QB depth

[Hercules]

I've wondered this sometimes as well. I honestly still believe Zac Lee gave us the best chance to win in 2010. Had he been the guy from the get-go, I strongly feel 2010 would have turned out slightly different. 1-2 more wins. Nothing spectacular, but not nearly as disapointing.

 

Zac Lee got hurt just after the Missouri game, and could hardly throw the ball the rest of the season. If he had been healthy down the stretch, he might have played and Martinez could have rested, which would have been great. But there's no logical reason to believe that he would have done any better than Martinez. He could have been injured just like Martinez was (and he was, in real life). Against Texas Zac Lee fared no better than Martinez as the WRs dropped both of their passes, and against Missouri Zac Lee fared worse than Martinez. You really think Zac Lee was going to put up the 51 points needed to beat Oklahoma State?

 

He could have helped us beat Texas A&M, but he was injured (like Martinez). He could have helped us beat Oklahoma, but he was injured (like Martinez). He could have helped us beat Washington, but he was injured (like Martinez).

 

If you consider the WCO a complete failure, then hypothetically speaking - you'd have to think that we would have still failed w/ Bo Pelini at DC instead of Cosgrove. I don't believe that. A top 25 offense averaging 35 points a game (i think BC averaged 33 or so over those 3 years), paired with a top 15 defense is going to be successful.

 

Last year Nebraska averaged 32.69 points per game. That was with a west-coast spread option hybrid that was poorly designed, without the right personnel to run either a west coast offense or a spread option offense on their own, and with only one QB that could run it. When that QB went down, the whole second half of the season crumbled. And that offense STILL averaged those 33 points you're talking about.

[kchusker_chris]

Actually, he's almost 21 and a redshirt sohpomore - ie: junior. By now, a fair number of people are finishing up their final semesters at NU and about to begin their careers within the next year or so. Don't act like Martinez is some baby fresh off momma's tit. The "freshman" thing is WAY overplayed.

 

He was 20 years old during the bulk of last season. That's not a child, but it's not like he's some jaded veteran, either. It is not overstated to mention the fact that he was making his first career starts last year, his first press interviews at this level, and he was under a spotlight the likes of which he had never seen before. The fact that he didn't handle that spotlight well is not unusual.

True. Cam Newton was 21 years old, making his first career starts last year, his first press interviews at this level, and was under the spotlight well beyond anything Martinez saw, or will ever see (hopefully). The fact that he did handle the spotlight, and win a Heisman is certainly unusual though. Wasn't Tebow 19 or 20 when he hoisted his first Heisman? Wasn't McCoy 19-20 and a redishirt freshman when he broke the passing records for a QB to lead Texas to a #13 ranking, that was broken by Sam Bradford the next season at 19 or 20 winning the Big12 Championship?

 

It's been almost a decade since we've really had any continuity at QB...so I guess I'm at the point where since I know we're probably going to have a new starter every year...I damn well expect them to play a little better than t-mart did. If he's the starter, I don't care whether he's a freshman or a senior - no excuses. There's plenty of redshirt freshmen that go out and lead their teams to championships.

 

Sorry for placing high standards on Nebraska - I guess some are content w/ the mediocracy and willing to write it off to a "20 year old redshirt freshman" - to me, he's just the starting QB for Nebraska - 18 or 28, doesn't matter...get the job done.

[Hercules]

There's plenty of redshirt freshmen that go out and lead their teams to championships.

 

No. There aren't.

[Saunders]

There's plenty of redshirt freshmen that go out and lead their teams to championships.

 

No. There aren't.

Out of the 15 Big 12 Champions, only 1 was had a freshman QB.

[knapplc]

True. Cam Newton was 21 years old, making his first career starts last year, his first press interviews at this level, and was under the spotlight well beyond anything Martinez saw, or will ever see (hopefully). The fact that he did handle the spotlight, and win a Heisman is certainly unusual though. Wasn't Tebow 19 or 20 when he hoisted his first Heisman? Wasn't McCoy 19-20 and a redishirt freshman when he broke the passing records for a QB to lead Texas to a #13 ranking, that was broken by Sam Bradford the next season at 19 or 20 winning the Big12 Championship?

