majech

I've never had a problem finding awesome Husker gear. I think there is a lot of awesome new stuff out there, especially with the move to the B1G.

He's still in the doghouse. :-) He'll get some rec yard time in the spring and probably some during the non-con. By the time B1G rolls around, he'll be in solitary confinement for making Marlowe look bad.

That was god awful bad.

Majech, please believe me that nobody is saying Tmart is better than Frazier was. That being said, the point many are trying to say is that football is a team sport. I can't imagine you not acknowledging that comparing those two is apples and oranges in many ways. I'm a Lincoln native and I assure you I've watched both but where it gets muddy is when we consider the "team" they played with. I would argue that Tmart, Lee, Ganz or "any" qb we've had lately would have performed much, much better with the Oline, rbs, wrs & OC Frazier played with. Having a vicious, attacking mid-90s defense that crushes opponent offenses wouldn't hurt either. In summary I think it's grossly unfair to compare Frazier's "WATCHED" results with Tmart's. We're talking two very, very different "teams" in terms of quality. I certainly hope they are not saying he is better, as that is just lunacy, but the comparison keeps getting made, lol. Frazier clearly had a better O-Line, but Tmart has had pretty damn good WR and RB's imo. Burkhead is a machine and Helu was a game changer and is doing well in the League. I'd even say that TMart's WR's have been better than Fraziers. The OC is the biggest difference imo. TO's offenses were focused, consistent, and maxed out execution due to a structured system that had been in place for seasons. Our offensive philosophy is pretty much a train-wreck imo. Towards the end of the last 3 seasons, our offense has gotten worse. That is totally opposite of how it should be. I think that is because we have no "system" or core philosophy. Beck referred to our offense as a "mutt". How many times have you ever seen a mutt win a dog-show? NONE. They can make nice pets and can be cute to look at or play with, but when facing the elite, mutts don't get it done. THAT really hinders TMart, and our team, imo. The biggest measure of a QB, imo, is their ability to make plays and run their offense. When does TMart make "that" play? When does he make "that" throw? I just don't see it. It seems to me that he would make a great scramble for a big 1st down, but he doesn't. Actually, imo, his running is not very good. Straight line speed? Great, but that doesn't really get showcased much at the QB spot. Regarding running the offense, our offense has had many, many underachieving efforts with TMart taking the snaps, and yes I know there are many other factors involved, but it just does not seem to be working to me. That are also many times that TMart does things that are just not good, like when he threw the ball to K Reed who was like 7 yards behind the LOS in the bowl game. Just throw the ball away. Where is the gamesmanship and awareness? Too many plays like that out of a 2-year starter imo. Wow. Well, we'll agree to disagree then. Roy & Rex are damn fine backs but neither is in the same galaxy as LP (on the field). Saying Frazier's Oline was "better" than Tmart's is like saying a brand new Maserati is "better" than a 20 year old used Pinto. While 100% true, that sure doesn't paint a picture at all of the truly MASSIVE difference in quality between the two. Lastly, I don't recall wrs C. Johnson, R, Baul, J. Vedral, etc being pass dropping machines and they blocked wayyyyyyyyy better than Bell, Turner or Reed. The bottom line is that it's about 10,000 times easier for a qb to make plays and run their offense when their Oline is consistently steamrolling people into the dust, the wrs catch the ball and your OC has the opponent DC chugging down Jim Beam by halftime. Also, in the unlikely event you do get stopped, so what? Punt the ball, let the defense totally destroy the offense and get the ball back in four plays. Heh...you really don't think those things make much difference, huh? Well, that's ok. It would be so boring if we all agreed on everything, right? GBR!! I never stated that TMart's RB's were as good as Frazier's, they CLEARLY were not. That being said, it is not a fair statement to say TMart has not played with good RB's and WR's. If RB and Helu are not good enough for TMart to succeed, then then there is a TMart issue as RB and Helu are both VERY good RB's. Are they LP and Ahman? Hell no, but they are good. Do TMart's WR's drop passes? They certainly do. Pretty much all WR's we've had for seasons have dropped passes which, imo, points to coaching. Frazier's WR's basically never dropped passes, but I think if you look at strictly talent eval, I'd give Paul, Kinnie, JT, K Bell, and Enunwa the edge. Now this staff comes nowhere near getting everything out of those guys, but again, I don't think it is fair to say that TMart doesn't have the WR talent to succeed. There are also some major issues with the scheme of our O-line. I think the talent is better than the results, tbh. Re-watch the Michigan game as an example. Their D-line scheme DESTROYED our blocking scheme. It wasn't so much that our linemen couldn't block, it is that our scheme didn't have them block. Michigan would line up 1 guy in the middle, overload 2 guys on the edge over our right tackle, and one guy on our left tackle. This pretty much stymied our oline as our two OG's and C would basically triple team their NT or not block anyone, while our RT would unsuccessfully attempt to block two guys. This happened a lot and has happened in many other games.

