The Latest Quarterback Thread

[knapplc]

Well I guess that is where we agree to disagree, I think that the caliber of talent has changed, or rather improved on every other squad that running only will only get you so far with success. I think its important to note that our QB's which had success for years running the ball had a distinct running style. I am not really sure how to explain it. Crouch, Frost, Fraiser, etc, they were running backs. They had a running style. Taylor has speed, but when the option to the short side of the field is closed, he slows up and braces for a hit. He doesn't really have the ability to juke or power his way for the extra yard or two. I guess it comes down to the opportunity cost of Taylor hitting the big one occasionally to being stopped for a loss or no gain more often.

 

For the record, this was exactly what they said about Nebraska in the early 90s when Osborne was in the midst of his seven-game losing streak in bowl games.

 

40 times have not increased so drastically that players are so much faster now that we cannot be successful running the ball. This is a fallacy.

[HuskerBCS]

And again, I can't believe we have to keep saying this - you don't have to be able to pass to be a successful college quarterback. This is not the NFL. You can succeed by running at this level. We proved that for decades.

 

 

Knapplc....you talked about how our Oline would have to change the way they play and it would have to become "their thing" again to blow up defenses. Have you ever thought about how tough it is to change your mentality from pass blocking on your heels, to attacking in run blocking? If one game we are always passing and the line is being passive in the blocking, on their heels, how can we expect them to flip a switch the next game or even next series and just blow the opponent off the ball. Seems like it'd be pretty difficult to me. Id rather they just attack the entire game, every game.

 

Yes, I have, which is exactly why I posted that in response to a comment that Martinez needs to become a passing quarterback to succeed. This is what we're asking Martinez to do - heck, it's what we asked him to do between the first and second quarters Saturday. We went from a team predominantly running the ball to a team that passed on something-teen successive plays. That is not putting him in a position to succeed.

 

Do you think this is the coaches fault then? Should Bo have brought in an offensive coordinator who would run the ball instead of promoting Beck?

 

The way I see it, we either are going to try to pass and be balanced, which would require us making a change at qb. Or we are going to commit to being a running team, which would require different offensive coaches. At the very least a different mindset from the coaches we have but we all know how well that worked with Watson. Coaches have their "style" and belief in what works and usually wont change for anyone or anything.

[treyball3]

That all depends on your definition of successful. If you are content to win eight or nine games and go to mid-level bowl then yes. If you want to compete for the MNC I believe you have to be able to throw the ball, and throw it with a measure of compentcy. We did prove for decades that you can win running the ball....decades ago (decade and a half actually). Look back at the last 20 or so national champions and see how many of them could not throw the efficently.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to anwser me honestly. If, and it's a big if, we have a compent defense, do you really think TM can or will develope into a QB who can lead a team to wins in big games over top quality opponents?

Tommie Frazier and his career 50% completion rate say "Hello!"

 

This is NOT 1994 anymore! There were about 12 good teams in the 90s. With the money, scholarship reductions, etc today, the game is way different. Parity is real. We're not the 1994 Huskers! Please stop living in the past. We have great WRs this year, or Martinez would be completing about 25% of his passes. How many great catches have those guys made this year on terrible thrown balls?

 

And Taylor Martinez is not equal to Tommie Frazier. Tommie was one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) players to ever play the game. How can we compare Taylor to him?? This is getting annoying...

[Lyons in the Sea of Red.]

Well I guess that is where we agree to disagree, I think that the caliber of talent has changed, or rather improved on every other squad that running only will only get you so far with success. I think its important to note that our QB's which had success for years running the ball had a distinct running style. I am not really sure how to explain it. Crouch, Frost, Fraiser, etc, they were running backs. They had a running style. Taylor has speed, but when the option to the short side of the field is closed, he slows up and braces for a hit. He doesn't really have the ability to juke or power his way for the extra yard or two. I guess it comes down to the opportunity cost of Taylor hitting the big one occasionally to being stopped for a loss or no gain more often.

 

For the record, this was exactly what they said about Nebraska in the early 90s when Osborne was in the midst of his seven-game losing streak in bowl games.

 

40 times have not increased so drastically that players are so much faster now that we cannot be successful running the ball. This is a fallacy.

