Starling is a cheeky dude

[knapplc]

He should have been a situational/Wildcat QB a la Tim Tebow, as well as taking Marlowe's place on those jet sweeps. A guy you get on the field 20 snaps a game and find a way to put the ball in his hands for 12-15 of them.

Right, because all those records he nearly set were worthless.

The ONLY thing preventing Taylor from rewriting the record books was a high ankle sprain. This revisionist history needs to stop.

His shoddy performances against SDSU and Texas beg to differ. Most telling of all is that the way he floundered in those games was identical to the way he floundered after the high-ankle sprain. Revisionist history is conveniently forgetting those performances and blaming everything on a high-ankle sprain that, in a lot of ways, did nothing to change the slide that had already been set in motion.

Taylor's last run of any consequence was in the K State game, nine and a half quarters before he sprained his ankle. No TD runs---or big runs at all---in those 9 quarters.

Let's face facts: Taylor is, by and large, a one-trick pony. As soon as teams schemed to take that trick away and dared us to beat them in some other way, he was worse than useless. And that's the problem with being one-diminsional. If Taylor was able to throw (and our receivers could catch), then loading the box would expose our opponents to plays downfield. When they pull back to cover the pass, Taylor could rip them with runs. And so on.

Having said all of that, I will blame this 50/50 on our offense not putting Taylor in position to succeed in light of his horrible passing fundamentals. But to suggest that everything would magically have been okay if Taylor's ankle was 100% is, IMO, conveniently ignoring what had already begun to emerge before the Mizzou game.

The fact that he was a Freshman making his fourth and sixth career starts beg to differ as well. There are some bizarre standards being set for Martinez. If he's not as perfect and polished as a fifth-year senior, some people want to kick him to the curb. Me, I'm pretty thrilled with the fact that he performed as well as he did as a Freshman. Nine wins and a Big XII North title under his leadership - with a conference title three points away - isn't bad. It's better than Blaine Gabbert, the rumored top QB prospect in this year's draft, can boast.

As for his lack of production after K-State, that's hogwash. As has been mentioned, the passes he put in the hands of receivers during Texas would have, if caught, won us the game. He LIT UP Oklahoma State to the tune of 300+ yards and 5 TDs, so the allegation that he's a "one-trick pony" is also hogwash. And before we go all crazy with "OSU is a terrible defense" let's look at the stats - 46th in the country in Pass Efficiency. Certainly not great, but not chopped liver, either, especially in the pass-happy Big 12.

The kid was a FRESHMAN. Seriously - what did you expect? Perfection?

EDIT - forgot to mention that Taylor did all that against the 28th-rated schedule in the country.

 

[knapplc]

I guarantee back in the 90s our coach wasn't a huge motivator. Sure, he motivated but he wasn't the main source. It was the players. When your peers on your team are getting jacked up and motivating hard(Peters, Wistrom, etc)that has more influence than the coaches.

You have got to be kidding me. Osborne is a master motivator. The man tours the country giving motivational speeches. That's insane.

 

[Blackshirtsguru]

I guarantee back in the 90s our coach wasn't a huge motivator. Sure, he motivated but he wasn't the main source. It was the players. When your peers on your team are getting jacked up and motivating hard(Peters, Wistrom, etc)that has more influence than the coaches.

You have got to be kidding me. Osborne is a master motivator. The man tours the country giving motivational speeches. That's insane.

I'm glad you chimed in when ya did because after reading that I started having heart palpitations! Just because someone doesn't run around the locker room, slobbering all over the place, screaming 45 obsceneties a minute, doesn't mean he isn't a motivator. I have old HS friends (some who were damn good) who played under Osborne during the "94-95 era". They say that man would get them so motivated, they would have ran through walls after his speeches. Remember...it's now how you say it, it's what you say!

Oh and let's talk about Charlie McBride....I have heard that he would get his Blackshirts so jacked up, that he had to keep them from fighting each other before a game. Like a bunch of caged pit bulls. True Story.

 

[zoogs]

Glendower, how did our best talent not score TDs this year?