Majech, please believe me that nobody is saying Tmart is better than Frazier was. That being said, the point many are trying to say is that football is a team sport. I can't imagine you not acknowledging that comparing those two is apples and oranges in many ways. I'm a Lincoln native and I assure you I've watched both but where it gets muddy is when we consider the "team" they played with. I would argue that Tmart, Lee, Ganz or "any" qb we've had lately would have performed much, much better with the Oline, rbs, wrs & OC Frazier played with. Having a vicious, attacking mid-90s defense that crushes opponent offenses wouldn't hurt either. In summary I think it's grossly unfair to compare Frazier's "WATCHED" results with Tmart's. We're talking two very, very different "teams" in terms of quality. I certainly hope they are not saying he is better, as that is just lunacy, but the comparison keeps getting made, lol. Frazier clearly had a better O-Line, but Tmart has had pretty damn good WR and RB's imo. Burkhead is a machine and Helu was a game changer and is doing well in the League. I'd even say that TMart's WR's have been better than Fraziers. The OC is the biggest difference imo. TO's offenses were focused, consistent, and maxed out execution due to a structured system that had been in place for seasons. Our offensive philosophy is pretty much a train-wreck imo. Towards the end of the last 3 seasons, our offense has gotten worse. That is totally opposite of how it should be. I think that is because we have no "system" or core philosophy. Beck referred to our offense as a "mutt". How many times have you ever seen a mutt win a dog-show? NONE. They can make nice pets and can be cute to look at or play with, but when facing the elite, mutts don't get it done. THAT really hinders TMart, and our team, imo. The biggest measure of a QB, imo, is their ability to make plays and run their offense. When does TMart make "that" play? When does he make "that" throw? I just don't see it. It seems to me that he would make a great scramble for a big 1st down, but he doesn't. Actually, imo, his running is not very good. Straight line speed? Great, but that doesn't really get showcased much at the QB spot. Regarding running the offense, our offense has had many, many underachieving efforts with TMart taking the snaps, and yes I know there are many other factors involved, but it just does not seem to be working to me. That are also many times that TMart does things that are just not good, like when he threw the ball to K Reed who was like 7 yards behind the LOS in the bowl game. Just throw the ball away. Where is the gamesmanship and awareness? Too many plays like that out of a 2-year starter imo.

I know you are being facetious, but there are many time when it IS Taylor's fault. He runs into blocked players quite often, he panics and leaves too soon sometimes, and he often does not "feel" pressure coming. The O-line clearly has it faults, but TMarts pocket presence, or lack there-of, compounds the problem. True to the Red has made some very good points in this thread. Some of his posts are brass, but there is a lot spot on assessment there. I'm not trying to bashing Taylor, just saying it how it is. I REALLY want Tmart to succeed and win us championships, but I just don't see it At the same time, the oline's shortcomings compound Taylor's problems. It goes both ways. It is a team sport afterall. He skewed the thread into a Taylor bashing session. I don't care how many good points he had in doing so. If you're waiting for a QB to come in and win us a championship, I hope you're patient. Teams win championships. Not quarterbacks. A lot of things need to improve to reach that level. The QB position on this team is far from the top of that list. Don't get me wrong, it's on the list. Everyone on the team needs to improve to reach that level. Hyper-scrutinizing the QB position is easy, but it's lazy and to do so is failing to see the big picture. It's not like Taylor's goofy throwing motion is losing us games and keeping our defense from playing at a championship level. It didn't seem like he skewed this thread to me. He voiced an opinion and made many valid points, imo. Now he did come across as brass and I'm sure he rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. I totally acknowledge that teams, not QB's, win championships. That being said, teams rarely win championships without elite QB's, and Nebraska has NEVER won a championship without an elite QB. I also agree that we have much bigger problems than TMart, but this thread is about TMart, not those other issues. I personally think he has developed a lot and I think he often takes too much of the blame. That being said, I don't think he is close to being an elite QB, despite being a 2 year starter, and I don't think we use him in the most advantageous way. I'm also doubtful that he'll become what I consider an elite QB. What surprises me though, is when someone points out obvious weaknesses of TMarts, they are often ridiculed, have their fandom questioned, and are just generally bashed. I'm amazed how honest criticism of a QB gets some people so fired up.

