Ryker Fyfe Broken Wrist - Armstrong still out...

[Landlord]

It's not hard to understand that I am making the distinction that our recruitment of quarterbacks was really good, vs. the quarterbacks on our roster actually being really good.

[Stone Cold]

I do remember alot on this board talkin about hot good Stanton and Darlington were or are and ive never seen them play once.

[Moiraine]

I do remember alot on this board talkin about hot good Stanton and Darlington were or are and ive never seen them play once.

 

Both were injured their senior years of H.S.

[Stone Cold]

And they never recovered.

[Mavric]

Tommy would be half of the 8yrs, Stanton fizzled under 2 staffs and transfered and Darlington was never going to be a starter regardless where he went because of injuries and we knew that before he graduated HS.

 

If you wanna measure it solely off of rankings before those players ever take the field then, sure.....our QB recruiting was just ACES!

Lots of assumptions and false conclusions in here.

 

Stanton didn't fizzle under two staffs. He played as a RSFr then was left off the fall camp roster by the new staff. Don't know if how it would have turned out but I don't think those two are equivalent.

 

And you're demonstrably false about Darlington because he is - in fact - playing. So assuming he would never play anywhere is false.

 

Not to mention that LoMS is exactly right that there is a definite distinction between recruiting, development and on-field success. You can be good at any mixture of those but failing in one area doesn't mean you were bad at all of them.

[MyBloodIsRed16]

I always kinda felt Stanton must not have been very bright. Seemed there were always comments he couldn't learn the offense. Was in my mind from what I saw better than Fyfe. Darlington showed me in spring he is also better than Fyfe. I just think the coaches have a soft spot because he is a senior walk-on. Have a feeling Darlington is a gamer. Just get him out there and see what happens. Some kids just don't practice as well as they play... and eveyone has heard of practice all Americans, and I think NU has a few of those

[Redux]

 

Tommy would be half of the 8yrs, Stanton fizzled under 2 staffs and transfered and Darlington was never going to be a starter regardless where he went because of injuries and we knew that before he graduated HS.

If you wanna measure it solely off of rankings before those players ever take the field then, sure.....our QB recruiting was just ACES!

 

Lots of assumptions and false conclusions in here.

 

Stanton didn't fizzle under two staffs. He played as a RSFr then was left off the fall camp roster by the new staff. Don't know if how it would have turned out but I don't think those two are equivalent.

 

And you're demonstrably false about Darlington because he is - in fact - playing. So assuming he would never play anywhere is false.

 

Not to mention that LoMS is exactly right that there is a definite distinction between recruiting, development and on-field success. You can be good at any mixture of those but failing in one area doesn't mean you were bad at all of them.

I'm a Stanton fan and wish he would have stayed, but he didn't pan out regardless how you look at it. If Bo were still here he probably still transfers.

 

All we heard for the last 3 years was how Darlington was basically one wrong shove from being comatose. That has changed this season, don't get me wrong I'm thrilled for him, but look back at the discussions.

 

LoMS can be right about that. Here's the pattern though: 2 guys accounted for 8 years of football, awesome. Those same 2 guys had no depth because the guys recruited with them or after end up transferring, fizzling and/or switching positions. Recruiting doesn't end when they sign. QB's need to be kept on campus for their first couple years and motivated enough to BE backup.

 

Answer me this, would we feel good about the QB position for 2017 and forward if this staff weren't here?

[MyBloodIsRed16]

 

 

 

Tommy would be half of the 8yrs, Stanton fizzled under 2 staffs and transfered and Darlington was never going to be a starter regardless where he went because of injuries and we knew that before he graduated HS.

If you wanna measure it solely off of rankings before those players ever take the field then, sure.....our QB recruiting was just ACES!

 

Lots of assumptions and false conclusions in here.

 

Stanton didn't fizzle under two staffs. He played as a RSFr then was left off the fall camp roster by the new staff. Don't know if how it would have turned out but I don't think those two are equivalent.

 

And you're demonstrably false about Darlington because he is - in fact - playing. So assuming he would never play anywhere is false.

 

Not to mention that LoMS is exactly right that there is a definite distinction between recruiting, development and on-field success. You can be good at any mixture of those but failing in one area doesn't mean you were bad at all of them.

I'm a Stanton fan and wish he would have stayed, but he didn't pan out regardless how you look at it. If Bo were still here he probably still transfers.

 

All we heard for the last 3 years was how Darlington was basically one wrong shove from being comatose. That has changed this season, don't get me wrong I'm thrilled for him, but look back at the discussions.

 

LoMS can be right about that. Here's the pattern though: 2 guys accounted for 8 years of football, awesome. Those same 2 guys had no depth because the guys recruited with them or after end up transferring, fizzling and/or switching positions. Recruiting doesn't end when they sign. QB's need to be kept on campus for their first couple years and motivated enough to BE backup.

 

Answer me this, would we feel good about the QB position for 2017 and forward if this staff weren't here?