 

It's been almost a decade since we've really had any continuity at QB...so I guess I'm at the point where since I know we're probably going to have a new starter every year...I damn well expect them to play a little better than t-mart did. If he's the starter, I don't care whether he's a freshman or a senior - no excuses. There's plenty of redshirt freshmen that go out and lead their teams to championships.

 

Sorry for placing high standards on Nebraska - I guess some are content w/ the mediocracy and willing to write it off to a "20 year old redshirt freshman" - to me, he's just the starting QB for Nebraska - 18 or 28, doesn't matter...get the job done.

 

So your standards for success are - let me see if I have this straight - two Heisman winners, three national champions and another conference winner?

 

That is a perfectly reasonable and sound expectation for a Redshirt Freshamn. Kudos.

[kchusker_chris]

True. Cam Newton was 21 years old, making his first career starts last year, his first press interviews at this level, and was under the spotlight well beyond anything Martinez saw, or will ever see (hopefully). The fact that he did handle the spotlight, and win a Heisman is certainly unusual though. Wasn't Tebow 19 or 20 when he hoisted his first Heisman? Wasn't McCoy 19-20 and a redishirt freshman when he broke the passing records for a QB to lead Texas to a #13 ranking, that was broken by Sam Bradford the next season at 19 or 20 winning the Big12 Championship?

 

It's been almost a decade since we've really had any continuity at QB...so I guess I'm at the point where since I know we're probably going to have a new starter every year...I damn well expect them to play a little better than t-mart did. If he's the starter, I don't care whether he's a freshman or a senior - no excuses. There's plenty of redshirt freshmen that go out and lead their teams to championships.

 

Sorry for placing high standards on Nebraska - I guess some are content w/ the mediocracy and willing to write it off to a "20 year old redshirt freshman" - to me, he's just the starting QB for Nebraska - 18 or 28, doesn't matter...get the job done.

 

So your standards for success are - let me see if I have this straight - two Heisman winners, three national champions and another conference winner?

 

That is a perfectly reasonable and sound expectation for a Redshirt Freshamn. Kudos.

we were talking about age - those were the first 3-4 "young" and innexperienced success stories (at the QB position) that came to mind. 2006, 2007, 2010. It happens more than most people realize. Happens constantly at other positions (Lattimore at SC jumps out), yet they are 18 as well...and handle the media just fine. Denard Robinson is within days of the same age as Martinez. He's certainly handled the media much better. Seems like every year we are hearing about some electrifying freshman or first year starter tearing it up. I just personally don't give a sh!t if he's a freshman or senior. he's expected to perform at the same level regardless IMO.

[knapplc]

True. Cam Newton was 21 years old, making his first career starts last year, his first press interviews at this level, and was under the spotlight well beyond anything Martinez saw, or will ever see (hopefully). The fact that he did handle the spotlight, and win a Heisman is certainly unusual though. Wasn't Tebow 19 or 20 when he hoisted his first Heisman? Wasn't McCoy 19-20 and a redishirt freshman when he broke the passing records for a QB to lead Texas to a #13 ranking, that was broken by Sam Bradford the next season at 19 or 20 winning the Big12 Championship?

 

It's been almost a decade since we've really had any continuity at QB...so I guess I'm at the point where since I know we're probably going to have a new starter every year...I damn well expect them to play a little better than t-mart did. If he's the starter, I don't care whether he's a freshman or a senior - no excuses. There's plenty of redshirt freshmen that go out and lead their teams to championships.

 

Sorry for placing high standards on Nebraska - I guess some are content w/ the mediocracy and willing to write it off to a "20 year old redshirt freshman" - to me, he's just the starting QB for Nebraska - 18 or 28, doesn't matter...get the job done.

 

So your standards for success are - let me see if I have this straight - two Heisman winners, three national champions and another conference winner?

