Phillip Dillard calls for the replacement of Martinez at QB

[knapplc]

I don't mean the fans. What I mean is, what are the coaches seeing that makes them think that he's not ready to play? Unless it's knowledge of the playbook, I don't see what puts him at a disadvantage to Taylor (as a QB, not as a pure athlete).

 

I'm not saying we should be promoting Carnes to starter, but I see no reason not to play him in situations like we were in against Wisconsin.

 

NOTE - this is kind of Part II to what I just wrote to 3rd and long.

 

I'm right there with you that Carnes should be - needs to be - seeing more of the field. I don't know that throwing him to the wolves against Wisconsin would have been a good idea, but it would have been wise to get him more reps against Washington when we were up in the 4th, and against Wyoming.

 

One of the explanations for why Carnes isn't seeing the field as much is that we put in a new offense, new terminology and new alignments, and Martinez needs in-game time to get it all down. That's the official line on why he's seen so much of the field this year, but I don't like that explanation much. Carnes may not know the whole playbook, he may not be ready to read defenses the way he needs to, and he may not be comfortable, but he's never ever going to get there without live action. You can only simulate so much on the field.

 

I never thought we had a legit shot at anything other than a conference title and BCS game this year, although with our schedule it's looking like a long shot at this point. We were always, in my opinion, going to have at least two losses in the regular season. But that doesn't mean that you have to keep plugging away with Martinez every single snap to try to steal those games, or that you never put your reserves in for the learning experience.

[3rd and long]

Knapplc, being as it appears you and bshirt are the biggest TM supporter on here, I would think you would want Carnes to get a couple of series, because then when he fails (as it is so continuously pointed out that he is not ready) you can show all of us that want to see him how wrong we are and then we'll stop clamoring for him.

 

I really do know that the most popular player is always the backup QB, and nine times out of ten, he ends up being worse than the guy on the field. But really, would it have done any damage to get Carnes a little time against Wisconsin?

 

Don't misunderstand my stance on Martinez. I recognize that he is the current best option we have, and that our other option is still learning. That does not equate to unequivocal support, or blind support, though. I am highly critical of Martinez' game, his ball-control, his errant reads, etc. I just end up spending more of my time dispelling myths about the guy than critically analyzing his game. If we could have threads that weren't angst-driven hyperbole and were simply focused on his game, your opinion of my opinion would be quite different.

 

I wouldn't care to "show all of you" that you're wrong, because I don't think you're wrong (or that, by inference, I'm "right"). In fact, I agree with you that Carnes really should be getting reps in these games, even early, like we did with Cody last year where we planned to put him in for a series or two early in most every game. Carnes is one hit away from having to take over, and he's gotten, what? 15 snaps all year? To quote Goose, "This is not good! This is not good!"

 

Well said, but one question. Are most of the myths you're dispelling really myths. The character assiginations on him are completely uncalled for, but most of the posts I've read really do address what (to me anyway) are very legimate concerns. I wil admit many probably are angst driven, that just shows the incredible passion of Husker fans. Most are not personal, if he can start to eliminate some of these issues, I think most people will happily jump back on his bandwagon.

[knapplc]

Well said, but one question. Are most of the myths you're dispelling really myths. The character assiginations on him are completely uncalled for, but most of the posts I've read really do address what (to me anyway) are very legimate concerns. I wil admit many probably are angst driven, that just shows the incredible passion of Husker fans. Most are not personal, if he can start to eliminate some of these issues, I think most people will happily jump back on his bandwagon.

 

Myths, mischaracterizations, misunderstandings about what's going on and why.... that's what I spend most of my time discussing. And I did that for the myths, mischaracterizations and misunderstandings about Zac Lee, the myths, mischaracterizations and misunderstandings about Cody Green, the myths, mischaracterizations and misunderstandings about Niles Paul, etc. It's safe to say I'm a bleeding heart when it comes to what I perceive to be unwarranted criticisms of Husker players.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Jerry Tagge's Sophomore Year, 1969

 

107 - 189 1,355 yards 3 TDs 8 INT

 

Tommie Frazier's Sophomore Year 1993

 

77 - 162 (.475) 1,159 yards 12 TDs 4 INT

 

Just for the record.

 

Also just for the record, both QBs had stellar defenses that didn't require the offense to score 49 points in order to win.

