I hope Turner or another QB gets a long hard look this offseason.

[zoogs]

I don't know. The lines always get overlooked. Cotton has been pretty solid at TE. Reed hasn't had too many chances to get worked into the game. Our backup RBs we never get to see much of. My point basically is that consistency is *not* one of Taylor's traits and hasn't been.

 

I guess you could make the argument here by saying the consistency of everybody else on the offense is bad, but that doesn't make Taylor a consistent player either. He'll have moments where he shines, and then he'll have his oh-my-goodness moments. Or the moments where he disappears and becomes pretty completely ineffective.

[Hercules]

I don't know. The lines always get overlooked. Cotton has been pretty solid at TE. Reed hasn't had too many chances to get worked into the game. Our backup RBs we never get to see much of. My point basically is that consistency is *not* one of Taylor's traits and hasn't been.

 

I guess you could make the argument here by saying the consistency of everybody else on the offense is bad, but that doesn't make Taylor a consistent player either. He'll have moments where he shines, and then he'll have his oh-my-goodness moments. Or the moments where he disappears and becomes pretty completely ineffective.

 

The offense as a whole is still inconsistent. It's much better than it was in 2009 and 2010, but not where it needs to be. The problem I have is when everyone focuses on the QB, when he's only one aspect of the offense, and he really was one of the most consistent aspects of it this season. You mention Kyler Reed, who was injured throughout the season, but he was really no different from any other receiver on the team in his struggles with drops. You mention the backup running backs, but I don't think I need to remind anybody of Ameer's colossally important fumble against South Carolina.

 

It's a unit-wide problem. They all need to get more consistent - the Dude was simply saying that Taylor and Rex are closer to being consistent than anybody else on the unit. I'd agree with that 100%. Well, not 100%. There were certain players who were very consistent, just in a very bad way.

[COMPTON]

I agree and I would like to see players like Jamal Turner, Quincy Enunwa, Aaron Green, Brion Carnes be given the chance to prove whether they can be consistent in game situations. I've heard it many times that some players are just "ballers" as they call it and even if practice doesn't always go perfect when the lights are bright and the ball kicks off these type of players just seem to "get it."

[zoogs]

I think you just have to look at Turner's comments that he made about Taylor's passes. You just don't know about them. Sometimes the ball comes out a certain way, but it's no sure bet.

 

Anyway, I don't want to get into the other players too much, although I know that is the angle of the discussion here. It's just that to me, consistency is one area Taylor really needs to work on, especially in his throwing. But he is talked about as if he's fine there.

[Hercules]

I don't think there's anyone who thinks Taylor is fine just the way he is as a QB. I think every Husker fan wants to see him improve every aspect of his game. I guarantee that's how Taylor feels too, even if he gives the press the cold shoulder when they ask him about it.

 

I think when you're seeing people say Taylor is "fine," they're saying that in a specific context. For example, Taylor played "fine," in the South Carolina game. He was not the reason we lost, it was just that he didn't get nearly the support he needs from the rest of his team. Or when people are talking about what needs to get better next year - everyone wants Taylor to get better. But if this team is going to get better, there are about 6 other position groups that should be prioritized as "in need of improvement" ahead of Taylor.

[HuskerShark]

I don't think there's anyone who thinks Taylor is fine just the way he is as a QB. I think every Husker fan wants to see him improve every aspect of his game. I guarantee that's how Taylor feels too, even if he gives the press the cold shoulder when they ask him about it.

 

I think when you're seeing people say Taylor is "fine," they're saying that in a specific context. For example, Taylor played "fine," in the South Carolina game. He was not the reason we lost, it was just that he didn't get nearly the support he needs from the rest of his team. Or when people are talking about what needs to get better next year - everyone wants Taylor to get better. But if this team is going to get better, there are about 6 other position groups that should be prioritized as "in need of improvement" ahead of Taylor.