 

That is a perfectly reasonable and sound expectation for a Redshirt Freshamn. Kudos.

we were talking about age - those were the first 3-4 "young" and innexperienced success stories (at the QB position) that came to mind. 2006, 2007, 2010. It happens more than most people realize. Happens constantly at other positions (Lattimore at SC jumps out), yet they are 18 as well...and handle the media just fine. Denard Robinson is within days of the same age as Martinez. He's certainly handled the media much better. Seems like every year we are hearing about some electrifying freshman or first year starter tearing it up. I just personally don't give a sh!t if he's a freshman or senior. he's expected to perform at the same level regardless IMO.

 

Well, I for one am completely shocked that Taylor Martinez is the only Freshman/Redshirt Freshman to perform poorly in front of cameras/microphones. I appreciate knowing that every other young player has not only succeeded on the field, but with the press as well. <---- take that tongue-in-cheek, not snarky, BTW

 

EDIT - we're veering away from the original point you and I were discussing which was that Taylor is awkward and whatnot. I think we're both more concerned how he does between the stripes than off the field, right?

[kchusker_chris]

EDIT - we're veering away from the original point you and I were discussing which was that Taylor is awkward and whatnot. I think we're both more concerned how he does between the stripes than off the field, right?

absolutely, and if there's one thing us martinez skeptics love about him starting next year - it's that the "redshirt sophomore" thing doesn't work nearly as well as the "redshirt freshman" thing.

 

from now on, if I hear any of the following statements (used in any shape or form) in regards to the discussion of Taylor Martinez, I am chaning my avatar to a fat jiggly pasty white guy in cut off jeans wearing Texas gear. (not really) i'll do my best to avoid them as well.

 

1) "he was just a redshirt freshman"

2) "he's bad w/ the media"

3) "he quit (or almost quit) the team"

4) "prima-donna"

5) "injury prone"

6) "skips meetings"

7) "disinterested on the sidelines"

8) "anything to do w/ A&M"

9) "heisman contendor"

10) "...before injury..."

11) "...after injury..."

 

did I miss anything - either excuses for or against Martinez?

 

FACT: kid can play - let's see what he can do this season. Cool?

[knapplc]

EDIT - we're veering away from the original point you and I were discussing which was that Taylor is awkward and whatnot. I think we're both more concerned how he does between the stripes than off the field, right?

absolutely, and if there's one thing us martinez skeptics love about him starting next year - it's that the "redshirt sophomore" thing doesn't work nearly as well as the "redshirt freshman" thing.

 

from now on, if I hear any of the following statements (used in any shape or form) in regards to the discussion of Taylor Martinez, I am chaning my avatar to a fat jiggly pasty white guy in cut off jeans wearing Texas gear. (not really) i'll do my best to avoid them as well.

 

1) "he was just a redshirt freshman"

2) "he's bad w/ the media"

3) "he quit (or almost quit) the team"

4) "prima-donna"

5) "injury prone"

6) "skips meetings"

7) "disinterested on the sidelines"

8) "anything to do w/ A&M"

9) "heisman contendor"

10) "...before injury..."

11) "...after injury..."

 

did I miss anything - either excuses for or against Martinez?

 

FACT: kid can play - let's see what he can do this season. Cool?

 

Cool! Release the hounds!

 

(and if he still sucks, bring on Carnes!)

[bshirt]

My feeling is that some of the vets on the team last year, specifically the senior class that was the backbone of the team, did not take to Taylor's ascension very well. It's an aspect of that choice I would still criticize Bo for. I think it caused problems last year. But that was all last year. Those seniors are gone, and Taylor is well positioned to start making this team his own, starting this year. It wouldn't exactly be Taylor's fault he was tapped for starting QB by Bo, anyway.

I've wondered this sometimes as well. I honestly still believe Zac Lee gave us the best chance to win in 2010. Had he been the guy from the get-go, I strongly feel 2010 would have turned out slightly different. 1-2 more wins. Nothing spectacular, but not nearly as disapointing.