There's thread after thread of people trying to address this one; it's probably too complex and multi-faceted for me to know for sure

What I mean is this.

Our coach decided our "best talent" was Taylor, and put him in position to score a bunch of TDs this year by revolving the offense around him and making him starting QB.

If your gripe is that our other playmakers didn't score enough of them...yes, I agree.

The kid was a FRESHMAN. Seriously - what did you expect? Perfection?

No, that is not what I expected at all. What I expected actually was three regular season losses, so he exceeded those expectations, but made up for it by practically single-handedly costing us the CCG and being lifeless against Washington.

This was always my problem with starting Taylor. You start him and you have to expect mistakes, games where he is cold and costs us, games that we can't win because of his inexperience and streakiness. Injury ended up having a lot to do with that, so most of my criticism is not going with Green for the final two games, but Taylor has a lot to do with the result too. It is not Taylor at fault so much as the decision about Taylor, in my opinion.

2010 was our year to make a run in many ways. It is a mistake to make a tactical choice that results in lowering our realistic expectations for the team. However, I'm sure Bo thought of it as an instant spark that would push us over the top. But I hope he has learned by now that you can only patiently build up something over the years, like he has on defense, rather than make quick sweeping changes or bandage patch-on fixes.

Bo must have seen some of those '5 hour energy' commercials and bought into that idea. When really, it's crap and no substitute for a good sleep schedule.

 

[junior4949]

I guarantee back in the 90s our coach wasn't a huge motivator. Sure, he motivated but he wasn't the main source. It was the players. When your peers on your team are getting jacked up and motivating hard(Peters, Wistrom, etc)that has more influence than the coaches.

You have got to be kidding me. Osborne is a master motivator. The man tours the country giving motivational speeches. That's insane.

You know better than this. Never ever let facts get in the way of a great argument.

 

[knapplc]

The kid was a FRESHMAN. Seriously - what did you expect? Perfection?

No, that is not what I expected at all. What I expected actually was three regular season losses, so he exceeded those expectations, but made up for it by practically single-handedly costing us the CCG and being lifeless against Washington.

This was always my problem with starting Taylor. You start him and you have to expect mistakes, games where he is cold and costs us, games that we can't win because of his inexperience and streakiness. Injury ended up having a lot to do with that, so most of my criticism is not going with Green for the final two games, but Taylor has a lot to do with the result too. It is not Taylor at fault so much as the decision about Taylor, in my opinion.

2010 was our year to make a run in many ways. It is a mistake to make a tactical choice that results in lowering our realistic expectations for the team. However, I'm sure Bo thought of it as an instant spark that would push us over the top. But I hope he has learned by now that you can only patiently build up something over the years, like he has on defense, rather than make quick sweeping changes or bandage patch-on fixes.

Bo must have seen some of those '5 hour energy' commercials and bought into that idea. When really, it's crap and no substitute for a good sleep schedule.

This is exactly what I mean about "revisionist history." It's Taylor Martinez' fault that we lost the CCG. Up 17-0, Taylor allowed Oklahoma to outscore us 23-3. You gotta be kidding me. :facepalm:

And "lifeless against Washington" has more to do with our defense and our O Line than with Martinez. Sure, blame it on Martinez, even though several key members of our defense had already checked out of the program for all intents and purposes, and barely put on a semblance of an effort out there. I could name names and cite Facebook posts where these guys were counting down the days before they left the Huskers, but that wouldn't matter - to some, Taylor Martinez is the scapegoat.

As a Freshman, he was supposed to overcome injury, horrific line play and an OC who has been shown the door for over a year now. As a Freshman he was not allowed to lose more than three games.

zoogies, your 20/20 hindsight is brilliant, as always.

 

[zoogs]

Huh, I seem to remember criticizing the defense a lot for allowing a 17-0 lead to evaporate, and being jumped on by almost everybody for daring to say anything about our defense....

I guess the validity of one's argument depends entirely on if you are defending Martinez, or defending Watson.

