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

[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.

 

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.

 

 

Yes, i do mean that 100%. I would laugh my ass off at the haters watching our "real" qb (whoever it is) look like sh*t with our Oline's penalties & dismal blocking. Our wrs dropping his passes would be humorous as well.

 

As you're easily in the top10 Tmart haters club (every since he beat out your hero Z. Lee) I guess you'll just have to eat it with them. But you'll probably love it as it will indeed be 2009 offensively all over again. Maybe it will bring back many, many fond memories for you. Ahhh....those 3 & outs are a thing of beauty.

 

I should have said "benched" or "too sick" instead of "hurt". But the obvious point (that you pretend to not notice) was we would just see how easy it is to look terrific at qb with an Oline that doesn't block & wrs that don't catch the ball ( Heck, that's if they remember what route they're supposed to run).

 

It just might turn on a light bulb for you.

[The Dude]

Taylor, consistent?

Yes.

[Enhance]

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.

I thought this year's offense had more direction and a better identity than any offense the previous two years. Excepting the times when Beck wanted to throw it a little too much, the offensive direction was clear - run the football and do it in different ways.

 

The option game really isn't even close to what it used to be around here. I don't think the players - from linemen, to receivers, to Martinez and the backs - have spent enough time with it to make it work. I think they're better built to run options out of the shotgun formation a la Tim Tebow more-so than they are out of the I-formation a la Tommie Frazier. The blocking isn't there a lot of times when we run it out of the I-formation, and Martinez (as we have seen before) isn't that great with lateral movement and cutting up field. His strength is bursting straight through a hole once he's found a crease.

 

That said, I don't think they should scrap it, but they should consider what works better for the team. I don't think Martinez is built to run a traditional option attack very well, but I think he could succeed in one that involves the shotgun formation or diamond formation.

[lo country]

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.

 

Spot on post. Folks are confusing a "fast" guy for a good runner. Martinez is far from a good runner. He is incredibly fast in a straight line. Put a man in front of him and he goes down like a bag of wet cement. Beck's play calling doesn't help. He tries to run an offense predicated o a dual threat QB. Martinez is not. He is not consistent enough of a passer nor a true runner. He cannot run off tackle, blow over a DB or juke anyone in the open field. He has become a much better game manager, BUT Beck's O is not advertised as one that needs a manager.

 

Look at teams that run a similar O to what ours was advertised in the spring to be. They all have dynamic game changing QB's who can put the D on their heels through the air or on the ground. All season guys have stacked the box. Martinez is not effective enough with his arm to get them out, nor can he run "tough" enough to to to get through the stack. If you think his standing straight up, slowing down to get hit is an effective way to run ..................

 

Teams do game plan to stop his straight ahead speed and have done it with surgical precision leaving Rex to try and slam home some points.

 

Another poster spoke about Turner's comment ref never knowing where the ball was going to be when released. That has got to hurt a receiver for sure. I would almost bet that if Martinez threw 10 balls all 10 would be at a different spot. I wish I could find our receivers YAC. That would be a very telling statistic as it relates to "accuracy" vs completion percentage. Folks talk about Martinez having a higher completion percentage than Tommie, EC etc... This may be true, BUT if Martinez throws a 10 yrd route and gets 10 yrds and completes this pass 10 times he gets 100 yrds. Now EC throws the same pass, but actually hits the guy in stride and each pass nets 15 yrds and he completes only 9 passes, he gets 135 yrds to Martinez 100 yrds. It is all about moving the ball and getting it to the receiver so that they can get YAC. Martinez, IMO, appears unable to do this. How many passes are low, high or behind?

 

Martinez is incredibly fast, but without a crease and open field with no obstacles, he is not as dynamic as year 1. Defenses have figured it out and we have not. If Beck really wants a dynamic, uptempo dual threat attacking O, Martinez is not your guy. If you want a game manager, then get a dedicated QB coach and work with Martinez and get your other play makers involved.

[roundegotrip]

How many dual threat QBs in AQ conferences had a better season than Taylor statistically? RG3, Robinson, James Franklin... I think that's about it.

[lo country]

How many dual threat QBs in AQ conferences had a better season than Taylor statistically? RG3, Robinson, James Franklin... I think that's about it.

 

Klein, Price, Boyd, Smith. Like Zoogies said, I am getting into the realm to agree to disagree. Not with you or any poster, but the notion that Martinez is a good dual threat QB. With work ie dedicated QB coach and a system that would exploit his strengths and not expose his weaknesses, he could be a very good one. I just think after year one, Beck has a long, long way to go.