 

However - that would have dramatically set us back for 2011 and our first year in the Big10. Bo, IMO, chose a mediocre present and great future (potentially), over a good present and good future. That caused some issues w/ the members on the team that wouldn't be there for that future. Just a theory. Crucify me for supporting it.

 

So we should just continue with WCO/fluffball & going 3 & out all game long, game after game, year after year vs any team with a decent defense? After seven years of complete failure, we shouldn't even consider going a somewhat similar direction with our offense that worked extremely well for decades?

 

The "old" days are gone but the last seven years were the Keystone Cops. Sorry, I bet big changes are coming.

Just can't agree w/ you here. The failure was defensive and you're arguing against the offense. Even a lot of the offensive struggles hinged on the defense when Callahan was here. 3 & out? How about 3 plays, surrendering 80 yards & 7 points in about 75 seconds. How many times did we see that? Bet the offense felt great heading out after that short breather down another 7. Watson, the 3 years under Bo - shouldn't not be lumped into BC's days.

 

If you consider the WCO a complete failure, then hypothetically speaking - you'd have to think that we would have still failed w/ Bo Pelini at DC instead of Cosgrove. I don't believe that. A top 25 offense averaging 35 points a game (i think BC averaged 33 or so over those 3 years), paired with a top 15 defense is going to be successful.

 

Oh, we'll just agree to disagree. Clownahan's offense scored wildly against.......

 

a. creampuffs

b. opponent waterboys at garbage time

 

Sure, those gave annual stats that weren't bad but his WCO was shut down like a can of sardines vs any decent defense repeatably. Actually several very, "very" average defenses stopped it as well.

 

Just a very quick review of Cally's unstoppable WCO at NU.....

 

2004....17 vs S. Miss, 14 vs Kansas, 10 vs Texas Tech, 3 vs Oklahoma

 

2005......25 vs Maine, 7 vs Pitt

 

2006.....10 vs SoCal, 20 vs Texas, 7 vs Oklahoma, 14 vs Auburn

 

2007....20 vs Wake Forest, 6 vs Missouri, 14 vs Okie St, 14 vs TAM

 

Add to the above several games where the offense only performed at garbage time when we were hopelessly blown out and no....I'm not impressed and am delighted it's gone.

 

Sure, we scored 31 vs So Cal in 2007! Too bad 21 of the pts were in the 4th qtr while down 49- 10. 2007 at Okie state, even the 14 pts we get was in the 4th while down 38 - 0. I could go on & on.....but thank God it's in the past.

[BigWillie]

 

But isn't what you're saying (and you're not wrong) true of any offense we run, no matter what it is, who we have, etc? It is extremely unlikely that we ever have a coach the equivalent of Osborne, or the advantages we had with Epley as S&C Coach, etc. So what you're saying isn't exactly a knock against the run-first offense, it's a knock against any offense, isn't it? Wouldn't the disadvantages of not being in the 90s be the same no matter what offense we run?

 

And further, wouldn't we have even greater disadvantages today trying to run the same offense everyone else is running, thus competing for the same players in recruiting? The genius of Osborne wasn't only in his game-day scheming, it was also because he knew that he could corner the market on Option players since everyone else was recruiting to a pro-style offense. So if we ran a different offense (not necessarily the Option, but any somewhat unique offense), wouldn't that give us an advantage?

 

Yes, it is. But the simple point I am making is that we do not have the personnel to go back to that old grind it out style.

 

The biggest thing that will be getting lost this year is the complete lack of experience we have across the board on our line. For example, of our projected 3 deep on the line, we have a total of 36 starts between those guys. Those 36 starts are between 3 guys, and only 1 of which (Caputo) is pretty assured of his starting spot. Sirles and Marcel will both be battling for their spots.

 

Combine that complete inexperience with an offensive line coach who has never been known for putting our quality offensive lines, and would anyone be confident in us going back to a complete grind it out style?