OK, I'll give you that the defense played a big part in allowing the Sooners to come back. I even said as much from the outset. But how did they even start to come back? We had all that momentum, were driving towards the goal line, and Taylor makes one of the worst decisions to throw across his body you can ever make, lofting it up there for an interception in the end zone. And yes, for the rest of the game he was completely useless. There is no revisionist history here. We did not need to stick with him throughout the second half, but we chose to. It was something a number of people were calling for even as the game was happening, but became increasingly obvious it wasn't going to happen as the second half wore on.

I actually didn't get on board calling for Taylor to be pulled until towards the end, when it was likely too late anyways, so call that hindsight if you will.

ven though several key members of our defense had already checked out of the program for all intents and purposes,

You're right on that, the bowl game was a huge CF in so many ways.

 

[knapplc]

You're not blaming me for the red herring of "almost everyone" jumping on you. I do not represent "almost everyone." Frankly, I don't recall it that way, but if you'd like to pull up quotes that support this, I'm willing to read them.

Nor do I see what defending Watson has to do with the allegation that "Martinez single-handedly [cost] us the CCG." We're not talking about Watson, we're examining your statement that Martinez was the primary factor in our CCG loss.

 

[zoogs]

I'm not blaming you at all, knapplc, just making an observation. Criticizing the defense in any way for that game was extremely unpopular. I considered it a team loss. So it's unfair to say Taylor single handedly lost it for us, but he did cost us, big time. From handing OU the momentum they needed, to being completely ineffective for at least all of the second half. When we had chances to come back and tie it or win it, he laid back and took drive-killing, chance-killing sacks that were completely unnecessary. By being on the field that second half he offered nothing. The opportunity to take him out was there, but we didn't take it.

 

[knapplc]

With whom should we have replaced Taylor?

 

[bshirt]

He should have been a situational/Wildcat QB a la Tim Tebow, as well as taking Marlowe's place on those jet sweeps. A guy you get on the field 20 snaps a game and find a way to put the ball in his hands for 12-15 of them.

Right, because all those records he nearly set were worthless.

The ONLY thing preventing Taylor from rewriting the record books was a high ankle sprain. This revisionist history needs to stop.

His shoddy performances against SDSU and Texas beg to differ. Most telling of all is that the way he floundered in those games was identical to the way he floundered after the high-ankle sprain. Revisionist history is conveniently forgetting those performances and blaming everything on a high-ankle sprain that, in a lot of ways, did nothing to change the slide that had already been set in motion.

Taylor's last run of any consequence was in the K State game, nine and a half quarters before he sprained his ankle. No TD runs---or big runs at all---in those 9 quarters.

Let's face facts: Taylor is, by and large, a one-trick pony. As soon as teams schemed to take that trick away and dared us to beat them in some other way, he was worse than useless. And that's the problem with being one-diminsional. If Taylor was able to throw (and our receivers could catch), then loading the box would expose our opponents to plays downfield. When they pull back to cover the pass, Taylor could rip them with runs. And so on.

Having said all of that, I will blame this 50/50 on our offense not putting Taylor in position to succeed in light of his horrible passing fundamentals. But to suggest that everything would magically have been okay if Taylor's ankle was 100% is, IMO, conveniently ignoring what had already begun to emerge before the Mizzou game.

Oh gimme a break, Hujan. Did you even watch that game?

Tmart's "shoddy" Texas game was 99.9% our wrs dropping balls all over the place. Ted's guys were so impressively consistent they continued dropping Lee's passes too. Dissing Tmart for that is grossly unfair to say the very least. Our hands of stone wrs catch half those passes they dropped we score a couple more TDs and the run game opens up. But....oh well....

I didn't see the SDSU game but even "if" Tmart sucked in that game our running game should have steam-rolled them anyway. Freakin SDSU.....just another SW gem.

I guess Tmart forgot to be a "one trick pony" when he threw five TD passes vs Okie St, right? Geesh....what do you want from the guy?