 

I guess are there more dual threat guys/QB's you would like in our system more than Martinez or less?

[Hunter94]

we are back, once again, to the issue of qualified coaches.......sigh

[zoogs]

That said, I don't think they should scrap it, but they should consider what works better for the team. I don't think Martinez is built to run a traditional option attack very well, but I think he could succeed in one that involves the shotgun formation or diamond formation.

 

Really want to focus on the bold because that is a good point. I sort of don't get why we don't run the diamond formation all the time.

[lo country]

we are back, once again, to the issue of qualified coaches.......sigh

 

Absolutely. Sad, but true. At least IMO, it comes down to the staff trying to fit, to a degree, square pegs in round holes. Martinez is not Reesing. We gave the keys to an O in dire straights to an unproven RB coach and really do not look that much better from the our first game to the bowl game. Penalties, dropped balls, play makers on the bench, a complicated D scheme that takes too long to learn and doesn't work without a dominate D line.

 

And now rumors of Bo playing favorites, Raymond calling out the lack of talent etc....... Need to see a lot of pointing with the thumb in the off season. And to those who will say the staff didn't drop the balls, get off sides, miss tackles you are absolutely correct, BUT the staff calls the plays, decides who plays and stays in, are the ones who could have pulled Yoshi to get his composure for a play or two, are the ones who call pass plays when the run game is working, continue to have no defined or consistent identity on O, call passing plays when our receivers are prone to drops, don't allow former starters to play, bench the leading receiver through five games etc.......

[lo country]

That said, I don't think they should scrap it, but they should consider what works better for the team. I don't think Martinez is built to run a traditional option attack very well, but I think he could succeed in one that involves the shotgun formation or diamond formation.

 

Really want to focus on the bold because that is a good point. I sort of don't get why we don't run the diamond formation all the time.

 

Beck is prone, IMO, to a case of the cutesies. If it works, he out thinks himself. ie The diamond worked, but their DC will do this so I am going to do this play which will work against what he is going to do to counter what I just did. He needs to keep what is working until the DC stops it and have a functioning workable plan B we can immediately go to instead of the typical freak out put Martinez in the pocket and have him progress through his reads and become a pocket passer.

[Enhance]

That said, I don't think they should scrap it, but they should consider what works better for the team. I don't think Martinez is built to run a traditional option attack very well, but I think he could succeed in one that involves the shotgun formation or diamond formation.

 

Really want to focus on the bold because that is a good point. I sort of don't get why we don't run the diamond formation all the time.

 

Beck is prone, IMO, to a case of the cutesies. If it works, he out thinks himself. ie The diamond worked, but their DC will do this so I am going to do this play which will work against what he is going to do to counter what I just did. He needs to keep what is working until the DC stops it and have a functioning workable plan B we can immediately go to instead of the typical freak out put Martinez in the pocket and have him progress through his reads and become a pocket passer.

However, I think a fair to point to make is Tim Beck has never been a division one offensive coordinator. I know some are sick of hearing it, but the man deserves time and I'm sure he's going to use a lot of time this off season diagnosing what he did wrong and how he can be a better coordinator in the future. If I may tie an old player cliche to a coach - he should make the biggest jump between year one and year two.

 

The nice thing about running a spread option instead of traditional option are the running lanes for Martinez. By my estimations, Martinez has always broken off his biggest runs out of a shotgun set. When he gets the ball deep in the backfield, he can probably make his reads a lot easier than when he is right up at the line of scrimmage. Furthermore, shotgun sets spread the defense out more-so than an I-formation and a couple wide receivers.

[Hercules]

When criticizing Tim Beck this year, I think it's important to remember that it was his first year as coordinator, it was his players' first year in the system, and it was his COACHES' first year in the system too, which made it even harder for them to teach the players. I think you're going to see a pretty big jump in year two, as far as that aspect of it goes.

 

zoogies, every time you or someone else asks why we couldn't have a RB take responsibility for Taylor's rushing production, you're completely ignoring the whole point of having a QB who can run. That point is to force the defense to defend all 11 players on the field for the offense. That stresses the defense in a lot of ways, whether they're worried about the QB taking off out of the pocket on a passing play, or whether they're worried about defending the option. Using a backup running back to replace Taylor's rushing production completely removes that aspect of our offense. (I understand your counterargument to this, that Taylor's passing deficiencies make it so the defense doesn't have to defend all 11 players on the field, but I'm just trying to explain the point of not simply asking a RB take over all the rushing production from the QB).