 

I know adding guys like Stai and Garrison are supposed to help - but to me that is only patching a problem than fixing the root of a problem. If Cotton needs that much help, then why not just hire one quality OL coach and be done with the issue instead of allowing him to continue on staff? But I digress.

 

There was someone who did a great breakdown of spread-option offenses and their balance as compared to ours. The only successful team in recent history that was even close to running as much as we did last year was Florida under Tebow. I need to find that because it would be really relevant.

 

But I personally do not care how we run our offense, from the gun or under center. The only thing I want is balance, the ability to make teams respect us either running or throwing. And right now, we only have one of those we can do, and teams showed a very good ability at loading the box to stop us from doing that. That goes back to it being a different day and age than in the 90's and how we cannot focus going hard in one direction with our offense.

 

About recruiting disadvantages - you are going to limit yourself even further by going to a grind it out scheme. Not many players, especially top players, are looking to be put into an offense that will not showcase them for the next level. The simple reason being is that even if they shine, they still have those questions about how they will adapt going to a pro-style offense. So going to a straight running style takes your pool of who you can recruit and dwindles it down to a select bunch. Even more, the group of HS and its players who play in a more modern offense is MUCH deeper than it is for a power offense.

 

I mean, even in Nebraska, how many HS teams have gone away from the power football type and into a more traditional approach to football?

 

So while you think it may be making our recruiting more difficult, it really is not, at all.

[knapplc]

The High School teams will follow the lead of Nebraska. If a coach thinks he can get his players to play for the Huskers by running the Option, the Wing-T, the Wishbone or the Spread, they'll run that offense. We've seen the offenses in High Schools change with the Huskers before, and they'll do it again. I don't think we're overly limiting our pool by conforming to a specific type of offense, even the power running game of the 80s. Ignoring the 90s, which was an aberration of success, the 80s showed us that we could consistently get top talent to come to Nebraska running an atypical offense. It takes the right coach (not a genius like Osborne - just the right coach) and a few years of consistency, but it can be done. Not only in Nebraska, but across the nation. Guys like Steve Taylor, Turner Gill, Mike Rozier, Irving Fryar - the household names all came from out of state to an atypical offense.

 

As far as losing that many starts on the line... it's hard to say how that's going to affect us. I think I recall doing a spreadsheet back in January about DJ, Williams and Ricky which showed they accounted for a disproportionate amount of penalties, for the 60% of the line they occupied. We could be seeing addition by subtraction. It would be difficult to prove the point that we've had a dominant line in the past - it's not unlikely that we could have a better line this year than last, even with the younger guys. Maybe I'm misremembering that spreadsheet and maybe the coaching is the factor - not many will argue in favor of the coach, that's for sure. But regardless, we can't be much worse.

[Saunders]

 

I know adding guys like Stai and Garrison are supposed to help - but to me that is only patching a problem than fixing the root of a problem. If Cotton needs that much help, then why not just hire one quality OL coach and be done with the issue instead of allowing him to continue on staff? But I digress.

I'm not a Barney fan, but Osborne had 2 OL coaches. He brought in Dan Young to help that bum Milt Tenopir... Just saying...

[mjmartin1970]

What do people who are in the state (NE) think of Tyson Broekemeier? I know he wasn't heavily recruited by DI FCS schools, but looking at his stats etc. It looks to me he has the potential to provide the needed depth & maybe long term be a starter (I'm think Gdowski-esque). (and no, I'm not discounting Ron Kellogg III, just heard he doesn't have the wheels to run our current offense).

[flatwaterfan]

From the 2 games I saw, Broekemeier is very accurate and can throw on the move. Has good arm strength and touch. More of a pass first QB, he will keep his eyes down field when flushed and looks to throw on the scramble. Can run if need be as he has decent mobility and speed. Passing is his strength though. Very smart I think he does a good job of finding the open receiver. Broekemeier has to put on some muscle. Needs a couple of years to mature. I think he is going to be contending as a Junior & Senior. I'm thinking a Todd Reesing type of player and that this offense fits him to a T. (If it's like the Kansas offense.)