I would not feel good about the QB situation. I just think about when T-Mart was playing and everyone was calling for TA to play.. I don't remember the noise to be as loud to have Stanton, Darlington,or Bush play over TA (notice I didn't even mention Fyfe). This coaching staff needs to get a QB drafted in the next few years and then you don't have to worry about backups transferring because if the wait their turn they can get drafted as well..... look at USC a few years back. The damn backups were getting drafted

[Stumpy1]

 

Tommy would be half of the 8yrs, Stanton fizzled under 2 staffs and transfered and Darlington was never going to be a starter regardless where he went because of injuries and we knew that before he graduated HS.

 

If you wanna measure it solely off of rankings before those players ever take the field then, sure.....our QB recruiting was just ACES!

Lots of assumptions and false conclusions in here.

 

Stanton didn't fizzle under two staffs. He played as a RSFr then was left off the fall camp roster by the new staff. Don't know if how it would have turned out but I don't think those two are equivalent.

 

And you're demonstrably false about Darlington because he is - in fact - playing. So assuming he would never play anywhere is false.

 

Not to mention that LoMS is exactly right that there is a definite distinction between recruiting, development and on-field success. You can be good at any mixture of those but failing in one area doesn't mean you were bad at all of them.

 

To be honest, If it weren't for Foltz's accident, I don't think Darlington would have played. He volunteered for the spot so he could find a way onto the field.

[Moiraine]

I always kinda felt Stanton must not have been very bright. Seemed there were always comments he couldn't learn the offense. Was in my mind from what I saw better than Fyfe. Darlington showed me in spring he is also better than Fyfe. I just think the coaches have a soft spot because he is a senior walk-on. Have a feeling Darlington is a gamer. Just get him out there and see what happens. Some kids just don't practice as well as they play... and eveyone has heard of practice all Americans, and I think NU has a few of those

I don't think it has anything to do with having a soft spot. You don't burn his redshirt unless POB is significantly better than Fyfe, unless your starter is injured early in the season or he's injured late and you have an extremely important game. I think, as a true freshman, POB isn't enough better than Fyfe (if better at all) to burn his shirt.

[Count 'Bility]

i dont think the soft spot theory is too far fetched. Now, it's high possible it doesnt pertain to the qb position, cuz yeah, at all costs, you really wanna redshirt your golden boy true freshman if you have a 5th year senior with 4 years starting exp. That's a given. But it was talked about in the offseason that this staff last season played guys despite some of the toxicity becuase they felt it be best that they didnt come in and just rock the boat to hard. And I think that theory paid off in the long run. Trust was generated. And those who didnt, left.

[GBRHouston]

 

I always kinda felt Stanton must not have been very bright. Seemed there were always comments he couldn't learn the offense. Was in my mind from what I saw better than Fyfe. Darlington showed me in spring he is also better than Fyfe. I just think the coaches have a soft spot because he is a senior walk-on. Have a feeling Darlington is a gamer. Just get him out there and see what happens. Some kids just don't practice as well as they play... and eveyone has heard of practice all Americans, and I think NU has a few of those

I don't think it has anything to do with having a soft spot. You don't burn his redshirt unless POB is significantly better than Fyfe, unless your starter is injured early in the season or he's injured late and you have an extremely important game. I think, as a true freshman, POB isn't enough better than Fyfe (if better at all) to burn his shirt.

Armstrong could be down. Ryker likely will be down. Darlington would be our first string man. What would we do if he gets hurt or just isn't cutting it? Put in Lamar Jackson? This isn't a throw away game. We need to win this. This opinion may be unpopular, but if those hypotheticals happen, we'll have to burn it. Of course I hope nothing happens. I hope either Tommy starts and we're back to normal, or Darlington starts and he lights it up.

[Mr. ES335]

Did anyone know that last years Nebraska QB Tommy Armstrong did something unprecedented in College football history?

In back to back games, he was the MVP for Iowa in their game against the Huskers, and the MVP in their Bowl game too.

BTW,

How is that Big 10 conference working out for you Bugeaters?

Remember how all of you said back in the 90's how you'd kick any team in the B1G's a$$?

[Moiraine]

Did anyone know that last years Nebraska QB Tommy Armstrong did something unprecedented in College football history?

In back to back games, he was the MVP for Iowa in their game against the Huskers, and the MVP in their Bowl game too.

BTW,

How is that Big 10 conference working out for you Bugeaters?

Remember how all of you said back in the 90's how you'd kick any team in the B1G's a$$?

I think we "all" said that because in the 90's we would have kicked any Big Ten team's a$$es.

 

Apparently Iowa fans think time travel is real and Nebraska is still coached by Osborne and has the same OL, defense and Tommie Frazier and therefore every loss since 2011 proves Nebraska was bad in the 90's.

[Caven]

Did anyone know that last years Nebraska QB Tommy Armstrong did something unprecedented in College football history?

In back to back games, he was the MVP for Iowa in their game against the Huskers, and the MVP in their Bowl game too.

BTW,

How is that Big 10 conference working out for you Bugeaters?

Remember how all of you said back in the 90's how you'd kick any team in the B1G's a$$?

 

To be fair - in the 90s they would have.