Alright, we will disagree. However, I agree on your point of Beck not calling to the skillset of the offense and Taylor. And more than likely this uproar of Taylor talk is largely avoided if we stick to the run game and avoid putting Taylor in those postions. However, I think that it must be noted of how he performed. Running QB or not, the quality of his passing game should be alarming. Beck is largely responsible I guess you could say, but receivers are open on the majority of passing downs. The fact that he is missing that bad is my main reason for concern.

[3rd and long]

That all depends on your definition of successful. If you are content to win eight or nine games and go to mid-level bowl then yes. If you want to compete for the MNC I believe you have to be able to throw the ball, and throw it with a measure of compentcy. We did prove for decades that you can win running the ball....decades ago (decade and a half actually). Look back at the last 20 or so national champions and see how many of them could not throw the efficently.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to anwser me honestly. If, and it's a big if, we have a compent defense, do you really think TM can or will develope into a QB who can lead a team to wins in big games over top quality opponents?

Tommie Frazier and his career 50% completion rate say "Hello!"

 

Yep, one example, 16 years ago, behind what was argueably the best O-Line ever put together in the college game. And honestly, I don't think it could be done now. The college game is much more sophisticated with coaches shuffling back and forth between college and the NFL, if you are a one demensional team, they will find a way to take away that demension. Lets look at the last 10 years, any of the teams have a QB who wasn't competent throwing the ball. I haven't looked but I would be surprised if thats the case.

[Joe_5700]

That all depends on your definition of successful. If you are content to win eight or nine games and go to mid-level bowl then yes. If you want to compete for the MNC I believe you have to be able to throw the ball, and throw it with a measure of compentcy. We did prove for decades that you can win running the ball....decades ago (decade and a half actually). Look back at the last 20 or so national champions and see how many of them could not throw the efficently.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to anwser me honestly. If, and it's a big if, we have a compent defense, do you really think TM can or will develope into a QB who can lead a team to wins in big games over top quality opponents?

Tommie Frazier and his career 50% completion rate say "Hello!"

 

This is NOT 1994 anymore! There were about 12 good teams in the 90s. With the money, scholarship reductions, etc today, the game is way different. Parity is real. We're not the 1994 Huskers! Please stop living in the past. We have great WRs this year, or Martinez would be completing about 25% of his passes. How many great catches have those guys made this year on terrible thrown balls?

 

And Taylor Martinez is not equal to Tommie Frazier. Tommie was one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) players to ever play the game. How can we compare Taylor to him?? This is getting annoying...

 

Did you watch Tommie play much? Many only seem to remember him winning the big games as a junior and senior. Did everyone forget the constant low passes that only Abdul Mohammed who was about 5' 2" and able to dig some of those turf bombs out of the ground? Martinez needs work. A lot. If the coaches thought Carnes was a better solution, trust me he would be out there. I do think that Carnes should have been put in after the game was decided in Madison in the 4th quarter.

[knapplc]

That all depends on your definition of successful. If you are content to win eight or nine games and go to mid-level bowl then yes. If you want to compete for the MNC I believe you have to be able to throw the ball, and throw it with a measure of compentcy. We did prove for decades that you can win running the ball....decades ago (decade and a half actually). Look back at the last 20 or so national champions and see how many of them could not throw the efficently.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to anwser me honestly. If, and it's a big if, we have a compent defense, do you really think TM can or will develope into a QB who can lead a team to wins in big games over top quality opponents?

Tommie Frazier and his career 50% completion rate say "Hello!"

 

This is NOT 1994 anymore! There were about 12 good teams in the 90s. With the money, scholarship reductions, etc today, the game is way different. Parity is real. We're not the 1994 Huskers! Please stop living in the past. We have great WRs this year, or Martinez would be completing about 25% of his passes. How many great catches have those guys made this year on terrible thrown balls?

 

And Taylor Martinez is not equal to Tommie Frazier. Tommie was one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) players to ever play the game. How can we compare Taylor to him?? This is getting annoying...

 

I know Taylor isn't Tommie's equal - I watched every game Tommie played, and you're right that he's the best there ever was. But he still completed a piss-poor percentage of his passes and we were successful. Why? It wasn't because he was a great passer, it was because of when the passes were called. Ignore the O Line and Frazier and the RBs, NONE of which we have now (I hear you, treyball3). What we had back then was a cohesive play-calling gameplan, something I don't see us showing these days. The plays were called in sequence to set up other plays, and if we're doing that now it's nearly impossible to tell. It doesn't seem like it to me.

