Slot Receiver
- Thread starter Hunter94
- Start date
huskerscott
Starter
So you basically just said what I said you just made a longer explanation.1. You don't understand offensive football if you think that we lost the Texas game because they stopped Taylor. Of course they stopped Taylor from running the ball, that was their ENTIRE gameplan. They sold out. If a defense dedicates 9 guys to stop your running game, they're going to stop your running game. You just have to pass the ball to your wide open wide receivers, which we did, and we dropped it. That offensive performance isn't on Taylor. Zac Lee didn't fair any better in that game than Taylor did. You know why? Because we dropped the ball.He wasnt schooling Texas either. In fact was replaced by Lee in the 2nd half. I know we had million drops, but we had a million drops because they were stopping Martinez.Kapplc - nope. Just clarifying that he didn’t stun everyone until he was hurt. Everyone blames it on his injury, but what was the excuse for SDSU?
He said he was playing devil’s advocate, I was just playing along
Like I said this offense is stoppable. Especially when the defense is fast and plays disciplined. Of course our offense doesnt do them any favors by not being multi dimenisonal either.
2. Every offense is stoppable.
3. When the defense plays fast and disciplined, they'll stop ANY offense. But stopping an option offense requires defenses to play faster and even more disciplined.
4. Our offense was zero-dimensional at the end of the season. We didn't have a running game, and we didn't have a passing game. The reason is because we didn't have a running game. Before Taylor got hurt, we had a dynamic running game. When teams tried to stop the run, we then had a passing game available to us (Texas, and Oklahoma State). If they tried to stop Taylor from running AND from passing, then Roy Helu goes for 300 yards (Missouri).
I don't know how I can explain this any better, so people please help me out, because some posters still aren't getting it.
1. I never said we lost the Texas game because of Taylor.
2. Teams that sold out to stop the run/taylor were successful and the scoreboard shows it whether it was drop passes, penalties, roughing the passer calls, missed tackles, hometown referees or whatever other excuse you can come up with.
3. The only reason we had a dynamic running game in the first part of the season is because we played teams that defenses were SLOW and UNDISCIPLINED, plus alot of teams didnt have film on how to stop our offense. Once they did it was pretty simple.... stop Martinez, stop Nebraska. Every defense knows taylor cant throw the ball worth a crap.
bshirt
Banned
Who said they had "awesome" defenses? What straw-man are you dreaming up?
The point is that without a healthy Tmart we probably don't win those games and almost certainly don't torch their defenses. Our 09 offense would have scored 31 & 51 pts on them? lol! Well.....probably not.
huskerscott
Starter
huskerscott
Starter
I get what your saying for the most part..... Im just saying our running attack wasnt stopped because of Taylor's injury, it was stopped because we faced teams with better disciplined defenses. We had nothing to counter it.... other than the dropped passes in the Texas game and maybe OU I dont see any other way we couldve won the games we lost with the offense we were running whether Taylor was healthy or not.
Look at 1st UW game and the 2nd UW. In the first game, UW was sitting back seeing what taylor was gonna do. In the 2nd game they were T-ing off on him liked a pack wild animals smelling human flesh.
Last edited by a moderator:
suh_fan93
Heisman Trophy Winner
Just happened to stumble on these stats and it reminded me of this thread so I thought I'd share. It was a list of the top 20 greatest NFL Quarterbacks of all time. The article basically pointed out that 'completion percentage' isn't a great indicator of a good passer.knapplc said:
Just a few examples:
QB/ Career completion %
Terry Bradshaw 51%
Johnny Unitas 54%
John Elway 56%
Roger Staubach 57%
Bart Starr 57%
Dan Marino 59%
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
You can't compare pro numbers to college numbers, so I don't know why you'd bring up pro QBs in a discussion of college football.
suh_fan93
Heisman Trophy Winner
Maybe but for me anyway it still points out that some of the greatest quarterbacks even in the NFL had completion %'s in the 50's. Not a knock on what you had said earlier knapple I just found those numbers interesting. I would have sworn guys like that would have had a higher completion %.
I think Steve Young's was the highest I saw, I think it was 67% and I know Favre, Tom Brady, Joe Montana and Peyton were all in the 60's % wise.
Again, just an observation.... :thumbs
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc
International Man of Mystery
All-time, only 30 QBs even have a completion percentage over 60% in the NFL. Against the kind of speed and DB talent they face, completion percentages in the 50s are the norm, not the exception. This year 55 different QBs had completion percentages above 60% in college ball. That's nearly half the QBs in division one ball.
I'm not trying to crap on your point, but it's just not comparable.
kchusker_chris
All-American
lightbulb* - they must have receivers that can catch then...how innovative of them. excuse me for a while as I ponder this revelation and try to identify a way NU could apply it to the college game...
...
...naw, after further thought it's a stupid idea - a receiver just needs to block.
suh_fan93
Heisman Trophy Winner
Yeah, I think my post kind of indicated that: (Terry Bradshaw: 51%)
The point being completion % is NOT the best indicator of whether or not someone is a good passer...
Last edited by a moderator: