Chatelain's column - 2003 all over again

[Saunders]

What the original stat was supposed to be was that he led the nation in fumbles 3 years in a row, and that's not true either.

Why isn't this one true, I know from past research that it was indeed true for last year but I guess I can't recall looking for the previous 2 years.

He was tied.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Can someone give me a link that shows this stat? I honestly have looked and can't find it.

And, even if true, my post above shows that if he wasn't injured he would be starting and playing. AND, the offense would be more productive.

 

[EZ-E]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

 

[BigRedBuster]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

Agree!!!!

 

[NUpolo8]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

That one game was good.

 

[EZ-E]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

That one game was good.

Is it unfair to say that a four year starter and a returning all-big ten player wouldn't improve?

 

[NUpolo8]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

That one game was good.

Is it unfair to say that a four year starter and a returning all-big ten player wouldn't improve?

No, absolutely not. But that's not what you said now, was it?

And I question how healthy Taylor has been since Mizzou 2010. Last year was last year, sure, but that injury completely changed the trajectory of his career arc, and probably Bo Pelini's too. It's almost 30 for 30 worthy.

 

[EZ-E]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

That one game was good.

Is it unfair to say that a four year starter and a returning all-big ten player wouldn't improve?

No, absolutely not. But that's not what you said now, was it?

And I question how healthy Taylor has been since Mizzou 2010. Last year was last year, sure, but that injury completely changed the trajectory of his career arc, and probably Bo Pelini's too. It's almost 30 for 30 worthy.

K

 

[NUpolo8]

It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion.

That one game was good.

Is it unfair to say that a four year starter and a returning all-big ten player wouldn't improve?

No, absolutely not. But that's not what you said now, was it?

And I question how healthy Taylor has been since Mizzou 2010. Last year was last year, sure, but that injury completely changed the trajectory of his career arc, and probably Bo Pelini's too. It's almost 30 for 30 worthy.

K

I mean sure the 30 for 30 part is completely subjective. But since you're dismissing this and likely never to return to it, I guess that means you agree?

 

[ZRod]

What the original stat was supposed to be was that he led the nation in fumbles 3 years in a row, and that's not true either.

Why isn't this one true, I know from past research that it was indeed true for last year but I guess I can't recall looking for the previous 2 years.

He was tied.

Smartass haha!

Can someone give me a link that shows this stat? I honestly have looked and can't find it.

And, even if true, my post above shows that if he wasn't injured he would be starting and playing. AND, the offense would be more productive.

It's kind of an obscure stat to find actually I had to look for a good 20 minutes last year.

Here ya go, just select the year you want on the right hand tab.

http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/player-stat/fumble-category

 

[EZ-E]

Nah. Just trying to end the conversation with you.

 

[NUpolo8]

Nah. Just trying to end the conversation with you.

Next time, try it with a "you're correct". Its not my fault you tried to make a know it all point about Taylor Martinez improving this year when he wasn't injured when in actuality that adds up to 35 minutes and 58 seconds of a sample size.

 

[Ratt Mhule]

Nah. Just trying to end the conversation with you.

Next time, try it with a "you're correct". Its not my fault you tried to make a know it all point about Taylor Martinez improving this year when he wasn't injured when in actuality that adds up to 35 minutes and 58 seconds of a sample size.

"It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion."

Where did he say he improved based on a SSS? He said its unfair to say he WOULDN'T have improved if healthy the entire year.

 

[beanman]

The argument that Armstrong is only playing because Martinez is injured and Armstrong turned the ball over when Martinez would not have ignores the fact that Martinez led the NCAA each of the past three years in turnovers.

Can we stop trotting this out now?

Because it's a damned lie.

Where did he rank? Also . . . even if he didn't lead the NCAA it would be pretty tough to argue with the core of the argument: Taylor Martinez turned the ball over a lot.

I can't tell his ranking because I can't find an accurate list that lists total turnovers by player. You have to add up interceptions and fumbles separately.

What I was able to find (with 2 minutes of googling) is that he has never led the nation in turnovers.

What the original stat was supposed to be was that he led the nation in fumbles 3 years in a row, and that's not true either.

Of course, none of this excuses Nebraska's lack of emphasis on holding onto the football. It's just a knock people use on Taylor to prop up Tommy... even though he's on pace to beat Taylor's turnovers as a frosh.

Turnovers is BS yes, but the fumble stat was legit. I looked it up several times. He led the nation 3 times(once he was tied with Klein @ K-State IIRC). So please provide your stats so I can see what you mean.

 

[NUpolo8]

Nah. Just trying to end the conversation with you.

Next time, try it with a "you're correct". Its not my fault you tried to make a know it all point about Taylor Martinez improving this year when he wasn't injured when in actuality that adds up to 35 minutes and 58 seconds of a sample size.

"It's unfair to say that TMart wouldn't have shown improvement in this category this year when healthy in my opinion."

Where did he say he improved based on a SSS? He said its unfair to say he WOULDN'T have improved if healthy the entire year.

He didn;t say it. He doesn't have to. he said "Taylor Martinez has improved on this year when he wasn't hurt" The only game he wasn't hurt was the first game. Nebraska had the ball for 35 minutes and 58 seconds. He played the whole time. Every other game he's played in, according to everyone, he's been hurt.

And yes, its unfair to say he wouldn't have improved. But it's an unknowable thing, let alone a straw man argument. But he didn't say that. He tried to make a blanket statement, and I made a flip remark because that statement was stupid. Holy crap