 

[Hercules]

I'm not blaming you at all, knapplc, just making an observation. Criticizing the defense in any way for that game was extremely unpopular. I considered it a team loss. So it's unfair to say Taylor single handedly lost it for us, but he did cost us, big time. From handing OU the momentum they needed, to being completely ineffective for at least all of the second half. When we had chances to come back and tie it or win it, he laid back and took drive-killing, chance-killing sacks that were completely unnecessary. By being on the field that second half he offered nothing. The opportunity to take him out was there, but we didn't take it.

I think it was a team loss, although the offensive meltdown that happened in the OU game was far greater than the defensive version.

Especially throughout the second half, we were asking Martinez to be a dropback passer. He's not a dropback passer. He wasn't early in the season, and for some reason after he was hurt, everybody expected that he would materialize into some great dropback passer that could beat teams like Oklahoma. He couldn't, he's not that player. Darron Thomas isn't either, nor is Cam Newton - what makes them formidable QBs is their versatility, and Martinez didn't have that anymore after he was hurt. He had to be a dropback passer or just hand the ball off, and he wasn't ready to be a dropback passer.

The Oklahoma game, as far as I'm concerned, was lost when we went away from the Wildcat in favor of asking Martinez to run a west coast passing game. Burkhead was our strength on offense, that's who we should have given the ball to.

 

[Hujan]

He should have been a situational/Wildcat QB a la Tim Tebow, as well as taking Marlowe's place on those jet sweeps. A guy you get on the field 20 snaps a game and find a way to put the ball in his hands for 12-15 of them.

Right, because all those records he nearly set were worthless.

The ONLY thing preventing Taylor from rewriting the record books was a high ankle sprain. This revisionist history needs to stop.

His shoddy performances against SDSU and Texas beg to differ. Most telling of all is that the way he floundered in those games was identical to the way he floundered after the high-ankle sprain. Revisionist history is conveniently forgetting those performances and blaming everything on a high-ankle sprain that, in a lot of ways, did nothing to change the slide that had already been set in motion.

Taylor's last run of any consequence was in the K State game, nine and a half quarters before he sprained his ankle. No TD runs---or big runs at all---in those 9 quarters.

Let's face facts: Taylor is, by and large, a one-trick pony. As soon as teams schemed to take that trick away and dared us to beat them in some other way, he was worse than useless. And that's the problem with being one-diminsional. If Taylor was able to throw (and our receivers could catch), then loading the box would expose our opponents to plays downfield. When they pull back to cover the pass, Taylor could rip them with runs. And so on.

Having said all of that, I will blame this 50/50 on our offense not putting Taylor in position to succeed in light of his horrible passing fundamentals. But to suggest that everything would magically have been okay if Taylor's ankle was 100% is, IMO, conveniently ignoring what had already begun to emerge before the Mizzou game.

The fact that he was a Freshman making his fourth and sixth career starts beg to differ as well. There are some bizarre standards being set for Martinez. If he's not as perfect and polished as a fifth-year senior, some people want to kick him to the curb. Me, I'm pretty thrilled with the fact that he performed as well as he did as a Freshman. Nine wins and a Big XII North title under his leadership - with a conference title three points away - isn't bad. It's better than Blaine Gabbert, the rumored top QB prospect in this year's draft, can boast.

As for his lack of production after K-State, that's hogwash. As has been mentioned, the passes he put in the hands of receivers during Texas would have, if caught, won us the game. He LIT UP Oklahoma State to the tune of 300+ yards and 5 TDs, so the allegation that he's a "one-trick pony" is also hogwash. And before we go all crazy with "OSU is a terrible defense" let's look at the stats - 46th in the country in Pass Efficiency. Certainly not great, but not chopped liver, either, especially in the pass-happy Big 12.

The kid was a FRESHMAN. Seriously - what did you expect? Perfection?

EDIT - forgot to mention that Taylor did all that against the 28th-rated schedule in the country.

Now you're making excuses about him being a freshman. In other words, you're conceding not only that he wasn't the greatest QB, but that it was due to something other than his ankle injury.

Whatever the explanation is---an inherent flaw in his game or his inexperience---is irrelevant to the point I was making: Martinez ran up some gaudy numbers when teams did not anticipate him, then grew less and less effective as teams began to take away the zone read. I personally think that his running stats would not have changed significantly even if he hadn't injured his ankle. You apparently disagree, but you have the problem of the Texas and SDSU games to overcome. Why didn't Taylor run all over those teams?