People that talk about how good TMart is because of his all-time yardage ranking crack me up. Since when did stats like that really matter? He passed Tommie Frazier. So? Do you honestly think he is anywhere close to as good as Tommie was at running his offense? Tommie made huge plays, game changing plays, national championship game changing plays. Tmarts numbers are better because we use Tmart WAY more than we used Tommie. I think Tommie was like 14% of our offense while I believe Taylor has been close to 70% of our offense. That is a fault of our coaching imo. Just because someone has done more of something than someone else, does not make them better. Vinney Testaverde has more NFL passing yards than Fouts, Brees, Montana, Unitas, Brady, Kelly, Young, Simms, Aikman, Warner, Bradshaw, and Eli. So what? All those guys are or were better than Vinny, he just played longer and had more opportunity. I don't see how anyone in their right mind can WATCH Taylor run his offense and watch Tommie run his offense and put them in the same sentence. It's not ever close. We are not talking fantasy football, we are talking actual football.

I know you are being facetious, but there are many time when it IS Taylor's fault. He runs into blocked players quite often, he panics and leaves too soon sometimes, and he often does not "feel" pressure coming. The O-line clearly has it faults, but TMarts pocket presence, or lack there-of, compounds the problem. True to the Red has made some very good points in this thread. Some of his posts are brass, but there is a lot spot on assessment there. I'm not trying to bashing Taylor, just saying it how it is. I REALLY want Tmart to succeed and win us championships, but I just don't see it

Dunno about that--for every South Carolina, we had an Ohio State where the offense was able to bounce back and forget/overcome their errors. And the Michigan game was chock full of denfensive choke-jobs, if we want to be honest with ourselves here. We have? I seem to remember WAY more South Carolina type games than I do tOSU type games. Could you give some examples?

That's kinda why it is fun though.

Agree. This is actually a lot closer to "what we do" than is some of the stuff that we do...if that makes any sense, lol. It is closer to our "standard" offense than when we have our RB take snaps under center and pitch the ball to our QB.

I actually like that a lot. I never saw the RB taking snaps from under center, though. Can you find a video that leads with that and then if followed by the ski-gun so it would get Becks attention?

My question to this is, what good is a qb that throws a post ball when he's supposed to throw an out. A d-lineman who plays a gap when he's supposed to stunt outside. A LB who blitzes when he's supposed to cover the flat. A safety thats supposed to play deep middle instead of man on the TE. A rb that's supposed to max protect instead of running the wheel pattern. a...... well that's about enough of that. My point is that sometimes the most athletically gifted player doesnt get the job done. If guys like Marlowe, Cassidy and Thorell are so much more sharp in practice then they should be the ones on the field. I know there's always that one or two guys that "have to be on the field no matter what" but if those guys are doggin practice and not studying well enough, you just cant make an exception for them becuase then you throw out of balace things like team chemistry and trust. I know this has been discussed over and over and there are two sides to the argument, but when a player like Turner flat out admits publicly that he was struggling and got beat out, this case should just be closed. My opinion, based on facts, open to argument. While that is all true, I think there is a flip side. If your system is so complicated that by far superior athletes are kept off the field for lesser athletes, then there is a problem. The star athlete doing the wrong thing will lose the game, but the poor athlete not being able to get the job done or make a play, won't really win you the game either. It's kind of a catch-22 imo. If we occasionally saw the lesser athlete playing over the great athlete, I'd venture to say that it was just that particular situation. We see the lesser athlete beating out the superior athlete quite often. Whatever is causing that, and with the frequency we see it happening it has to be system/coaching related, needs to be fixed before we are going to move to the next level. Another thing, referring specifically to the Turner/Marlowe situation, is why do we try to use Marlowe like we would Turner? There is that option play that we ran with JT early in the season where he would motion towards TMart then reverse direction to be the pitch man to TMart. Seemed like a good play with JT, but at the end of the season we were running it with Marlowe. Seriously? Marlowe as a pitch man? We also would run Marlowe on end around plays and reverses. He is just too slow for that, we can't just pull out what is probably our most electric athlete and put in in what is one of our slower athletes and utilize them the same way. After each loss, we always hear how "we didn't execute." In many of those situations, our players have not really been put into situations to execute. The player needs to have the knowledge, skills, and heart to execute the play 100%. Our coaches need to have the knowledge and skills to put our players in situation where there skills to execute can be maximized. I think we are seriously lacking in that department, unfortunately.

