How good could Eric Crouch have been?

[bshirt]

Crouch won the Heisman, but you hear a lot of people who say that he was the worst Heisman winner ever (uh, Gino Torretta, anyone?). I assume that's part of what the OP is talking about, along with usually taking a back seat to Frazier and Gill in discussions about our best QB ever. We lost a few other guys in 2002--Fonoti, Volk, T. Wistrom--but much of the team returned and we went 7-7. I think that fall off says a lot about Crouch.

 

On the other hand, drop him in the 1983 offense, and does he really do more with it than Gill did? Likewise in 1995, is he overshadowed by others in that offense?

 

Says a lot about Lord too.

 

Crouch was a great player, and he had the benefit of Solich's offense being completely catered to him. In 1999, with him, Newcombe, Alexander and Correll, only a fumble and horrific game management kept them from a title, (and they still should have gone over Vtech)

 

Ultimately, what kept Crouch from being better than he was ( and he was pretty damn good) wasn't what was around him, it was between his ears.

 

100% agree that 1999 teams should have played for all the marbles.

 

I don't know what was wrong with Crouch "between the ears". It looked to me like he essentially carried NU on his back for 3.5 years (exception....1999 defense). What more could he have done?

 

He won the BigXII, beat Texas, got us to the NC game (bizarre scenario but he should have in 1999 too). Just imagine what he would have done with Frazier or Frost's teams?

[bshirt]

Personally I think Bobby would of been better if he hadn't blown out he knee.

Newcombe *might* have been shiftier. Maybe But not faster than Crouch. And there's no way Newcombe was as tough as Crouch. Eric took a LOT of punishment his last couple of years. The guy had amazing durability.

I definitely agree that Crouch was much tougher and durable. Made him a great player. I think their top end speed was the same as they both ran official 10.4's in the 100. I think Crouch had a better burst while Bobby had smooth acceleration. I think Bobby would of been a much better passer.

 

 

Yeah, that burst or gap speed he had was insane. Whew!

[Nebraska option]

With the the teams 1993-1997 he would have been a almost mythical type player.

[NUpolo8]

Crouch won the Heisman, but you hear a lot of people who say that he was the worst Heisman winner ever (uh, Gino Torretta, anyone?). I assume that's part of what the OP is talking about, along with usually taking a back seat to Frazier and Gill in discussions about our best QB ever. We lost a few other guys in 2002--Fonoti, Volk, T. Wistrom--but much of the team returned and we went 7-7. I think that fall off says a lot about Crouch.

 

On the other hand, drop him in the 1983 offense, and does he really do more with it than Gill did? Likewise in 1995, is he overshadowed by others in that offense?

 

Says a lot about Lord too.

 

Crouch was a great player, and he had the benefit of Solich's offense being completely catered to him. In 1999, with him, Newcombe, Alexander and Correll, only a fumble and horrific game management kept them from a title, (and they still should have gone over Vtech)

 

Ultimately, what kept Crouch from being better than he was ( and he was pretty damn good) wasn't what was around him, it was between his ears.

 

100% agree that 1999 teams should have played for all the marbles.

 

I don't know what was wrong with Crouch "between the ears". It looked to me like he essentially carried NU on his back for 3.5 years (exception....1999 defense). What more could he have done?

 

He won the BigXII, beat Texas, got us to the NC game (bizarre scenario but he should have in 1999 too). Just imagine what he would have done with Frazier or Frost's teams?

 

He quit in 1999.

 

Flat out quit on his team when Solich chose Newcombe over him in the starting QB battle before the season. Solich had to leave the team, drive to Omaha to his mother's house and beg him to come back. When he did that, the first unsealable crack in Solich's tenure hit. He lost the respect of a lot of the team after that. No question.

 

Its been covered ad-infinitum everywhere realted to NU, but Crouch was a total prima donna and Solich instilled the belief that it was OK for him to quit if he didn't get his way. I loved watching him play, but his attitude was an undeniable fault with him. He didn't have to carry the offense. Diedrick was more than capable (at least his recruiting said so)

[skersfan]

Plus 1.

 

We have to quit this love fest!!!!!!

 

Plus the fact it was a continous fault through his short pro playing career. If he did not get what he wanted he quit.

