Undone

I totally agree that his mechanics have traditionally either been bad or unorthodox. But the latter isn't necessarily a bad thing. I do disagree though with leaning out of a throw on a fade. Especially when the pass is put spot-on target; it completely invalidates the criticism. Either way though, seriously - his performance was awesome! Very encouraging.

Rewatching the ESPN feed, thanks for the link. Might be going out on a limb a bit, but I really don't feel like Taylor's footwork/mechanic/whatever are really any measurable amount different than last year. It would seem that the amount of practice and experience is just adding up to good things. Muscle memory. Making the right reads. Reading coverage. And not only making the right reads, but making them quickly. Making quick reads takes advantage of what pocket protection you do have. Also, when they harped on replays where he was leaning out of a throw (as opposed to leaning in), it seems like some of those passes were ones where he put some touch or loft on the ball. There's not a thing wrong with that. I don't think it would be uncommon for a seasoned NFL QB to lean out of a fade route once in a while; it's kind of part of the motion. Over-analyzing his throwing motion when he throws for 76% is just obnoxious.

I'll be watching our guards and tackles, seeing whether or not we're developing a better ability to open up running space at the line of scrimmage.

You mean from inside the old fascia? Or in the seats? You can occasionally get in to the southeast gate and go up the all-access ramp during the day.

Who could possibly be more knowledgeable than an eclectic group of fanatics shotgunning ideas anonymously from behind a computer screen? I feel like if I take an average of the typically dominant teams in any given season, if the majority of their pieces are already in place coming out of fall camp, it doesn't really matter. Whether they're grinding out their bread and butter, or flashing some of their bigger stuff...their quality opponents down the schedule have to be on top of their game either way. Showing a diversity in the team's playbook doesn't ever seem to be a huge factor. This also manifests itself pretty clearly in struggling teams down the stretch when a fan base forks off into two main camps: Those that feel that failure is a result of a poor playbook/poor playbook selection, and those that feel that plays just aren't being executed. Good teams seem to have success by mere execution. That doesn't mean their playbooks are "vanilla" or that they were wise or unwise to play it safe in the non-conference stretch. It just means they can have it their way, either way.

Agreed. One thing that sticks out to me is that the interpretation of all of the "change" is seen solely as a simplistic, good thing to most. To boil it down, the argument goes something like this: "Well, we really sucked 5+ years ago. So there were a lot of things to change, you have to change it. So we changed it." But the thing is that a lot of the change, as the article notes, has been done incrementally over the last four years as opposed to all at once. All of those changes (whether it's the transition from 'west coast' to whatever we do now, transitioning from Watson to Beck, transitioning from Carl to Papuchis, etc.) require their own varying amounts of time for things to settle in. Not to mention the fact that each change requires the test of time to figure out whether or not they amount to any measurable degree of success. Just because you do the opposite of what you were previously doing badly doesn't mean that it's going to go well. In sum, these changes are causing more and more delays to any serious success. And that's not a bad thing - It's not worth doing if it's not done right. I've learn to become patient with what we're doing. Maybe this was stating the obvious. Just feel like our fan base doesn't exactly wrap their minds around what all of this accumulated change means in the big picture.

Man hate Lane Kiffin. Lane Kiffin no hate man. Why I cry? Maybe Lane Kiffin took my frog. Him name is Hopkin Green Frog. P.S. I'll find my frog Perfectly executed.

Man hate Lane Kiffin. Lane Kiffin no hate man. Why I cry?

Continual offensive line improvement and more experience for the Fab 3 heading into next season could drastically change the situation you're talking about, though. But I do agree with you. I really encourage you to rethink this. If you look at his completion percentages in the second half of the season, he did get people the ball. Or he at least got the ball to them. The drops that our WR's had throughout the entire season were just...terrible. Coming at key times in games, too. Not dropping spot-on balls would also significantly change our offensive momentum. He's carrying two years of starting experience into just his junior year. He's been scapegoated like crazy this season...wait till we see what kind of continued improvement he brings to the table next year. If he stagnates, then obviously it'll hurt us. But if he doesn't, and we can learn to stop turning the ball over, things could be quite a bit different.

Exactly. I lol'd at that. Epic troll win for him, though.