 

Exactly. I've been defending Taylor a lot on this board recently, but like Hercules said, I still expect him to keep progressing as a QB. If he progresses as much next year as he did this year, I will be really pleased. I understand his deficiencies, but I think his upside outweighs them by far. He's been pretty efficient this year, and in the past 7 or 8 games, he hasn't thrown hardly any INT's which shows a lot of growth in decision making and improved accuracy.

[zoogs]

The thing that most concerns me is - where has his upside been? If he doesn't find a way to unleash that running upside that he is all about, well, let's just hope he does. I know a lot of the talk has been about how it's been coached out of him. I think that is a decision we can look at critically. We need it back.

[bshirt]

I don't know. The lines always get overlooked. Cotton has been pretty solid at TE. Reed hasn't had too many chances to get worked into the game. Our backup RBs we never get to see much of. My point basically is that consistency is *not* one of Taylor's traits and hasn't been.

 

I guess you could make the argument here by saying the consistency of everybody else on the offense is bad, but that doesn't make Taylor a consistent player either. He'll have moments where he shines, and then he'll have his oh-my-goodness moments. Or the moments where he disappears and becomes pretty completely ineffective.

 

The offense as a whole is still inconsistent. It's much better than it was in 2009 and 2010, but not where it needs to be. The problem I have is when everyone focuses on the QB, when he's only one aspect of the offense, and he really was one of the most consistent aspects of it this season. You mention Kyler Reed, who was injured throughout the season, but he was really no different from any other receiver on the team in his struggles with drops. You mention the backup running backs, but I don't think I need to remind anybody of Ameer's colossally important fumble against South Carolina.

 

It's a unit-wide problem. They all need to get more consistent - the Dude was simply saying that Taylor and Rex are closer to being consistent than anybody else on the unit. I'd agree with that 100%. Well, not 100%. There were certain players who were very consistent, just in a very bad way.

 

Yep.

 

Our offense this year is the 1983 "Scoring Explosion" relative to 2009 (even with a far tougher schedule.....no three SunBelt teams this year to puff up the stats). For sure it has a long, long ways to go but it's far better than it was.

 

I don't know why the average NU fan can't see the major problems on offense we have is "not" our qb. Tmart threw "one" real interception for the last seven games. "One". Even that "one" interception looked like a total miscommunication between Tmart & our wr. Even the announcer's said that was obvious. But regardless who's fault it was, we're talking "one" interception. Jeesh.....

 

Our Oline this year was a disaster with wildly inconsistent run blocking & penalties, our wrs dropped passes everywhere (as usual) & our backup rbs fumble in the red Zone or get beheaded. But what do 98% of the posts say? Of course, Tmart s*cks. Heh....talk about a rough crowd.

 

I almost wish Tmart would get hurt so I could laugh at the sh*theads when they get to see how awesome Carnes (or whoever) is with an Oline that can't block or figure out what a motion penalty is, TE's & Wrs who couldn't block PeeWee Herman or remember their routes & wrs that drop his passes reliably. It would be 2009 all over again but the pain of watching it would almost be worth it.

[zoogs]

You almost wish Taylor would get hurt?

 

Now that's a rough crowd.

[bshirt]

You almost wish Taylor would get hurt?

 

Now that's a rough crowd.

 

Oh, how witty. Way to take it totally out of context, zoogies.

[Hercules]

The thing that most concerns me is - where has his upside been? If he doesn't find a way to unleash that running upside that he is all about, well, let's just hope he does. I know a lot of the talk has been about how it's been coached out of him. I think that is a decision we can look at critically. We need it back.

... Ya know, he actually had a pretty good year running the football... 874 rushing yards with a 4.62 ypc is pretty darn good, especially for a QB.

 

Seriously, what are you expecting? 900 yards rushing? 1000 yards rushing? What would you deem as "acceptable?"

[zoogs]

You almost wish Taylor would get hurt?

 

Now that's a rough crowd.

 

Oh, how witty. Way to take it totally out of context, zoogies.

 

The context is you almost wish he'd get hurt, just so you can get a kick out of watching Nebraska struggle without him, and then stick it to the 'haters'. Is that the correct context now? I can get the frustration, but I hope you don't mean that at all.

