Ric Flair

Yeah, 11 am games suck. And yeah, the reason we're relegated to them is because we're not relevant nationally. A few more 9-4 seasons with a couple of blowout losses and we'll be playing at 3 am on Wednesday mornings on the Home Shopping Network. It's up to this staff to get it turned around. If they do, we'll get more afternoon and prime time games. If they don't, get your credit cards handy because you'll at least be able to buy cheap jewelry and knockoff clothes during the breaks in the game.

I hope we wear all black and kick in their teeth. And why do we keep scheduling Colorado? Was "Bye" not available, because it amounts to the same thing.

We haven't won a conference championship since 1999, 14 years ago. We were last nationally relevant in 2001, 12 years ago. We have done literally nothing to impress on a national stage since then. In fact, every time we get a national stage, we wind up waking up in some ditch the following morning sans pants and wondering WTF happened to us. So there's no cause for complaining about a lack of national respect. Respect is earned. We haven't earned any since our incoming freshmen were first graders.

The way that guy rolled onto his knee and it buckled, it's likely an ACL tear...possibly with other ligaments being involved as well. They'll probably wait a day or two for the swelling to subside and then perform the MRI, maybe on Monday or Tuesday. But I suspect we've seen the last of Long as a Husker. And that's a damn shame. He's worked his butt off to get to where he's at.

Is anyone clear what Papuchis' role in designing and calling the defense really is or how much direct control Pelini still exerts over the defense?

I'm in favor of putting the student section right behind the visitors' bench. I don't like hiding them in a corner, especially when that's done so that the university can squeeze more money out of a few more season ticket holders. So I'd like to see them be given better seats and asked to play more of a role in gameday. I think that's the first step toward getting them more involved and that it would increase the volume in the stadium. The last time I attended a game, the atmosphere resembled a canasta game at 10 a.m. on a Wednesday morning at the local Old Country Buffet.

Get well soon Taylor. And let's save the debates about his strengths and weaknesses and whether he should be starting, etc. for the other threads devoted to those topics on the board. Let's make this one just about appreciating Martinez and wishing him well.

both his quotes say roughly the same thing. Yeah, I'm not sure what was confusing about what I posted. Ohio State is undefeated. If they win out, they'll likely play in the Championship game. That opens the door for another Big Ten team to go to the Rose Bowl. That could be us. If Ohio State loses, then they're probably out of the running for the Championship game. That likely puts them first in line for the Rose Bowl.

I haven't watched much of Michigan. I've seen more of Northwestern, especially against Ohio State on Saturday, and came away pretty impressed with them. Despite their lack of talent, they're succeeding due to being a solid and very well coached team that knows exactly what it is and wants to do. And I think they're a team that's going to present us with a lot of problems.

If you look at the predictions, they have tOSU in the National Championship game, so they're not stumbling. Basically, they have us winning the division (probably winning out) and losing to the Buckeyes. I know. I was pointing out that our bid for the Rose Bowl is likely contingent on Ohio State not slipping along the way. If they do, that Rose Bowl spot is probably theirs.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? I don't think so. As knappic notes, our defense could charitably be characterized as a work in progress. And the offense will need to be hitting on all cylinders to compensate. If Ohio State stumbles, then they're first in line for the Rose Bowl bid. And even if they don't, I think we'll have an uphill battle to get there. In particular I've been impressed by Northwestern.

