How good can we be with TM under center next year?

[strigori]

Passing is an incredible threat and when down by 14 and time ticking, passing wins games. We can't pass to win. If they game is on the line, do you really want it to be lost or won on Martinez's arm?

Again - this is what everybody said about Osborne's offenses. Can't win from behind. Now they're saying the same thing about Taylor, even though just earlier this year, Taylor led the greatest comeback in school history.

I just don't understand how people can argue that we can't win more than four games if Martinez is at QB. Martinez was not the problem against Texas in 2010. He wasn't the problem down the stretch in 2010 either - our QB depth was.

In 2011, Martinez wasn't the problem against Michigan, Northwestern, or South Carolina.

It's not that I think that Taylor is some amazing QB, it's that there's a serious crack in the logic that people are using to arrive at the conclusion we'll only ever be able to win 9-10 games with Taylor at QB.

With all due respect to Dr. Tom, he very rarely won for a multiple score deficit. There is a reason why our 21 point comeback was a school record. People need to look at years other than 93-97. For most of Osborne's 25 years, in the rare event they got down by more than 14, it was pretty much over. Though admittedly it did not happen that often, but it did happen.

Taylor may not be 'the problem' but he is not 'the solution' either. He just is not a game changer, he managed most games well this year, but that only gets you so far, especcially when you do not have a dominant D on the other side. Without the breakaway run threat he was in 2010, he's just a guy back there and that is what has people think the cealing is 9 wins. At no point in the last 18 games or so, felt that Taylor was capable of putting the team on his back and making play after play when the game is on the line. And to really win big time, that is what you need.

 

[knapplc]

I think that we have so many issues on both sides of the ball and the staff that it will be hard to correct in a year. Martinez, as the QB, is an easy place for fans to look. Myself included.

It's not that I think that Taylor is some amazing QB, it's that there's a serious crack in the logic that people are using to arrive at the conclusion we'll only ever be able to win 9-10 games with Taylor at QB.

This is why I'm barely contributing to this thread, and that only in a bit of a silly way. Lo's post and Herc's post sum it up for me. Taylor isn't great, he's good. Sometimes he's really good, sometimes he's very much NOT good. But he's still growing, developing (much like guys in the pros are, at age 25-27, still developing). It doesn't end because you've started two seasons. But as lo country said, there are so many problems on this team, from the second-stringers to the coaches, that to spend as much time talking about the QB is silly. But, as lo so aptly pointed out, the QB is the easiest place to look. I do it, too.

I think, unintentionally, the myriad quarterback/Martinez threads we see point out our lack of understanding of what is a very complicated game. Most of the folks who post, me included, know football on a surface level, and the inner dynamics of what makes a team go or fail are often WAY over our collective head. The QB is the single-most visible player on the field, so he gets talked about most. It's silly, but that's the way it works.

 

[C N Red]

How good can we be with TM under center next year?

Ceiling = National Championship

Basement = Seven Wins (or Six Losses)

Your ceiling is set WAY too high. Then again, I'm more of a realist.

I have as much evidence to show that Martinez can win a championship as you have that he can't. "Realist" is an indefinite term, often based on one's point of view. The amount of "realism" in this thread is questionable, but hey, whatever passes the time in the offseason, eh?

So let's say you HAD to bet your life savings on whether we will win a MNC with TM starting QB. Which way would you bet? I'll even give you the next 2 years. So in the next two years with TM starting at QB(which I hope isn't the case) would you put all your money on winning a MNC or not?

 

[knapplc]

So let's say you HAD to bet your life savings on whether we will win a MNC with TM starting QB. Which way would you bet? I'll even give you the next 2 years. So in the next two years with TM starting at QB(which I hope isn't the case) would you put all your money on winning a MNC or not?

Take Martinez out of the equation and put the best year in Frazier's career, Frost's career, Jerry Tagge's career, and would you make that bet? Of course not, because no matter how great the QB is, the rest of the 2012 team has major, major holes.