 

Basically, I have no idea what you're advocating for, zoogies. If you're advocating for a wholesale change in offensive philosophy, then I think you're being impatient. Beck's offense is a good one, in which Martinez isn't a perfect fit but he is a good one, and you're going to see both of those guys have very good years in 2012 in their second year in the system.

 

If you're simply saying that the offensive philosophy in place is fine, but we're not getting the execution we need, I can completely agree with that. But the feel I get from this thread is that people don't believe that Taylor can make the improvements necessary toward becoming a better player, so we need to find someone else. Not only is that completely impractical (Carnes is the only other option right now, and he apparently can't read the defense pre-snap), but it is a sad lack of faith in a player who so far in his career has shown very clear improvement, and has put up with a ton of crap from the fans and the media in the meantime.

 

Taylor DID improve at the zone read this year, at running the option, his decision making was far better in the running game and the passing game, he started going through his reads better and finding his checkdowns, his accuracy did improve from 2010 to 2011, and he protected himself better as a runner (which is what people like you, zoogies, were saying he needed to do, and now you've changed your mind and are saying he needs to be more aggressive). Why are some so quick to say he hit his ceiling now, even after saying the same thing last offseason and being disproven this season?

 

Furthermore, I don't understand how a guy who was so supportive of Watson and Zac Lee in 2009-2010 could be so cynical about our offensive production this year, when we showed clear improvement against top defenses and received more consistent QB play.

[zoogs]

zoogies, every time you or someone else asks why we couldn't have a RB take responsibility for Taylor's rushing production, you're completely ignoring the whole point of having a QB who can run. That point is to force the defense to defend all 11 players on the field for the offense

 

I think you misunderstand me. There are many reasons to have a QB who can run. I am saying Taylor's running threat, specifically, is in one way only: straight-line burning speed. He doesn't run the option well. He doesn't shake defender and can't barrel over them. When the pocket breaks down and he gets pressured, he doesn't dance out of it. He usually goes down with it. I wouldn't even say he has great running vision. These are all the kinds of things you are looking to get out of the QB when he is a 'dual-threat' type.

 

I am saying if we are going to have a running QB, he has to be that kind of dynamic threat on the ground. Otherwise, we're better off having a passer. Or without even changing the scheme at all, a guy who isn't as fast, but has some vision and shake ability and throws the ball better. Sooner or later, one of our recruits is going to have that.

 

If Taylor ran either the read option or the option well, then we'd use both a lot more. We largely abandoned the option, didn't we?

 

If the steps he has taken to protect himself as a runner have nixed an entire dimension in his running game, then I'd have to say I was wrong and that it wasn't worth it. Although I've seen it said that he would probably protect himself better by lowering his shoulder rather than taking those steamrolling hits upright, and I agree with that.

 

I'm not that cynical about Beck, thugh, really. I will just disagree about all the passing and consistency improvements. I don't think Taylor raised the ceiling he was showing in his passing game pre-injury in 2010. He has cut down on mistakes, and that's about it.

[HuskerShark]

That said, I don't think they should scrap it, but they should consider what works better for the team. I don't think Martinez is built to run a traditional option attack very well, but I think he could succeed in one that involves the shotgun formation or diamond formation.

 

Really want to focus on the bold because that is a good point. I sort of don't get why we don't run the diamond formation all the time.

 

Agree 100%. I dont know about using it all the time, but just about every time I have seen us line up in the diamond, we have hit a huge play. I can't remember a time when we didn't pick up at least 5 yards. I can handle that.

[Hercules]

I don't know where this idea that we abandoned the option came from. We may have used it less in some games than in others, but we used it throughout the season, and we used it pretty effectively against South Carolina in the bowl game.

 

As far as Taylor's passing improvement goes, I look at "pre-Wisconsin" and "post-Wisconsin." It's about cutting down on mistakes, but it's also about taking what's there and not trying to force plays. You may think that's a small thing, but that's the difference between a win and a loss against Ohio State.

 

Furthermore, I just don't think that the QB is the only reason we have troubles in our passing game. Right now, I think our passing game would benefit more from having Alshon Jeffery than it would from having Andrew Luck.

 

As far as consistency, I don't really know what else to say, zoogies. This offense was far more consistent than the 2009 and 2010 units, including QB play, against much stronger defenses. There were no absolutely pathetic performances like we saw against Iowa State or Texas in 2009, or Texas A&M and Washington in 2010, and the offense actually carried the defense (as opposed to the other way around) in wins against Washington and Fresno State. We were capable of moving the ball on everyone, including teams with top 5 defenses like Michigan State and South Carolina, and we weren't relying on the big play. That's a good step forward for the entire offense, QB included.