You are struggling to find reasons to justify continuing on about Martinez. Read what you wrote here. The defense has been bad for the past couple of years so it's old news. Is that to imply that Martinez' struggles are new? Or that Martinez hasn't struggled for the last couple of years? Because neither is true, and neither makes any sense. Armstrong should play because he's a better game manager than Taylor. What's that based on? Games against a D1AA opponent and a team that hasn't won a conference game since 2011? Is that really enough to base a decision that affects the rest of this season on? Is there some reason to think it's more likely that Armstrong is going to lead us to a conference title game? Because Martinez has led us to two in the last three years. And if you're going to tell me it's different this year because Taylor's injured 2010 has something to say about that. So we need a game manager rather than a Martinez-esque risk-taker? I'd like to introduce you to Ron Kellogg III, then. And the offense has outgrown Taylor Martinez. The same offense that was built around him, with him as the basis. That makes as much sense as blaming Tommy Armstrong for allowing SDSU's running back to gain 200 yards. Which makes sense if we're blaming our defense's struggles on Taylor. I was helping to explain why I think more recent posts have been focused on Martinez's struggles rather than those of the defense. We have a viable replacement for Martinez with Armstrong. We don't have a viable replacement for the entire defense. We have 3+ years of game film on Martinez. He's a known quantity. And despite his significant edge in experience, I like our chances better with Armstrong at this point. A large part of that is intangible, just based on the feel that I get from the offense when each is playing. They seem far more comfortable and confident with Armstrong at the helm than with Martinez. That's kind of shocking given that Martinez is a four year starter and Armstrong is a redshirt freshman who just made his second start. But it's the sense that I get from watching the team. The offense just seems to run better with Armstrong at QB. I think you're having difficulties explaining why you seem to think that turnovers and time of possession are irrelevant to the defense's performance and the team's struggles. Because that's really what you're saying. You seem to think that the fact that Martinez simply hands the other team the ball 2-3 times a game and can't keep the offense on the field is irrelevant to those struggles. I couldn't disagree more.

The reason? No. One of the reasons? Without question. The main reason? Not even close. The single most-griped about reason? By a country mile. More griped about than the defense? I don't think so. I'm fairly new here, but have seen a lot more people griping about the defense and wondering why they can't stop anyone than posting about Martinez's issues. But regardless, it's not an either/or situation. Martinez's struggles put more pressure on the defense, which he too often puts back on the field too soon and with a short field to defend. And in fairness, the defense's struggles also put pressure on the offense, which probably has felt like it needs to score 70 in some games to have a chance. But what the offense does affects the defense...and what the defense does affects the offense. It's a team game and what one unit does isn't occurring in a vacuum....but has effects on how other units perform. Oh, see - I'm not new here. And I'm quite aware of the content of a lot of the posts in this forum. And I can tell you without question or hesitation that we have a huge disparity in threads griping about Martinez' faults (of which there are many) compared to the number of threads griping about the faults of the entire defense as a unit. Were we to have a similar number of different discussions about each individual defensive players' multiple gaffes as we have about Martinez', we'd need to double our server space. But we don't. In fact, nobody's even talking about the defense at all - except for praise. Here's just how absurd this has gotten: The defense committed five of Nebraska's eight penalties this past week. Do you know how many threads there are griping about that? One. Taylor Martinez didn't play this week. Do you know how many threads there are griping about him? Three, including this thread, created to praise a dedicated and much-maligned Husker. I think that's likely just because the defense has been bad for the past couple of years. It's old news. Now they're still struggling, but there seem to be some signs of hope. So the predominant sentiment is low expectations based on a couple of years of struggles combined with hope that things seem to be getting somewhat better and that there's hope that as the youngsters get more experience they could actually be pretty good. With Martinez, I think people hoped he would develop into a better and more consistent player than he has. As a fourth year starter, I think people hoped that he would have outgrown the mental errors and figured out a way to reduce his turnovers. We have a ton of weapons on offense now and just need someone to get them the ball consistently. I think Armstrong is better at that than Martinez. I see Martinez as a sort of boom or bust sandlot player. He's wired like Brett Favre, to be a high risk/high reward kind of player. When your offense is struggling and lacks playmakers, there's a value to having a guy like that. As you have more weapons, the risks start to outweigh the rewards. Then you're better off with a consistent game manager who can find ways to get the ball in the hands of your playmakers. So I think the offense has outgrown Martinez and that we're better off with Armstrong running the show. But regardless, the topic is far more current and interesting than dissecting for the 300th time why the defense is still struggling.