In theory? Yes. In reality? No. That's just the way of the world. Things that winners do are often considered strong points, while a loser doing the same thing is often considered a flaw.

The Callahan thread was locked because the conversation was devolving into personal attacks against the OP. Rather than hand out a bunch of warnings, we locked the thread after some discussion in the Super Secret Mod Lair. The reason similar threads are locked up is that it can become unwieldy to have the same conversation taking place in five different places. Points are made in one thread that would bring about better conversation in the other threads. So should that post be made four times, or should we just merge the thread with the other one, and have the point in one place? It's a philosophical question, and we've had some discussion about it HERE. Thanks, I'll check out that like. It just seems really cumbersome with all the thread locking, I look forward to checking out the link. Thanks for the info.

Nice, I'll check it out. Yeah, this one is tough. Kind of suffocating. Click the thread, read, go to respond...locked. Crap, yet another locked thread that was interesting.

lol oth·er    /ˈʌðər/ Show Spelled[uhth-er] Show IPA adjective 1. additional or further: he and one other person. 2. different or distinct from the one mentioned or implied: in some other city; Some other design may be better. The implied forum is huskerboard, I was asking of OTHER forums which people like to discuss husker football.

What are some other forums that some of you like to frequent to discuss Husker football?

Just out of curiosity, why do so many threads get locked here? I don't frequent a lot of forums, but I've never seen one where the mods lock so many threads and I don't understand why they do. There is one in the Football area, for example, that was locked today or last night for no apparent reason at all. The mod said the discussion could continue in the Woodshed if we liked. To my knowledge, there was no fighting or arguing in the thread, just a good discussion that the mod evidently got tired of. As I understand it the Woodshed requires a password because it is more "hard core". I don't have that password, nor do I care to have it, so moving a non argumentative thread there seem ridiculous imo. There is also a regularity of locking threads that may be of similar topic, not same, but similar. Why? What is wrong with having more that one thread that is about similar topics. I understand there is no need for duplicate threads, but multiple threads going in different angles on a similar topic is cleaner and more user friendly than 1 jumbled mess of a thread.

DING DING DING. We have a winner. It amazes me when people talk about how good the offense was under BC. It sucked. Oh, against cupcakes, and good teams that had pulled their starters, it could score. Does it amaze you when people say our D is good under Bo? Should we cherry pick scores of old? BC's offenses didn't do well at times..but other times it did. 200 yard IN THE FIRST HALF vs USC in 07. Wow, that's funny. At times, pretty much everything looks good. That was BC's offense. We had an entire season of one of the most dominant defenses I've ever seen in 09. And we decimated some extremely good offenses along the way. This season wasn't anything great, but to compare what Pelini has done on defense to what BC did on offense because of a 200 yard half in which we scored all of ONE TD, is pretty ludicrous. If that your argument, you've just proved mine. Thanks for the help, lol. I gave only one example, but there are more. Bo had one year in which our D didn't underachieve overall and that was 09. I give him a pass on 08....10, 11 he doesn't get one. And I'm not saying he's a bad HC...but the jury is clearly out on if he is or will be a good HC. You gave one? Where? 200 yards and one TD doesn't count as one. Sorry, just being honest and non-biased. There are more? Where, post them. So far we are at 0. And lighting up a scrub defense or a defense that is up by multiple TD's doesn't count. Fire away. I think the defense was good, not great, but good. And for the record, I totally agree that the jury is out on if Bo is a good HC. The jury is not out of BC though, he is a HORRIBLE HC. You pointed out earlier that he took over an average team. Really? The season before they won 10 games and lots of players went into the NFL, especially on defense, from BC's early years. Despite that he guided us to a losing season in his first season. Once he "got his players and system" installed (year 4) he guided us to yet ANOTHER losing season, the only 2 we had at NU since the sixties. There are many, many examples of new HC's that are implementing completely different offenses at schools and still have a winning record...Hoke, Meyer, Paul Johnson. Why make excuses for BC? He doesn't deserve it.