Flip it around, and put Martinez on the 1997 Huskers, the 1994 or 1995 Huskers, and/or the 1970/1971 Huskers, and do you make that bet? I would. I would also make that bet with Zac Taylor on those teams, Steve Taylor, Eric Crouch, and Turner Gill. We've had plenty of really good QBs who haven't won a title - not because of them, but because the pieces around them weren't good enough.

 

[C N Red]

So let's say you HAD to bet your life savings on whether we will win a MNC with TM starting QB. Which way would you bet? I'll even give you the next 2 years. So in the next two years with TM starting at QB(which I hope isn't the case) would you put all your money on winning a MNC or not?

Take Martinez out of the equation and put the best year in Frazier's career, Frost's career, Jerry Tagge's career, and would you make that bet? Of course not, because no matter how great the QB is, the rest of the 2012 team has major, major holes.

Flip it around, and put Martinez on the 1997 Huskers, the 1994 or 1995 Huskers, and/or the 1970/1971 Huskers, and do you make that bet? I would. I would also make that bet with Zac Taylor on those teams, Steve Taylor, Eric Crouch, and Turner Gill. We've had plenty of really good QBs who haven't won a title - not because of them, but because the pieces around them weren't good enough.

True, true. In all honestly I wouldn't feel very confident in winning a NC with TM on those past husker teams. Why? Because he has not proven to be able to run the ball good enough consistently, hasn't proven to make good decisions on the option, and does not throw it well enough to score points like they did. Now with those lines and RBs we could win alot of games alone, but the threat of running and throwing at QB is what really put those teams over the top.

 

[knapplc]

True, true. In all honestly I wouldn't feel very confident in winning a NC with TM on those past husker teams. Why? Because he has not proven to be able to run the ball good enough consistently, hasn't proven to make good decisions on the option, and does not throw it well enough to score points like they did. Now with those lines and RBs we could win alot of games alone, but the threat of running and throwing at QB is what really put those teams over the top.

Tommie Frazier's arm scared exactly nobody, nor did Scott Frost's. There was nothing, and I mean NOTHING about Nebraska's passing game in the 1990s that was scary, with the possible exception of the blocking of our WRs, which was scary-good considering how small they usually were.

 

[C N Red]

True, true. In all honestly I wouldn't feel very confident in winning a NC with TM on those past husker teams. Why? Because he has not proven to be able to run the ball good enough consistently, hasn't proven to make good decisions on the option, and does not throw it well enough to score points like they did. Now with those lines and RBs we could win alot of games alone, but the threat of running and throwing at QB is what really put those teams over the top.

Tommie Frazier's arm scared exactly nobody, nor did Scott Frost's. There was nothing, and I mean NOTHING about Nebraska's passing game in the 1990s that was scary, with the possible exception of the blocking of our WRs, which was scary-good considering how small they usually were.

But they were both definitely better running and option QBs then TM. When we run an option now I hold my breath b/c I would say there's a better chance we won't have the ball when the play is over than we will.

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Passing is an incredible threat and when down by 14 and time ticking, passing wins games. We can't pass to win. If they game is on the line, do you really want it to be lost or won on Martinez's arm?

Again - this is what everybody said about Osborne's offenses. Can't win from behind. Now they're saying the same thing about Taylor, even though just earlier this year, Taylor led the greatest comeback in school history.

I just don't understand how people can argue that we can't win more than four games if Martinez is at QB. Martinez was not the problem against Texas in 2010. He wasn't the problem down the stretch in 2010 either - our QB depth was.

In 2011, Martinez wasn't the problem against Michigan, Northwestern, or South Carolina.

It's not that I think that Taylor is some amazing QB, it's that there's a serious crack in the logic that people are using to arrive at the conclusion we'll only ever be able to win 9-10 games with Taylor at QB.