As for the Okie State game, there is no dismissing that he had a great game that day. But one great game does not a good QB make. The hallmark of a good QB is consistency. And even you must agree that Taylor was anything but consistent, injury or otherwise.

 

[Blaze1up]

Mock draft has him going 16th to the Dodgers.

http://www.mymlbdraft.com/MLB-Mock-Draft-2011

 

[Hercules]

He should have been a situational/Wildcat QB a la Tim Tebow, as well as taking Marlowe's place on those jet sweeps. A guy you get on the field 20 snaps a game and find a way to put the ball in his hands for 12-15 of them.

Right, because all those records he nearly set were worthless.

The ONLY thing preventing Taylor from rewriting the record books was a high ankle sprain. This revisionist history needs to stop.

His shoddy performances against SDSU and Texas beg to differ. Most telling of all is that the way he floundered in those games was identical to the way he floundered after the high-ankle sprain. Revisionist history is conveniently forgetting those performances and blaming everything on a high-ankle sprain that, in a lot of ways, did nothing to change the slide that had already been set in motion.

Taylor's last run of any consequence was in the K State game, nine and a half quarters before he sprained his ankle. No TD runs---or big runs at all---in those 9 quarters.

Let's face facts: Taylor is, by and large, a one-trick pony. As soon as teams schemed to take that trick away and dared us to beat them in some other way, he was worse than useless. And that's the problem with being one-diminsional. If Taylor was able to throw (and our receivers could catch), then loading the box would expose our opponents to plays downfield. When they pull back to cover the pass, Taylor could rip them with runs. And so on.

Having said all of that, I will blame this 50/50 on our offense not putting Taylor in position to succeed in light of his horrible passing fundamentals. But to suggest that everything would magically have been okay if Taylor's ankle was 100% is, IMO, conveniently ignoring what had already begun to emerge before the Mizzou game.

The fact that he was a Freshman making his fourth and sixth career starts beg to differ as well. There are some bizarre standards being set for Martinez. If he's not as perfect and polished as a fifth-year senior, some people want to kick him to the curb. Me, I'm pretty thrilled with the fact that he performed as well as he did as a Freshman. Nine wins and a Big XII North title under his leadership - with a conference title three points away - isn't bad. It's better than Blaine Gabbert, the rumored top QB prospect in this year's draft, can boast.

As for his lack of production after K-State, that's hogwash. As has been mentioned, the passes he put in the hands of receivers during Texas would have, if caught, won us the game. He LIT UP Oklahoma State to the tune of 300+ yards and 5 TDs, so the allegation that he's a "one-trick pony" is also hogwash. And before we go all crazy with "OSU is a terrible defense" let's look at the stats - 46th in the country in Pass Efficiency. Certainly not great, but not chopped liver, either, especially in the pass-happy Big 12.

The kid was a FRESHMAN. Seriously - what did you expect? Perfection?

EDIT - forgot to mention that Taylor did all that against the 28th-rated schedule in the country.

Now you're making excuses about him being a freshman. In other words, you're conceding not only that he wasn't the greatest QB, but that it was due to something other than his ankle injury.

Whatever the explanation is---an inherent flaw in his game or his inexperience---is irrelevant to the point I was making: Martinez ran up some gaudy numbers when teams did not anticipate him, then grew less and less effective as teams began to take away the zone read. I personally think that his running stats would not have changed significantly even if he hadn't injured his ankle. You apparently disagree, but you have the problem of the Texas and SDSU games to overcome. Why didn't Taylor run all over those teams?

As for the Okie State game, there is no dismissing that he had a great game that day. But one great game does not a good QB make. The hallmark of a good QB is consistency. And even you must agree that Taylor was anything but consistent, injury or otherwise.

Hujan, you didn't answer his question. What did you expect?

Seriously, at the beginning of the season, when Martinez was named the starter, what did you expect from Taylor Martinez?