No mention of Bo or Raymond in that blog that I saw. I see nothing wrong in pointing out how well a former NU coach handled getting his ass handed too him.

DING DING DING. We have a winner. It amazes me when people talk about how good the offense was under BC. It sucked. Oh, against cupcakes, and good teams that had pulled their starters, it could score. Does it amaze you when people say our D is good under Bo? Should we cherry pick scores of old? BC's offenses didn't do well at times..but other times it did. 200 yard IN THE FIRST HALF vs USC in 07. Edit - just realized I looked at the wrong game. Regardless, I can pull up any number of scores to contradict your point. That very same offense only scored 6 points against a far less talented defense on the road. Also, Pelini has had two defenses finish in the top ten in scoring defense and yards allowed. Did any facet of Callahan's teams ever finish in the Top 10, in anything? Didn't the 07 offense finish around #10? Also...Bo had a lot of very talented BC recruits to work w/. and as they have started to leave the D has gotten worse each year. Next year is all Bo players so we'll see where we go. AND BC had to field an offense from FS players who weren't recruited to run BC's offense...so he was handicapped off the bat. Again, BC had is faults. I just think his track record/resume show he's a great coach...and I would have liked to see how he could have grown as our HC. I already pointed out how he got better w/ recruiting in his later years at NU. AND he wanted to bring in a better DC but we wouldn't put the $ up for it. Nebraska is too conservative...stubborn...spoiled to give an outsider like BC a legit chance IMO. He'd be better off at a place like KU, ASU, UA, WSU, S or N Carolina...etc. It could be that... Or maybe we are too stubborn to accept the FIRST LOSING SEASON of many of our LIFETIMES. Or maybe we were to stubborn to accept the SECOND losing season of our lifetime. Or possibly the calling of OU fans "effin Hillbillies" for throwing oranges, which is something that WE ALSO DID. Or maybe it was the missing of a bowl game in over 40 YEARS. Or maybe it was the missing of a bowl game for a SECOND time. Or maybe it was getting embarrassed by the KANSAS FRIGGIN JAYHAWKS. Or maybe it was when we got our arses handed to us by OSU. Or maybe it was being HC in the MOST EMBARRASSING loses in school history over multiple seasons. Or maybe it was that he said things were "too complicated" for us. Or maybe it was that he said "it's just one loss of one season" after handing us our first losing season in forever and our first non-bowl game season in forever. Dude did NOT get it. Plain and simple. It was a horrid hire by a horrid AD. They are both gone. They both did irreparable damage to the Husker legacy and Husker nation. Good riddance, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

DING DING DING. We have a winner. It amazes me when people talk about how good the offense was under BC. It sucked. Oh, against cupcakes, and good teams that had pulled their starters, it could score. Does it amaze you when people say our D is good under Bo? Should we cherry pick scores of old? BC's offenses didn't do well at times..but other times it did. 200 yard IN THE FIRST HALF vs USC in 07. Wow, that's funny. At times, pretty much everything looks good. That was BC's offense. We had an entire season of one of the most dominant defenses I've ever seen in 09. And we decimated some extremely good offenses along the way. This season wasn't anything great, but to compare what Pelini has done on defense to what BC did on offense because of a 200 yard half in which we scored all of ONE TD, is pretty ludicrous. If that your argument, you've just proved mine. Thanks for the help, lol.

We'll hire him, and you guys hire Cosgrove. Deal? Deal..He wasn't awful at UW...in fact he was a Badger operative the whole time, sent to decimate your defense...muahhaha I wasn't impressed with BC's offense at all, but his offense would easily hand "half a hundred" on Cosgroves "defense" especially with all those slow white guys Wiscy loves to have on defense. Speaking of which. What's up with the talent at Wiscy? Toon is an ok possession WR. They start a walk-on at WR. And their defense is S L O W. Oregon's RB's were a good measure faster than Wiscy's DB's. I'm not hatin on Wiscy, I love they way they play, but are they gonna change, or are they stuck in their ways. Their offense was very good with Ball and Wilson, just think if they had an elite WR go go with that.

Well, considering that the last two QB's we have brought in either don't even SNIFF of PT or were moved to another position where they get a solid 1-2 plays per game behind guys with a 1/3 the talent, I'm not sure our QB recruiting will be elevated anytime soon. Considering that, what QB in their right mind that is a big time competitor, which is required to be elite at QB imo, would want to come to Nebraska with Tmart being a Sophmore?