[sd'sker]

Jerry Tagge's Sophomore Year, 1969

 

107 - 189 1,355 yards 3 TDs 8 INT

 

Tommie Frazier's Sophomore Year 1993

 

77 - 162 (.475) 1,159 yards 12 TDs 4 INT

 

Just for the record.

 

Also just for the record, both QBs had stellar defenses that didn't require the offense to score 49 points in order to win.

gawd, i love some good old-fashioned perspective.

[Malth]

bbbbut FRAZIER

[Pedro Guerrero]

Jerry Tagge's Sophomore Year, 1969 107 - 189 1,355 yards 3 TDs 8 INT Tommie Frazier's Sophomore Year 1993 77 - 162 (.475) 1,159 yards 12 TDs 4 INT Just for the record. Also just for the record, both QBs had stellar defenses that didn't require the offense to score 49 points in order to win.

 

So does this mean that we are going to be National Champions next year since that is what both of those guys did their junior years?

[sd'sker]

Jerry Tagge's Sophomore Year, 1969 107 - 189 1,355 yards 3 TDs 8 INT Tommie Frazier's Sophomore Year 1993 77 - 162 (.475) 1,159 yards 12 TDs 4 INT Just for the record. Also just for the record, both QBs had stellar defenses that didn't require the offense to score 49 points in order to win.

 

So does this mean that we are going to be National Champions next year since that is what both of those guys did their junior years?

yeah, it stands to reason.

[Saunders]

Jerry Tagge's Sophomore Year, 1969 107 - 189 1,355 yards 3 TDs 8 INT Tommie Frazier's Sophomore Year 1993 77 - 162 (.475) 1,159 yards 12 TDs 4 INT Just for the record. Also just for the record, both QBs had stellar defenses that didn't require the offense to score 49 points in order to win.

 

So does this mean that we are going to be National Champions next year since that is what both of those guys did their junior years?

yeah, it stands to reason.

I'm printing t-shirts baby!!!!!

[sd'sker]

Jerry Tagge's Sophomore Year, 1969 107 - 189 1,355 yards 3 TDs 8 INT Tommie Frazier's Sophomore Year 1993 77 - 162 (.475) 1,159 yards 12 TDs 4 INT Just for the record. Also just for the record, both QBs had stellar defenses that didn't require the offense to score 49 points in order to win.

 

So does this mean that we are going to be National Champions next year since that is what both of those guys did their junior years?

yeah, it stands to reason.

I'm printing t-shirts baby!!!!!

i'm sure the children of honduras will appreciate it.

[Ratt Mhule]

I never thought we had a legit shot at anything other than a conference title and BCS game this year, although with our schedule it's looking like a long shot at this point. We were always, in my opinion, going to have at least two losses in the regular season. But that doesn't mean that you have to keep plugging away with Martinez every single snap to try to steal those games, or that you never put your reserves in for the learning experience.

 

Before the season, I would have agreed with this. Before last week, however, I thought if we beat Wisconsin we have a legitimate shot at running the table. With OSU down and PSU down, we should win those games. MU would have been our toughest matchup, but if we could beat Wisconsin, we should beat Michigan at the Big House. And then get creamed by an SEC team in the MNC.

 

After last week, however, I realized how poor our team is. I wouldn't even be surprised to lose this week, lose to MU and lose to PSU. We should beat those teams, but who knows. Can't wait to play an SEC team in our bowl game!

[Enhance]

Enhance you have no evidence of not playing Carnes. He should have been playing late in the Wyoming and Wisconsin game, and after seeing Martinez struggle in yet another game which the team wasn't awful puts doubt in my mind. What happened to these two battling for playing time?

 

Everyone including the coaches treat Martinez like he's a high school QB and his dad is the principal, custodian, and asst. football coach of the high school. Keep coming up with excuse after excuse. If Martinez plays well against a few solid teams this year I will back him up 100%, but for what I've seen these last two seasons he only puts up stats against lesser opponents. Mizzou and Ok St were good performances last year but their defenses were less than par. If he plays well this weekend I'll slowly hop back on the bandwagon.

Missouri finished 2010 with the sixth ranked defense in the nation last year in points allowed per game, so saying they were "less than par" is drastically incorrect.

 

Furthermore, I have all the evidence I need to support not playing Carnes.

 

1) He's a redshirt freshman. Martinez became the starter at the same age, however Martinez beat out an incumbent (practically two incumbents) who were a sophomore and senior to be. Carnes couldn't beat out a redshirt sophomore for the job.