With all due respect to Dr. Tom, he very rarely won for a multiple score deficit. There is a reason why our 21 point comeback was a school record. People need to look at years other than 93-97. For most of Osborne's 25 years, in the rare event they got down by more than 14, it was pretty much over. Though admittedly it did not happen that often, but it did happen.

Taylor may not be 'the problem' but he is not 'the solution' either. He just is not a game changer, he managed most games well this year, but that only gets you so far, especcially when you do not have a dominant D on the other side. Without the breakaway run threat he was in 2010, he's just a guy back there and that is what has people think the cealing is 9 wins. At no point in the last 18 games or so, felt that Taylor was capable of putting the team on his back and making play after play when the game is on the line. And to really win big time, that is what you need.

List of plays made by Taylor during the Ohio State game which were a TD or contributed to a drive that ended in a TD.

17 or so yard TD run on an option play out of the diamond made it 27-13

Threading the needle pass to Kenny Bell on the drive that resulted in Quincy Enunwa's TD which made it 27-20

On 3rd and short the same drive Taylor didn't force one up but instead ran up the sideline and got the first down

30 or so yard TD PA pass to Quincy Enunwa made it 27-20

Another 3rd and short on the drive that ultimately tied the game, Taylor scrambled for another first down

Dump off pass to Rex Burkhead in the face of 3 Ohio State defensemen which resulted in the game tying TD.

And you're telling me he can't make plays--can't be a game changer.

 

[knapplc]

True, true. In all honestly I wouldn't feel very confident in winning a NC with TM on those past husker teams. Why? Because he has not proven to be able to run the ball good enough consistently, hasn't proven to make good decisions on the option, and does not throw it well enough to score points like they did. Now with those lines and RBs we could win alot of games alone, but the threat of running and throwing at QB is what really put those teams over the top.

Tommie Frazier's arm scared exactly nobody, nor did Scott Frost's. There was nothing, and I mean NOTHING about Nebraska's passing game in the 1990s that was scary, with the possible exception of the blocking of our WRs, which was scary-good considering how small they usually were.

But they were both definitely better running and option QBs then TM. When we run an option now I hold my breath b/c I would say there's a better chance we won't have the ball when the play is over than we will.

As Seniors both were better than Martinez has shown so far. But both had their struggles before making it to the top. Frost in particular looked very bad running the offense for the first half of 1996, and only found his groove later - with the benefit of FAR greater players surrounding him than Martinez can boast of.

Again, it doesn't boil down to Martinez, or even to Frost/Frazier. It boils down to the supporting cast, so the question in the OP regarding Martinez is inherently flawed.

 

[The Dude]

The most important asset is the passing ability though. The game has evolved to that. The NFL has evolved to that style. When Nebraska conforms to the NFL systems, we will bring in future NFL players. How many Nebraska QB's have been drafted to the NFL? It's time to move in that direction.

This is the same argument that people made in support of bringing Callahan to Nebraska, and it's the same thing people have said about offensive football in general since the 1980's. They've never stopped being wrong.

The NFL is getting closer to college football, not the other way around. The New England Patriots are headed to the Super Bowl with a spread offense. The Denver Broncos reached the second round of the playoffs running a bad version of the spread option with the NFL's version of Taylor Martinez at QB, if you will. And just a few days ago, Tampa Bay was this close to hiring spread option wizard Chip Kelly.

But this version won 2 MNC's (Chris Leak starter). Not even a close comparison.

That's true. Martinez is a much better college QB than Tebow is an NFL QB.

 

[C N Red]

Passing is an incredible threat and when down by 14 and time ticking, passing wins games. We can't pass to win. If they game is on the line, do you really want it to be lost or won on Martinez's arm?

Again - this is what everybody said about Osborne's offenses. Can't win from behind. Now they're saying the same thing about Taylor, even though just earlier this year, Taylor led the greatest comeback in school history.