 

I have heard he is a great guy, by people that know him now. I would guess he has grown up and if had the chance would do things differently now.

 

He is a Husker, and did a lot of good things for us. But there are very few OB's I would rate him above due to his actions while at Nebraska.

[JJ Husker]

Maybe we should analyze posters the way some of you rip apart some of our greatest players. Everyone has their faults. Is it necessary to dwell on the bad aspects? Cheer up. NU football would've been more bleak without Crouch. He was an excellent QB for us at a time when there was not much help around him. The debacle in Boulder had nothing to do with his play and everything to do with our lack of a defense. And we didn't even belong in the Miami game. Blaming Crouch for that game is nonsensical.

[walksalone]

With the the teams 1993-1997 he would have been a almost mythical type player.

 

I was just thinking about that too...

[Hercules]

With the the teams 1993-1997 he would have been a almost mythical type player.

 

I was just thinking about that too...

Crouch's 1999-2001 teams weren't that lacking in offensive talent. In 2000-2001 he didn't have a great RB or great defensive play, but that was it - there were still plenty of weapons around him, and some very good offensive linemen (those were the last offensive lines that even remotely resembled the lines of the 90's).

 

You put Crouch on one of those mid 90's teams and he'd have been a great player, but his numbers would have been worse than in 2001, not better. He would have had less playing time (just like all the starters did in the mid 90's, because they were up by 40 points heading into the third or fourth quarter almost every game), and he would have had less touches (because we had better RBs, and because Osborne didn't run the QB nearly as much as Solich did).

[walksalone]

With the the teams 1993-1997 he would have been a almost mythical type player.

 

I was just thinking about that too...

Crouch's 1999-2001 teams weren't that lacking in offensive talent. In 2000-2001 he didn't have a great RB or great defensive play, but that was it - there were still plenty of weapons around him, and some very good offensive linemen (those were the last offensive lines that even remotely resembled the lines of the 90's).

 

You put Crouch on one of those mid 90's teams and he'd have been a great player, but his numbers would have been worse than in 2001, not better. He would have had less playing time (just like all the starters did in the mid 90's, because they were up by 40 points heading into the third or fourth quarter almost every game), and he would have had less touches (because we had better RBs, and because Osborne didn't run the QB nearly as much as Solich did).

 

would that philosophy been altered though, due to the capabilities of Crouch?

[skersfan]

That being true, we seem to have a higher expectation of our current QB. Some say he almost quit last year, no evidence that it happened and he was thrown under the bus for it. We have a proven situation and we honor him for his play. Different standards I guess...

 

Team unity, who knows how good it was when he was here, but I doubt as good as it could have been.

 

Like I said I think he has most likely grown up, that according to people who know him now. Great guy. Those things were not said when he was here playing. He was a great player, but there was disention(spelling) within the team to. Great players do not have to be liked (Frazier) just play well. He did a great job for Nebraska no question. But other glaring things still resonate for me.

 

Continue the love fest.

[Hercules]

With the the teams 1993-1997 he would have been a almost mythical type player.

 

I was just thinking about that too...

Crouch's 1999-2001 teams weren't that lacking in offensive talent. In 2000-2001 he didn't have a great RB or great defensive play, but that was it - there were still plenty of weapons around him, and some very good offensive linemen (those were the last offensive lines that even remotely resembled the lines of the 90's).

 

You put Crouch on one of those mid 90's teams and he'd have been a great player, but his numbers would have been worse than in 2001, not better. He would have had less playing time (just like all the starters did in the mid 90's, because they were up by 40 points heading into the third or fourth quarter almost every game), and he would have had less touches (because we had better RBs, and because Osborne didn't run the QB nearly as much as Solich did).

 

would that philosophy been altered though, due to the capabilities of Crouch?

 

No. Osborne would have used Crouch differently than Frost, but I don't think he would have gotten more touches than Frost got - not with Ahman Green in the backfield, and Sheldon Jackson, Matt Davison, Bobby Newcombe, Brendan Holbein and Shevin Wiggins running all over the field. That team had a lot of great playmakers, and Osborne distributed the ball in a way that put a lot of stress on defenses - that's part of why his offenses were so much more effective than Solich's offenses.