This. You don't even have to ask yourself if the OP was serious about this. The "insider source" thing really had that insane, let's-play-russian-roullette-for-fun quality to it. I still can't tell if this guy's account is the same as one of the primary admins previously on um...ahhhhh, what was it called? Husker something. Huskerp...hmm, it's on the tip of my tongue. I think it might actually be a post-troll trolling under the guy's name. Hard to say, either way.

lol, exactly. You would really think that Husker fans would be the first to acknowledge this - we should be able to wrap our minds around this as well as any fan base. But the T-Magic scapegoat-lust gets in the way.

Finally, someone who gets it. Fair enough. But just make sure to credit both T-Magic and the WR corps next season if his completion percentage continues to rise. Because although I see and understand your obvious point about QB's needing to put balls consistently on target, having WR's that flat drop catches on key drives is equally devastating.

I like to reference Swift and Petersen as sure handed as well, but credit needs to go Ganz and Z Taylor for being pretty accurate as well. What is accuracy to you then? Is it completion percentage alone, the point the ball contacts the receiver alone, or both combined? It's ridiculous to deny that we have churned out receivers over the last three years that simply drop balls that are not only "catchable" but just ridiculous to have dropped in the first place.

I wonder what kind of similar analogy Taylor would use to describe his receivers that constantly, and I do mean CONSTANTLY, drop balls that hit them right in the hands. That is a much bigger problem with regards to the passing game than Taylor's footwork or pocket presence.

Definitely don't want to get into a big thing over that one fumble with regards to an entire season of mistake-ridden play and turnovers by the vast majority of our offense...but how many high quality backs would have been standing up straight when it's 3rd and 3 from the 8 yard line? Again, he's a freshman. But he's probably been more of a liability than an asset over the long haul of the season...however, that's to be expected from most freshmen. He and we will be better for it next season, guaranteed. But regardless...the fumbles and drops...I practically hear circus music going off when we get into the red zone.

How can you possibly say this? Those lapses in judgements are exactly why we are and have been a mediocre football team for a long time. The last 10 seasons have been great too, except for all those losses. ...because we were winning both sides of the ball, ASIDE from the 2 silly mistakes. I think pretty much everyone agrees with this - we were winning on both sides of the ball up to the end of the 1st half. But it also feels extremely obvious that we consistently make those "silly" mistakes (fumbles vs. Northwestern, anyone?). It separates us, with a large and gaping chasm, from being a team that actually could beat anyone on our schedule. I know Ameer is freshman, so don't jump all over me for this comment in regards to him specifically...but if the fumbles and drops don't get coached out of us by next season, we won't go anywhere.

How can you possibly say this? Those lapses in judgements are exactly why we are and have been a mediocre football team for a long time. This. It's unbelievable how the excuse machines pump out mindless comments like this after we absolutely embarrass ourselves like we did today.

How's that fantasy land working out for you? We sucked out loud today. A 17 point loss can't just get chalked up to bad breaks that could have gone either way. We were nowhere near good enough to beat the Gamecocks.

Condolences to the Moore family, how incredibly difficult.

Strong troll is trolling.

Totally agree that those are great wins. tofu (I've always wanted to type tofu instead of tOSU...get it? tofu?! ok...) and Penn State have as much history as Oklahoma or Texas. But I'm sure you can understand that if someone was giving us as die hard NU fans the option of beating Oklahoma at home in a 21 point come-from-behind victory or beating tofu, 10 times out of 10 we're going with Oklahoma. So for me, "hollow" is too far. But "settled in" is just as far off the mark. I miss the old rivalries. The only thing that really made it easier to handle was the fact that, as I'm sure has been stated 1,000 times, our true yearly rivalry with Oklahoma ended when the un-fabulous four crashed the Big 8's party a long time ago. And as always, [insert jaded stab at Texas].

No, not at all. Austin's main problem is not the horrendous negativity. Forums definitely need a balance of opinions - otherwise they'd be extremely boring. His main problem is refusing to dialogue on the strong points that others make contrary to his. To boot, he takes contrary opinions personally to a bizarre and irrational level.

I'd offer you a light, but I left my lighter in my other pants that just went in the wash. They're in the wash because I soiled them multiple times reading Austin's comments in this thread alone.

+1 to this, sir. This is a perfect example to blow Austin's reasoning right out of the water - but you won't get anywhere with him. I'm sure that this entire board knows that already.