I just don't understand how people can argue that we can't win more than four games if Martinez is at QB. Martinez was not the problem against Texas in 2010. He wasn't the problem down the stretch in 2010 either - our QB depth was.

In 2011, Martinez wasn't the problem against Michigan, Northwestern, or South Carolina.

It's not that I think that Taylor is some amazing QB, it's that there's a serious crack in the logic that people are using to arrive at the conclusion we'll only ever be able to win 9-10 games with Taylor at QB.

With all due respect to Dr. Tom, he very rarely won for a multiple score deficit. There is a reason why our 21 point comeback was a school record. People need to look at years other than 93-97. For most of Osborne's 25 years, in the rare event they got down by more than 14, it was pretty much over. Though admittedly it did not happen that often, but it did happen.

Taylor may not be 'the problem' but he is not 'the solution' either. He just is not a game changer, he managed most games well this year, but that only gets you so far, especcially when you do not have a dominant D on the other side. Without the breakaway run threat he was in 2010, he's just a guy back there and that is what has people think the cealing is 9 wins. At no point in the last 18 games or so, felt that Taylor was capable of putting the team on his back and making play after play when the game is on the line. And to really win big time, that is what you need.

List of plays made by Taylor during the Ohio State game which were a TD or contributed to a drive that ended in a TD.

17 or so yard TD run on an option play out of the diamond made it 27-13

Threading the needle pass to Kenny Bell on the drive that resulted in Quincy Enunwa's TD which made it 27-20

On 3rd and short the same drive Taylor didn't force one up but instead ran up the sideline and got the first down

30 or so yard TD PA pass to Quincy Enunwa made it 27-20

Another 3rd and short on the drive that ultimately tied the game, Taylor scrambled for another first down

Dump off pass to Rex Burkhead in the face of 3 Ohio State defensemen which resulted in the game tying TD.

And you're telling me he can't make plays--can't be a game changer.

Oh he can make some plays, it's just too bad that he can make as many bad plays as good plays.

Also, what did he do in the first 2.5 quarters of that game. If he wouldn't have made those plays and kept playing like he was it would have been another drubbing.

 

[knapplc]

Oh he can make some plays, it's just too bad that he can make as many bad plays as good plays.

Also, what did he do in the first 2.5 quarters of that game. If he wouldn't have made those plays and kept playing like he was it would have been another drubbing.

So you're "being more realistic" focuses on Martinez as the culprit for the Ohio State deficit and not on his role in the greatest comeback in school history? That's some pretty real realism you got going on there.

 

[Foppa]

You know what they say. Quarterbacks win championships.

I thought it was the punter?

 

[dspanther05]

Oh he can make some plays, it's just too bad that he can make as many bad plays as good plays.

Also, what did he do in the first 2.5 quarters of that game. If he wouldn't have made those plays and kept playing like he was it would have been another drubbing.

So you're "being more realistic" focuses on Martinez as the culprit for the Ohio State deficit and not on his role in the greatest comeback in school history? That's some pretty real realism you got going on there.

Braxton Miller going down was the only reason we won that game, not Taylor Martinez.

 

[knapplc]

Oh he can make some plays, it's just too bad that he can make as many bad plays as good plays.

Also, what did he do in the first 2.5 quarters of that game. If he wouldn't have made those plays and kept playing like he was it would have been another drubbing.

So you're "being more realistic" focuses on Martinez as the culprit for the Ohio State deficit and not on his role in the greatest comeback in school history? That's some pretty real realism you got going on there.

Braxton Miller going down was the only reason we won that game, not Taylor Martinez.

Yes, everyone knows that. Still doesn't change the fact that Martinez was at the helm during the comeback. If C N Red is being a "realist" while calling out Martinez for the deficit, "realism" dictates that we give him equal billing for the comeback. Because, reality being reality, Martinez had as much to do with the deficit as the comeback. That's kinda the whole point of what I was saying.