 

And as good as Crouch was, his ability wouldn't have dictated that he receive more touches than Frazier from 93-95. Anybody who thinks differently didn't watch Frazier play, and they don't realize the immense amount of respect that is still held by non-partisan fans who watched Frazier play. I was listening to a local radio talk show in Eugene, Oregon a couple weeks ago, hosted by two hard core Ducks homers, and they were discussing Tebow-mania. Anyways, somebody called in to say how amazing it was that Tebow didn't have more respect from NFL pundits since he was the best college QB of all time, and after the call ended the co-hosts started discussing how they thought Tebow was amazing in college, but that Tommie Frazier was actually the best college player they'd ever watched (they even took Frazier over Jim Brown). That's from two Pac 12 homers who have probably never attended or covered a Nebraska game in their entire life.

 

What's really nuts is that it's completely possible that Crouch would have been third string QB on that 1995 team. Had he been on those 93-95 teams, he probably would have been one of the best slot receivers/kick returners ever to play at Nebraska.

[druski_2k5]

Eric Crouch pretty much did everything that a college football quarterback could do besides win a National Championship. Not many though win it all, much less play in a title game.

 

Crouch, so far, has been my favorite player to watch at Nebraska. Every time he had the ball, you felt like you had the chance to see something special and had the ability to put the team on his back and carry them to victory. In 1999, had it not been for everyone fumble the ball, or if the numbers had not been stitched onto the jerseys, we probably would have won the National Title that year. Crouch was good that year, but not as good as his 2000 or 2001 self. The 1999 defense was flat out awesome and National Championship caliber, except for the fumbles. We still should have been playing for the National Title that year and we would have won it. We were the best team playing at the end of the 1999-2000 year.

 

I loved watching him run the option because he was always trying to get vertical up the field as fast as possible, he took a ton of punishment and made good pitches to sell the option. He was always trying to get as much yards as possible as fast as he could. He always got up, represented toughness that we want to see on the field, and had a never say die attitude, and kept fighting on every drive and every play.

 

We had no business being in the 2002 Rose Bowl. You cannot blame Crouch for the debacle in Colorado. The defense was gutted by Shawn Watson of all people, and we could not adjust. We also looked slow as molasses against Miami. Our linebackers and defensive line was not as fast as they needed to be to keep up with Miami. The 01 team had good play-makers around Crouch, but I feel the 2000 offense was much better all-around. I think at times it was Crouch verses the world, not only because when nothing was working Eric tried to make something out of nothing, but that's how Solich called the plays, unfortunately.

 

I fault Solich for designing the offense around Crouch only. Yes, Crouch should be used for the option and quarterback run game to open the pass, but it was Solich's fault for not getting other play-makers involved more, recruiting better players, and taking some heat off of Crouch. I still can't believe Wilson Thomas was under-utilized as much as he was.

 

Not everyone is perfect. Crouch went back to Omaha after not being named the starter, that is not disputed. Some say he quit and have sources, some say that he never quit and he was just frustrated because he felt he performed better. Could Solich have lost credit for the decision? Maybe. But he also kicked DeAngello Evans off the team before that year. Perhaps it was truly two different situations and each situation was treated differently, much like we see with Bo now. Even Crouch today, admits that he wish he would have handled the NFL differently. Showing signs of maturity. Maybe he was just a little immature in that regard. However, I hear he is one of the nicest guys off the field, and would even send "Thank you" notes to trainers for taping his ankles and taking care of any and all injuries. That doesn't seem like a selfish attitude or a "me" attitude at all.

 

I think it is really hard and really unfair to pin Nebraska's downfall on one guy. No one guy is bigger than the program. You can pin 2002 for a number of reasons for why we went 7-7. Crouch was not a part of that equation. It was mostly on the coaches for not recruiting well or getting guys in games earlier, that part I agree. But Crouch has not been a member of the football team since 2001. Crouch had a good statistical day at Colorado, but the defense blew it horribly. Against Miami, the team was not prepared, and Miami was one of the best teams ever. No shame in losing to a team of their caliber, but the way they lost was pretty embarrassing and you wished they would have shown up better, and that is on the coaches. Miami just had to key on Crouch and that's how you stopped the 2001 offense. Had the coaches throughout the season gotten more play-makers involved, much like Osborne did, maybe things would have turned out different. I still wonder how Osborne would have utilized Crouch during those years.