[3rd and long]

Well I guess that is where we agree to disagree, I think that the caliber of talent has changed, or rather improved on every other squad that running only will only get you so far with success. I think its important to note that our QB's which had success for years running the ball had a distinct running style. I am not really sure how to explain it. Crouch, Frost, Fraiser, etc, they were running backs. They had a running style. Taylor has speed, but when the option to the short side of the field is closed, he slows up and braces for a hit. He doesn't really have the ability to juke or power his way for the extra yard or two. I guess it comes down to the opportunity cost of Taylor hitting the big one occasionally to being stopped for a loss or no gain more often.

 

For the record, this was exactly what they said about Nebraska in the early 90s when Osborne was in the midst of his seven-game losing streak in bowl games.

 

40 times have not increased so drastically that players are so much faster now that we cannot be successful running the ball. This is a fallacy.

 

But it's not the 90's anymore, the game has evolved. And if all that mattered to the running game was 40 times, we wouldn't be having this discussion because we probably have the fastest QB in the nation in the 40.

[knapplc]

Well I guess that is where we agree to disagree, I think that the caliber of talent has changed, or rather improved on every other squad that running only will only get you so far with success. I think its important to note that our QB's which had success for years running the ball had a distinct running style. I am not really sure how to explain it. Crouch, Frost, Fraiser, etc, they were running backs. They had a running style. Taylor has speed, but when the option to the short side of the field is closed, he slows up and braces for a hit. He doesn't really have the ability to juke or power his way for the extra yard or two. I guess it comes down to the opportunity cost of Taylor hitting the big one occasionally to being stopped for a loss or no gain more often.

 

For the record, this was exactly what they said about Nebraska in the early 90s when Osborne was in the midst of his seven-game losing streak in bowl games.

 

40 times have not increased so drastically that players are so much faster now that we cannot be successful running the ball. This is a fallacy.

 

But it's not the 90's anymore, the game has evolved. And if all that mattered to the running game was 40 times, we wouldn't be having this discussion because we probably have the fastest QB in the nation in the 40.

 

The game hasn't evolved at all. Do you talk to any coaches? None of these offenses we're seeing are new.

[gobiggergoredder]

 

The game hasn't evolved at all. Do you talk to any coaches? None of these offenses we're seeing are new.

 

Knapp, you know what bothers me the most about you? Whether you are talking politics, 40 yard dash times or offense on this board, you nearly always present an 'OPINION' as fact. It's constant and relenting.

[zoogs]

I think what he meant was that in the 90s, the S&C of Nebraska was just light years ahead of everybody else, and that's not true anymore. Lots of ho-hum schools around the country have caught up to an approachable level, something that just wasn't the case back then. Days of complete physical dominance over opponents are probably over.

[treyball3]

That all depends on your definition of successful. If you are content to win eight or nine games and go to mid-level bowl then yes. If you want to compete for the MNC I believe you have to be able to throw the ball, and throw it with a measure of compentcy. We did prove for decades that you can win running the ball....decades ago (decade and a half actually). Look back at the last 20 or so national champions and see how many of them could not throw the efficently.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to anwser me honestly. If, and it's a big if, we have a compent defense, do you really think TM can or will develope into a QB who can lead a team to wins in big games over top quality opponents?

Tommie Frazier and his career 50% completion rate say "Hello!"

 

This is NOT 1994 anymore! There were about 12 good teams in the 90s. With the money, scholarship reductions, etc today, the game is way different. Parity is real. We're not the 1994 Huskers! Please stop living in the past. We have great WRs this year, or Martinez would be completing about 25% of his passes. How many great catches have those guys made this year on terrible thrown balls?

 

And Taylor Martinez is not equal to Tommie Frazier. Tommie was one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) players to ever play the game. How can we compare Taylor to him?? This is getting annoying...