 

Herc, Taylor really disappears in some games. And he is a straight-line kind of guy who won't be juking guys or even running them through for the tough inside yards. Give him a crease and he can be gone, that's his biggest strength and it's something he is really good at. But

 

Penn State: 18-57

Michigan State: 11-28

Wyoming: 11-40

Wisconsin: 18-68

 

Games like this, are really frustrating to watch out of him.

 

We can agree to disagree on that point. I think I just want to see Taylor put it all together more. We all know his speed and acceleration, that home run threat, is why is the starter. Well, he will need to show that it is worth it!

 

I mean, if Taylor is no longer a serious threat to take it to the house, where does that leave him? What is the point of him being is really fast if he doesn't add a significant jolt to the running game, knowing it all comes already at the expense of the passing game?

 

This is about more than just numbers though. It's just that if we have a 'dual-threat' who is a bit weaker in the passing game than average, he has to make up for it by being a serious, serious threat on the ground. And that means being that guy who will hurt defenders, make something out of nothing, and not just the guy who excels only in space.

 

Taylor had all these 'good' numbers in the SC game, if you will. 10/16 passing, 10 rushes for 78 yards if you take out the sacks and everything - and we still put up only 10 points. Anyway. I know I'm in the minority opinion here. I'll just end on that note, for now.

[Hercules]

I mean, if Taylor is no longer a serious threat to take it to the house, where does that leave him? What is the point of him being is really fast if he doesn't add a significant jolt to the running game, knowing it all comes already at the expense of the passing game?

 

You really think Taylor isn't the same threat he was last year? It's telling that most of the defenses we faced this year, South Carolina included, came into the game talking about how their main objective was to contain Taylor Martinez. The fact that defenses went all out to contain Martinez (which made other aspects of their defense vulnerable) is a sign that his big-play threat is there, whether he's showing up on SportsCenter or not.

 

Anyways, zoogies, I can only assume that since you didn't answer my question before... you don't have a good answer. But just in case I'm wrong, I'll ask again. How do you define, "a significant jolt to the running game?" Taylor had 874 rushing yards this year, at 4.62 ypc. If you include only running plays and not sacks, his numbers go to 973 yards at 5.8 ypc. What does he need to accomplish in order for you to consider him a "significant jolt to the running game?" Does he need 1,000 yards? Does he need 1,500 yards?

 

As outlined earlier in the thread, when you take sacks out of the equation, Taylor had a more efficient year running the football than Rex did. So I'm curious - why are you criticizing Taylor for his so called lack of production on the ground while Rex goes blameless? I mean, I understand that the QB position has more responsibilities than just running the football, and that Taylor is not as efficient at those. But Rex's only responsibility (statistically speaking) is running the football, so if Taylor's production isn't good enough for you, how come Rex's is?

 

This is about more than just numbers though. It's just that if we have a 'dual-threat' who is a bit weaker in the passing game than average, he has to make up for it by being a serious, serious threat on the ground. And that means being that guy who will hurt defenders, make something out of nothing, and not just the guy who excels only in space.

 

I personally don't care what kind of runner he is, as long as he produces. Tommie Frazier and Eric Crouch were guys that were elusive in traffic, and even punishing in contact. Scott Frost and Tim Tebow weren't going to make many people fall out of their shoes with a juke, but they were awfully tough to bring down. Taylor doesn't really fit either of those descriptions - yet he's putting up comparable numbers on the ground.

 

Now, if you want to talk about how his passing game isn't as strong as we need it to be, I'm all ears! But you're acting like he's not contributing enough to the running game (which he clearly is, according to the statistics), and you're acting like you've completely given up on his ability to improve his passing game, which I think is premature, given how he improved this season. The people who are saying that he's hit his ceiling now are the same ones that said at this time last season - and they were wrong.

 

Taylor had all these 'good' numbers in the SC game, if you will. 10/16 passing, 10 rushes for 78 yards if you take out the sacks and everything - and we still put up only 10 points. Anyway. I know I'm in the minority opinion here. I'll just end on that note, for now.