The reason? No. One of the reasons? Without question. The main reason? Not even close. The single most-griped about reason? By a country mile. More griped about than the defense? I don't think so. I'm fairly new here, but have seen a lot more people griping about the defense and wondering why they can't stop anyone than posting about Martinez's issues. But regardless, it's not an either/or situation. Martinez's struggles put more pressure on the defense, which he too often puts back on the field too soon and with a short field to defend. And in fairness, the defense's struggles also put pressure on the offense, which probably has felt like it needs to score 70 in some games to have a chance. But what the offense does affects the defense...and what the defense does affects the offense. It's a team game and what one unit does isn't occurring in a vacuum....but has effects on how other units perform.

I'll give you everything but lacking leadership. Could you expand on that? I think he's been a phenomenal leader. That's an intangible that's hard/impossible to quantify. So this is really just my opinion. But I don't see the players rallying around him and reacting to him the way I'd like. I don't see him on the sideline working with the receivers and the offense in preparation for the next drive. I don't see him commanding the huddle and demanding the respect of the rest of the offense. I usually see him standing or sitting alone on the sideline and not really even talking to anyone. In the losses and blowouts, I see him on the field with a glazed over expression like he's checked out and looking like he's sulking on the sideline. Now part of that could be that he just has crappy body language, kind of like Eli Manning. But my read on him is that he's not a very effective leader. In a variety of ways, I see the offense responding to Armstrong and Kellogg in ways I haven;t seen them respond to Martinez. Like I said, there's really no way to define that, so it's just the sense that I get and my opinion.

Martinez has been the primary reason we've won so many of our tough games over the past two years. Yet you're here griping about him as if he's the dumptser fire, while paying lip service to the defense's responsibility. It beggars belief. I've made clear repeatedly that the defense is the larger issue knappic, including in this thread. So that's simply untrue. And I'm unclear why you don't seem to think that Martinez's mistakes and inconsistent play matter at all. When an offense can't move the ball and turns the ball over all the time, it puts a lot more pressure on the defense. When you have a crappy defense to begin with, that makes things even worse.

I respectfully disagree. There's enough blame for our struggles to go around and a large helping belongs to the defense. But just as Martinez deserves credit for his play in some of the comebacks you referenced, he deserves blame for his mistakes and poor play in the losses and blowouts. The defense has been pretty craptacular the past couple of seasons. But the offense hasn't done a lot to help them out. Some of the blame for that falls on Beck for questionable play calling. But some falls on Martinez for not playing well in big games. The bold should have been all you said. The offense hasn't done "a lot" to help the defense out? Are you serious? This is like a guy volunteering to help a crash victim. You're trying to bandage the boo-boo on his elbow while ignoring that he's bleeding out from a head wound. I don't disagree that the defensive struggles have been the larger issue. But I think you're placing far too much of the blame on that unit, while almost completely absolving the offense generally and Martinez specifically. How much pressure do repeated three and outs place on an already struggling defense? How about turnovers? How difficult is is for a defense to spend most of the game on the field because the offense simply can't move the ball consistently? No doubt the defense has been a veritable dumpster fire. But that hasn't occurred in a vacuum. The offense hasn't done them any favors.

Couldn't have said it better myself. On top of that, tfree32, I've seen that article linked several times on this board, and I will continue to vehemently oppose it's use as anything more than a fun read with no statistical relevance. Read how they calculated their data - it's extremely, extremely, skewed. The article itself questions the validity and says something along the lines of this should article should not be used to draw any real conclusions from. What specific issues do you have with the data?