 

I know Taylor isn't Tommie's equal - I watched every game Tommie played, and you're right that he's the best there ever was. But he still completed a piss-poor percentage of his passes and we were successful. Why? It wasn't because he was a great passer, it was because of when the passes were called. Ignore the O Line and Frazier and the RBs, NONE of which we have now (I hear you, treyball3). What we had back then was a cohesive play-calling gameplan, something I don't see us showing these days. The plays were called in sequence to set up other plays, and if we're doing that now it's nearly impossible to tell. It doesn't seem like it to me.

 

I hear what you're saying. If we put Taylor into the 1994 Huskers, he might be a lot better. But I think he would've completed a lot less passes, because I don't think the WRs were as good back then compared to what we have now. We can't just ignore the Oline and RBs, and WRs. Its a team game. And we have what we have.

 

Disclaimer: I was only 15 in 1994, so my memory may be inaccurate

[knapplc]

 

The game hasn't evolved at all. Do you talk to any coaches? None of these offenses we're seeing are new.

 

Knapp, you know what bothers me the most about you? Whether you are talking politics, 40 yard dash times or offense on this board, you nearly always present an 'OPINION' as fact. It's constant and relenting.

I've noticed that about you, too. Fact is, 90% of the people here do this.

[robsker]

And again, I can't believe we have to keep saying this - you don't have to be able to pass to be a successful college quarterback. This is not the NFL. You can succeed by running at this level. We proved that for decades.

 

 

Knapplc....you talked about how our Oline would have to change the way they play and it would have to become "their thing" again to blow up defenses. Have you ever thought about how tough it is to change your mentality from pass blocking on your heels, to attacking in run blocking? If one game we are always passing and the line is being passive in the blocking, on their heels, how can we expect them to flip a switch the next game or even next series and just blow the opponent off the ball. Seems like it'd be pretty difficult to me. Id rather they just attack the entire game, every game.

 

Yes, I have, which is exactly why I posted that in response to a comment that Martinez needs to become a passing quarterback to succeed. This is what we're asking Martinez to do - heck, it's what we asked him to do between the first and second quarters Saturday. We went from a team predominantly running the ball to a team that passed on something-teen successive plays. That is not putting him in a position to succeed.

 

Do you think this is the coaches fault then? Should Bo have brought in an offensive coordinator who would run the ball instead of promoting Beck?

 

The way I see it, we either are going to try to pass and be balanced, which would require us making a change at qb. Or we are going to commit to being a running team, which would require different offensive coaches. At the very least a different mindset from the coaches we have but we all know how well that worked with Watson. Coaches have their "style" and belief in what works and usually wont change for anyone or anything.

 

You ask..

Should Bo have brought in an offensive coordinator who would run the ball instead of promoting Beck?

 

My take is this --- Bo should have brought in a proven, experienced OC who has had demonstrated success elsewhere --- and not promoted his inexperienced friend who was reared in a woefully unsuccessful offensive system that failed.

 

That said, when we hired our head coach 4 years ago, NU should have gone with a

a proven, experienced head coach who has had demonstrated success elsewhere.

 

As in any organization, your program (or, in this case, your team or subunit of the team) will typically prosper (or fail) in proportion to the caliber of leadership you hire. That is why hiring proven, demonstrated talent in leadership is the best approach (it does not always work --- but is more likely to work than field-testing your leaders who have just transitioned into leadership and who have no demonstrated excellence on their resume.)

 

Hiring an inexperienced OC from a failed staff was risky. And, seemingly, it was an unnecessary risk to take. NU lives with it now --- I always say hire the guy who made his mistakes and learned from them elsewhere --- and do not hire a guy and watch him make his mistakes here. Beck is a newbie cutting his teeth --- and it shows. Not necessarily his fault --- he should not be at the helm of the NU offense.

[Hoosker]

Let's break this down and see if we can't have a rational conversation.

 

Taylor

--Flawed throwing mechanics - It's a no brainer that the kid is an athlete playing quarterback. Why wasn't he recruited by anyone else as a QB? He doesn't step into his throws which causes him to only use his upper body and that's why he shorts most of the deeper passes. His throwing motion is awful. Anyone who watches him throw can see it. The thing that scares me is that he continues to play this way after starting for an entire year (banged up or not) + the first 5 this year. Like Herbstreit said, he has a 3 second timer in his head when he is in the pocket. Whether the pocket is collapsing or not, after 3 seconds or so, he panics, scrambling outside and just flings up an meatball (See INT # 1).