 

Crouch did come back after not being named the starter, and all he did was, win the starting job, win a boatload of games, awards, a Big XII Championship and do the best he could with what was on the team offensively, defensively, and coaching wise.

 

I think you can blame Solich's staff for not keeping up with recruiting and getting players involved for slipping off the radar, but I just think it's unfair to blame ONE player for a downfall.

 

If you blame ANY one person for the downfall at Nebraska. Look at Steve Pederson, not Eric Crouch.

[bshirt]

Maybe we should analyze posters the way some of you rip apart some of our greatest players. Everyone has their faults. Is it necessary to dwell on the bad aspects? Cheer up. NU football would've been more bleak without Crouch. He was an excellent QB for us at a time when there was not much help around him. The debacle in Boulder had nothing to do with his play and everything to do with our lack of a defense. And we didn't even belong in the Miami game. Blaming Crouch for that game is nonsensical.

 

It's amazing, really amazing that some NU internet fans are so dim-witted they pin CozBohl's defense on our "qb". Awesome....

 

Also extremely impressive is them thinking Frost, Frazier or Gill would have made a lick of difference in that Miami game. That Miami team was hard-core vicious and without a mid 90's pancaking Oline NU was doomed. A mid 90s defense would have helped a lot too. But nahhhhhhh.......blame the qb.

[bshirt]

Crouch won the Heisman, but you hear a lot of people who say that he was the worst Heisman winner ever (uh, Gino Torretta, anyone?). I assume that's part of what the OP is talking about, along with usually taking a back seat to Frazier and Gill in discussions about our best QB ever. We lost a few other guys in 2002--Fonoti, Volk, T. Wistrom--but much of the team returned and we went 7-7. I think that fall off says a lot about Crouch.

 

On the other hand, drop him in the 1983 offense, and does he really do more with it than Gill did? Likewise in 1995, is he overshadowed by others in that offense?

 

Says a lot about Lord too.

 

Crouch was a great player, and he had the benefit of Solich's offense being completely catered to him. In 1999, with him, Newcombe, Alexander and Correll, only a fumble and horrific game management kept them from a title, (and they still should have gone over Vtech)

 

Ultimately, what kept Crouch from being better than he was ( and he was pretty damn good) wasn't what was around him, it was between his ears.

 

100% agree that 1999 teams should have played for all the marbles.

 

I don't know what was wrong with Crouch "between the ears". It looked to me like he essentially carried NU on his back for 3.5 years (exception....1999 defense). What more could he have done?

 

He won the BigXII, beat Texas, got us to the NC game (bizarre scenario but he should have in 1999 too). Just imagine what he would have done with Frazier or Frost's teams?

 

He quit in 1999.

 

Flat out quit on his team when Solich chose Newcombe over him in the starting QB battle before the season. Solich had to leave the team, drive to Omaha to his mother's house and beg him to come back. When he did that, the first unsealable crack in Solich's tenure hit. He lost the respect of a lot of the team after that. No question.

 

Its been covered ad-infinitum everywhere realted to NU, but Crouch was a total prima donna and Solich instilled the belief that it was OK for him to quit if he didn't get his way. I loved watching him play, but his attitude was an undeniable fault with him. He didn't have to carry the offense. Diedrick was more than capable (at least his recruiting said so)

 

I don't know the full story about him "quitting" as you do. But really, I don't care. LOTS of kids have problems when they're 19 or 20 years old. He didn't hurt anybody so as I see it, BFD. I also don't care what rumors have been covered ad-infinitum on the internet. Some people eat up the National Inquirer and some don't. I don't. To each their own.

 

I "do" know he played fantastic cfb for NU and I watched Diedrick. He wasn't even in the same galaxy as Crouch running the ball. But he was serviceable and a decent rb but not even remotely close to some of the many great ones we've had so we'll just agree to disagree about this one too.

 

Especially after 1999, Crouch carried NU.

[Nevada Husker]

Watching Tebow makes me think if Crouch played QB in the NFL he could have done just as good.

Two very different guys. Tebow is built like a linebacker, was a better passer in college than Crouch, and has an incredible will & drive to lead his team. Crouch could beat Tebow in a foot race, but in all other areas I believe Tebow comes out further ahead in terms of having NFL success.