposed to throw an out. A d-lineman who plays a gap when he's supposed to stunt outside. A LB who blitzes when he's supposed to cover the flat. A safety thats supposed to play deep middle instead of man on the TE. A rb that's supposed to max protect instead of running the wheel pattern. a...... well that's about enough of that. My point is that sometimes the most athletically gifted player doesnt get the job done. If guys like Marlowe, Cassidy and Thorell are so much more sharp in practice then they should be the ones on the field. I know there's always that one or two guys that "have to be on the field no matter what" but if those guys are doggin practice and not studying well enough, you just cant make an exception for them becuase then you throw out of balace things like team chemistry and trust. I know this has been discussed over and over and there are two sides to the argument, but when a player like Turner flat out admits publicly that he was struggling and got beat out, this case should just be closed. My opinion, based on facts, open to argument. While that is all true, I think there is a flip side. If your system is so complicated that by far superior athletes are kept off the field for lesser athletes, then there is a problem. The star athlete doing the wrong thing will lose the game, but the poor athlete not being able to get the job done or make a play, won't really win you the game either. It's kind of a catch-22 imo. If we occasionally saw the lesser athlete playing over the great athlete, I'd venture to say that it was just that particular situation. We see the lesser athlete beating out the superior athlete quite often. Whatever is causing that, and with the frequency we see it happening it has to be system/coaching related, needs to be fixed before we are going to move to the next level. Another thing, referring specifically to the Turner/Marlowe situation, is why do we try to use Marlowe like we would Turner? There is that option play that we ran with JT early in the season where he would motion towards TMart then reverse direction to be the pitch man to TMart. Seemed like a good play with JT, but at the end of the season we were running it with Marlowe. Seriously? Marlowe as a pitch man? We also would run Marlowe on end around plays and reverses. He is just too slow for that, we can't just pull out what is probably our most electric athlete and put in in what is one of our slower athletes and utilize them the same way. After each loss, we always hear how "we didn't execute." In many of those situations, our players have not really been put into situations to execute. The player needs to have the knowledge, skills, and heart to execute the play 100%. Our coaches need to have the knowledge and skills to put our players in situation where there skills to execute can be maximized. I think we are seriously lacking in that department, unfortunately.

In theory? Yes. In reality? No. That's just the way of the world. Things that winners do are often considered strong points, while a loser doing the same thing is often considered a flaw.

The Callahan thread was locked because the conversation was devolving into personal attacks against the OP. Rather than hand out a bunch of warnings, we locked the thread after some discussion in the Super Secret Mod Lair. The reason similar threads are locked up is that it can become unwieldy to have the same conversation taking place in five different places. Points are made in one thread that would bring about better conversation in the other threads. So should that post be made four times, or should we just merge the thread with the other one, and have the point in one place? It's a philosophical question, and we've had some discussion about it HERE. Thanks, I'll check out that like. It just seems really cumbersome with all the thread locking, I look forward to checking out the link. Thanks for the info.