 

--Poor decision-making in the passing department - It's not like the Badger defenders made spectacular plays to pick Taylor off, they didn't even make great plays. They simply caught the ball when Taylor threw at them. It's not like the receivers ran bad routes or couldn't catch the ball when it came their way. The WRs have stepped up so far this year and are no longer an excuse for Taylor's awful throws. Each of Taylor's 3 INTs last Saturday came from poor decision-making and for him not to learn from the INT #1 OR INT #2 really sends a message to me that the kid just isn't getting it. For those of you saying he's only a sophomore, find a different excuse. He's been in Lincoln for 3 years. He's a glorified junior starting his 2nd season at Nebraska. The biggest strides QBs make in their college careers TYPICALLY come between their 1st and 2nd season as the starter. The final season(s) are when they have the mechanics down and are just fine tuning themselves at that point. Taylor is not even close to this point.

 

--Lacks ball security when running the football/scrambling in the pocket - This is a big one. It takes almost zero skill to hold onto the football. Everyone wants to point out that Taylor is a running quarterback and shouldn't be compared to the many Pro-style QBs around the country. This is true, Taylor isn't a Pro-style QB, he's a runner, and as a running QB, you NEED, not should, NEED to be able to hold onto the football. Again, he hasn't progressed in this category at all since he stepped onto the turf against Western Kentucky over a year ago. This is a MAJOR concern with how many times he carries the ball each game. The fact that he carries the ball as much as Rex is beyond ridiculous, but that's beside the point, and not entirely his fault, but if he claims to be a running QB, you'd figure that ball security shouldn't be a concern, but it definitely is.

 

--One-dimensional runner- I know many posters have touched on this already so I won't go into much detail, but again, he is a straightforward runner and not too much more. He can't juke anyone and he doesn't break many tackles. He obviously can accelerate as well as anyone in the country (minus the SEC), but he just doesn't have enough of the necessary running qualities when you have to get past ALL 3 LAYERS of the defense. If he was at a different position, then maybe his acceleration and 'beat-you-to-the-corner' speed would come in handy, but lining up under center, limited to only those two attributes, doesn't produce (at least against teams with quality defenses). He has yet to put a successful game together on the ground against a quality opponent, weak ankle or not weak ankle (See 2010 Texas).

 

--Zero leadership qualities -- Obviously this one is more of an opinion that a fact, but it needs to be addressed. Everyone has seen the pressers. He is awkward, to put it lightly, in front of the media and never says what he needs to say as the leader of a top-notch football team. The emotional aspect of being a QB is almost as important as the physical aspect. You need to know how to address your players when times are tough and battle through adversity. This is my biggest problem with Taylor. HE HAS NO RESILIENCE AS A PLAYER. When he does something wrong, he has not once, NOT ONCE, came back from it in the same game and proved everyone wrong. When he throws an INT in a game, he never improves after he does so. His best games, that really mattered, in his career overall as a QB are 10 WASH, 10 KSU, and 10 OKST. All three were not only less-than-stellar defenses, but Taylor did not throw an INT in any of those games. His best games unfold when he never screws up in the passing game. When he does, he has yet to show any sort of resilience. When he falls, he falls hard and can't seem to pick himself up: a MAJOR issue when you're the leader of the offense. As the leader of the team, you need to take responsibilities for your teams offensive performance and put the blame on your shoulders, even if it's not completely your fault. It shows that you're unselfish and thinking of your teammates before yourself. He has yet to show that in his pressers, or at least the one's I've seen.

 

The bottom line is that Taylor should not be the future of Nebraska football. He has made little, if any progress in the very reasonable amount of time he's seen over the last few years. I realize that Brion hasn't proven himself in practice to challenge Martinez for the starting role, but with what I've just explained, he needs to become a more prevalent part of the offense every week. He needs to see time nearly every week in order to improve and develop chemistry with his teammates. Whether he has challenged Taylor for the starting role or not, Bo needs to at least implement him into the offense in order to develop him as a player and perhaps light a fire under Taylor's rear end. The fact that he did not see any snaps during the second half last weekend was mind boggling. I think we have to stick with Taylor for now given the extreme shortage of able QBs behind him, but anyone who truly believes that Martinez is the right man for the job is delusional.