 

We put up 13 points in the SC game. 14 if we hadn't missed the extra point. 17 if we hadn't missed a chip shot field goal. 24 if one of our back up running backs (who you said earlier in this thread were deserving of more playing time) hadn't fumbled the ball inside the 10 yard line. We were moving the ball just fine, especially considering that we were playing the #4 defense in the country. The fact that we didn't finish on those 3 opportunities had very little to do with Taylor.

 

...

 

And by this point in this thread, I must seem like the biggest Rex Burkhead hater ever. I'm not. I love that dude. But I have no idea why Rex goes by with so little criticism compared to Taylor who takes ridiculous amounts of criticism, some of which is not even remotely valid (e.g. "He's not producing enough in the running game"), when their production is so comparable. My theory is that it has something to do with their personalities, but that's another discussion...

 

Bottom line, I'm stoked that they're going to make up our backfield again next year, even while I have hopes that they'll make significant improvements in the offseason. I hope that Taylor develops better vision, better accuracy, and that he continues to improve in his execution of the option game. I hope Rex develops a home-run capability, but I feel like that's a long shot... It's really the only thing he's lacking, but it is incredibly important for a RB - it's the difference between an NFL RB and a solid college RB, and our RB stable has sorely missed that home run threat since Helu left (you wanna know where Taylor's big-play ability went? It went away the minute the defense wasn't worried about the other guy in the backfield beating them for 80 yards).

[zoogs]

It's telling that most of the defenses we faced this year, South Carolina included, came into the game talking about how their main objective was to contain Taylor Martinez. The fact that defenses went all out to contain Martinez (which made other aspects of their defense vulnerable) is a sign that his big-play threat is there, whether he's showing up on SportsCenter or not.

 

Isn't it also telling that Wisconsin came out of the game with a player talking about how it was the simplest defensive gameplan they had put into place?

 

The point of having a running QB, in my opinion, is to add something that some secondary RB or group of RBs can't do. Running point on the option or the zone read with deadly efficiency, that's something. Blowing past safeties with regularity, bull-dozing through the line or shaking multiple defenders, that's something too.

 

With Taylor, it's neither of those, but it's a third thing: his burst and the fact that he can take it to the house if he's given an obvious lane to go through. These are the kinds of things that qualify as 'significant jolt'. And the problem I am trying to get at, this just doesn't happen very often. The jolt is too often MIA.

 

If he puts up numbers that are respectable, fine, but why are we not having a RB do that? Because we can't find some RBs to churn out 800 yards with enough carries?

 

We are building our offense around this exciting, FAST player. The sacrifice is a passing game that can't be used too much and is average, at best, in production. This has to be made up for, and if it doesn't add a dimension to the ground game, it's not. JMO.

 

What Taylor needs to do to contribute enough to the running game is to answer this question: why can't we duplicate his running production with another RB, especially when a stronger passer means less stacked fronts for the backs?

 

This is independent of whether we have anybody better right now or not, by the way. Just a discussion of whether this is an issue or not.

 

In typing this over, I think the important point is that the running game doesn't really feed off of Taylor. He doesn't run the option or the zone read too smoothly. If he did, and he was a bigger part of the reason that made Rex or the other backs go, it would change everything, IMO. Maybe I'm heading towards a "come on, OC! Design a better offense for this personnel!" direction.

 

I hope that answers the question! I am thinking we are headed towards just agree to disagree territory though. The difference may just be an optimistic view of some kind of future potential on your part, and a failure to factor that in on my part.

[TheW0rld]

Maybe I'm heading towards a "come on, OC! Design a better offense for this personnel!" direction.

 

This is exactly where I sit now after reflecting on the offense this season. I got the impression that I saw a lot of different things thrown at the wall to see if they would stick but not a coherent attacking system ala Oregon. It would seem obvious that you would want to set up Martinez to burst north-south instead of running him east-west down the line but we got a big dose of the more traditional option. Other than for nostalgia I just didn't see the point in trying to perfect that with this personnel.