I respectfully disagree. There's enough blame for our struggles to go around and a large helping belongs to the defense. But just as Martinez deserves credit for his play in some of the comebacks you referenced, he deserves blame for his mistakes and poor play in the losses and blowouts. The defense has been pretty craptacular the past couple of seasons. But the offense hasn't done a lot to help them out. Some of the blame for that falls on Beck for questionable play calling. But some falls on Martinez for not playing well in big games.

This is worth a read. We've discussed Martinez's penchant for turnovers quite a bit. But his limitations as a passer are pretty staggering. He's basically only accurate on passes of less than 10 yards. So between his limitations as a runner and as a passer, his crazy amount of turnovers, his lacking leadership and his questionable decision making, I'm more than ready to see Armstrong as the starter. We've seen the best Martinez has to offer. Despite the fact that we haven't seen the best from Armstrong, I believe he's still the better option for us. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1754936-nebraska-football-what-does-taylor-martinez-need-to-show-nfl-scouts-in-2013

Put me down as a vote for giving Armstrong the starting nod and never looking back. Some doubt that Armstrong can get it done in a big game. But we know Martinez cannot, because we have four years of failures that document that. Martinez averages more than a fumble a game, a category he's led the country in for three years running. He's a turnover machine. Those stats are just an absolute killer. And far more of his mistakes come against the Ohio States and Wisconsins of the world than against the Idaho States. So in big games we can typically count on Martinez to turn the ball over 2-3 times on average. That's one player committing 2-3 turnovers on his own on average in those games. And you're going to have a tough time winning games when you have a QB simply handing the other team the ball with that frequency. It's also worth noting what crappy situations that routinely puts the defense in. As deservedly maligned as that unit has been, Martinez's frequent errors have caused at least some of those problems. A lot of posts recently have noted how limited Martinez is as a runner, even when healthy. He's basically a one trick pony, who can find a gap and explode through it on occasion. But he's not shifty as a runner. He has terrible pocket presence and isn't mobile in the pocket in a way a QB needs to be. But I found this analysis of his passing to be fairly shocking... So in summary, Martinez is a one dimensional runner even when healthy, a decent passer only on passes of less than 10 yards and a turnover machine who regularly hands the other team the ball. I'm failing to see how a four-year starter with these limitations brings more to the table at this point than a redshirt freshman who is a more natural quarterback, a better leader and the future of the program. We've seen the very best that Martinez has to offer. It's simply not good enough. And I'll take the mistakes Armstrong makes while learning on the job over the mistakes Martinez continues to make because he hasn't learned the job any time. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1754936-nebraska-football-what-does-taylor-martinez-need-to-show-nfl-scouts-in-2013

I hope you're right. I have no confidence in this staff right now. I think they could coach the defense from the 1985 Chicago Bears playing a Big Ten schedule to 4 losses and a couple of blowouts where the defense gives up 500+ yards. Then after the games, Bo would freak out at Mike Singletary, Richard Dent, etc. about how it was all their fault because they weren't executing.

I think you're right. Unfortunately, to execute it properly and force offenses to play mistake free football, our defense must basically play mistake free football...and we have what is possibly the most undisciplined and mistake-prone team in Div. I college football. That's a recipe for disaster...after disaster...after disaster.

I like it overall. More money, better academics, good cultural fit, etc. given the state of our program, I think we're lucky to be in the Big Ten. The Big 12 is a lot better football conference right now and I hate to imagine what our record might be if we were still there.

I think we wind up with 4-5 losses. If we play Ohio State in the CCG, we might lose by 50. We're at best the 4th best team in what is at best the 4th best conference in the country. I'd like to have more hope...I really would. But after watching our team struggle to tackle the past couple of seasons and hearing about how we don't even bother to practice that skill, I'm not sure how we're expecting any improvement. I think the defense continues to be a complete sieve and the offense is as inconsistent as Martinez's flakiness and Beck's inability to find ways to overcome it can make it. So I think we're in for more frustrating Saturdays, likely followed by an offseason where the fanbase is divided over whether Pelini needs to be replaced or should be given more time.