 

2) Bo has said that he has no problem putting Carnes in the game, but he also said Carnes is not going to be the starter. In essence, Pelini still thinks Martinez is the better player right now.

 

3) The only evidence you and other Carnes supporters alike have for Carnes is a practice spring game that many desperately cling to as if it means something. He played well in the spring game, no question, but given the way our defense has played this year I'm not entirely too surprised by this. Ultimately it was a practice - a scrimmage.

 

4) Putting Carnes in will set the offense back, and there is absolutely no way of debating this. It's a pure fact. Martinez knows the offense better and has played in what - 17 games? Which is in opposition to Carnes' only playing time coming in garbage time of a couple of games.

 

That's a lot more than you have. Saying Martinez isn't playing well is not evidence as of yet considering I believe the coaches did not put him in a position to succeed yet this year. I've said it a lot already and I'll say it again - no running quarterback Nebraska has had would have had a successful game last Saturday with that kind of offense.

[knapplc]

After last week, however, I realized how poor our team is. I wouldn't even be surprised to lose this week, lose to MU and lose to PSU. We should beat those teams, but who knows. Can't wait to play an SEC team in our bowl game!

 

Yeah, I don't know. It's a shake-your-head year. I think we have WAY more talent than we're showing. I don't know why we're not playing up to our ability, but very clearly we are not.

 

Walking into this season I thought:

• Taylor would be OK, but still make plenty of mistakes (being a sophomore). He's making way more mistakes than I thought he would, and that leap I'd hoped for hasn't happened. The turnovers are very troubling.
  
• Rex would be Rex (meaning awesome) and that we would find one of the three freshmen to contribute. So far, RB across the board is a good crew.
  
• The TEs would be just like last year. They are (which is good) but our passing game is even worse, so they're less effective.
  
• The WRs would be a work in progress (aside from BK). Instead, they're a strength of the team when they can get the ball, despite BK's early struggles. These guys have been a pleasant revelation.
  
• The OL would be one step better than a disaster. These guys are becoming a strength, much quicker than I thought, and I'm glad to be wrong. Impressed with them so far.
  

 

On defense I thought:

• Our DL would be ridiculously good, and deep. They're not good, in fact they're getting pushed around by every opponent so far, and while they've been OK, I expected far more from both the DTs and DEs. I'm baffled.
  
• The LBs would struggle, aside from David. Overall, they've been one giant "meh" and just short of a . David is doing fine, but could be better. We knew Compton and Fisher would be rusty, but instead they've been invisible. Surprised by this.
  
• The secondary would be a step down but by conference play we'd be right back where we were a couple of years ago. Instead, Dennard got hurt and the rest of the guys have been bewilderingly lost back there. The biggest shock of the team, IMO.
  

 

On special teams I thought:

• Clearly Maher would be a step down from Henery, and we'd miss Alex terribly. True, he's a step down, but everyone would be. And with Maher, it's a pretty small step. Shocked is how best to describe my reaction to Maher, and pleasantly so.
  
• We'd be mediocre at best with KR, and pretty good with PR (mostly because of Turner). Instead AA leads the nation in KR, and Turner is barely getting a chance at PR. But overall we're solid here.
  

 

So clearly my assumptions have been all wrong, and I'm baffled by it. But regardless of my assumptions of individual players or units, I felt that with the schedule we've been given, there was almost no way to have less than two losses. So, so far, I'm disappointed but not disillusioned.

 

 

 

And here's the sunshine pumper in me - think about this: What if the first part of this season, for whatever reason, is the worst ball we play all year? What if this team improves? What if Beck gets better with experience, and Martinez fixes his turnovers, and we focus on the RBs (our true strength) and suddenly the passing opens up a little and the defense clicks.... What happens then?

 

None of that is impossible, and with the talent we have, it may even be probable. I'll keep hoping.

[Ratt Mhule]

And here's the sunshine pumper in me - think about this: What if the first part of this season, for whatever reason, is the worst ball we play all year? What if this team improves? What if Beck gets better with experience, and Martinez fixes his turnovers, and we focus on the RBs (our true strength) and suddenly the passing opens up a little and the defense clicks.... What happens then?

 

None of that is impossible, and with the talent we have, it may even be probable. I'll keep hoping.

 

IF that stuff happens, and thats a big if. The bright side is, we won't be playing Alabama, Florida or LSU in a bowl game! We would be playing Oregon or Stanford in the Rose bowl. Oh crap! I guess its not a bright side afterall