Why the offense looked good (your opinion)

[billdozer15]

I picked lesser opponent. However, i think it is also attributed to better QB play. Armstrong is a natural QB, Martinez is not. I saw several instances where Armstrong made decisions that Martinez as a Senior still would mess up, especially in the run game. Its unfortunate that we had to have an injury force player development, that is not how it is supposed to work.

[jmfb]

I dont care if you are playing on AIR VS NO DEFENSE

The offense was crisper, fewer penalties, more fluid, more consistent

You can just tell, on things like Speed Option, changing directions, stepping into throws, running hard- putting correct shoulder into defender- running through contact. option decisions etc

[WayUpAbove]

Each answer is correct. Better play calling lead to narrowing the scope of what plays the offense plays. When you play the plays everyone knows, you're bound to have better execution because they have done it a thousand times. Chip Kelly said that they only have 4 running plays while at Oregon. It just leads to better execution because your allowing the players to have more confidence in what they are doing. When that happens, and everyone executes better, your QB play is by far better. It also helps that you do this against an FCS defense. All of this happens. Let's be honest, Taylor would have looked amazing too.

 

Although, I have to admit, Tommy looked great! So did RKIII. Thank the whole offense, and the OC for playing plays those kids have ran through a thousand times before thanking Tommy (even though he looked great). Also, thank SDSU for having a not so good defense.

 

You have to remember our offense practices against our defense. Our defense, that is actually close to the being the worst in Div. 1. The same defense that'd can't stop anyone's running attack. The same on that allowed an FCS RB rush for 200+ yards.

 

It is no wonder that the coaches think that Taylor is better. I would hate to see how he eats up our own run defense at practice!

This. Our defense is not a good gage to test our offensive prowess. Defensively, we currently rate, IIRC 105 or 109. That sucks no matter how you try and spin it. I am sure that anyone on O looks pretty stellar against them. I really think this is what throws our staff for a loop. They see our O (or D) being successful and think it translates to game time. Going against Martinez probably gives them a false sense of security as he is not really mobile, makes mistakes and runs as soon as pressure appears. In the open field, he is easy to tackle as he has no shake or bake.

 

They want to start Martinez, great. The staff will do what they want. BUT to improve our D, let them go against TA evert day. he has accuracy, pocket presence and can actually run like a dual threat QB. I would almost guarantee an improvement if the staff did this. Go against a real dual threat QB.

This is exactly the problem and has been for years now including the Callahan and Solich years except now we don't really have enough talent/conditioning in key spots (O/D Linemen) to ever elevate anyone to a Top 10 level. Thankfully we're in a completely weak conference with Urban being the only coach who will hover around the top 5/10 and allow us to have a peak at the top 25 here and there until we get a real staff/strength and conditioning

[True2tRA]

Everyone keeps saying we pared down the offense for these two backups? Please explain, in specific examples, what you sae that we did so different on offense. I'd love to hear it because I believe it's a figment of your imagination.

 

Your argument could be that the coaches said they were going to trim it down. But these coaches say a lot of things that don't always appear to be true. I mean, they also say they are going to simplify on defense to help these young players out. So, what's the excuse there? Have they done it? If so, why no progress? After all, this defenses struggles cant possibly be a scheme issue according to many of you.

[Mavric]

Everyone keeps saying we pared down the offense for these two backups? Please explain, in specific examples, what you sae that we did so different on offense. I'd love to hear it because I believe it's a figment of your imagination.

 

Your argument could be that the coaches said they were going to trim it down. But these coaches say a lot of things that don't always appear to be true. I mean, they also say they are going to simplify on defense to help these young players out. So, what's the excuse there? Have they done it? If so, why no progress? After all, this defenses struggles cant possibly be a scheme issue according to many of you.

I don't know that they pared it down just for the backups. Beck said early last week that they thought coming into the year that they could do more with an experienced and talented offense but obviously things hadn't gone as well to start the year as they liked. They decided to cut back on what they were doing, which sounded to me like that was going to happen regardless of who was at QB. Bo then commented about that several times after the game.

 

I guess if you don't believe the coaches, I guess I don't know what to tell you. I don't think either one of them was changing plays at the line nearly as often as Taylor does regularly. I don't have any stats on it but it seemed to me like we ran quite a bit of zone read look - either the actual play or play action off it. They also could have pared back the number of things they worked on in practice to refine a few things instead of have a lot of things to choose from.

 

To me it just makes sense that our offense hadn't been running as smoothly as we've been accustomed to so they made some changes. But that only matter to those who don't believe the fallacy that we never make adjustments.

[walksalone]

Beck managed not to go "Full Watson" during the game...

[True2tRA]

Beck managed not to go "Full Watson" during the game...

 

Did Beck not go " full Watson"...or did Tommy not go "full Martinez". Hmmm......one wonders?

[walksalone]

Beck managed not to go "Full Watson" during the game...

 

Did Beck not go " full Watson"...or did Tommy not go "full Martinez". Hmmm......one wonders?

 

He didn't go "Full Watson". What I think is that at times, T-Mart gets put in certain situations by the offensive playcalling that sets him up for failure...

[True2tRA]

Beck managed not to go "Full Watson" during the game...

 

Did Beck not go " full Watson"...or did Tommy not go "full Martinez". Hmmm......one wonders?

 

He didn't go "Full Watson". What I think is that at times, T-Mart gets put in certain situations by the offensive playcalling that sets him up for failure...

 

Well, whatever it was, it was the first time in Husker history the offense went over 300 yards in both passing and rushing in a single game. That history obviously includes all the other FCS teams we have played in history. Since that seems to be the issue we can't overlook. Damn that Beck and his record setting "pared down" offense.

[walksalone]

Beck managed not to go "Full Watson" during the game...

 

Did Beck not go " full Watson"...or did Tommy not go "full Martinez". Hmmm......one wonders?

 

He didn't go "Full Watson". What I think is that at times, T-Mart gets put in certain situations by the offensive playcalling that sets him up for failure...

 

Well, whatever it was, it was the first time in Husker history the offense went over 300 yards in both passing and rushing in a single game. That history obviously includes all the other FCS teams we have played in history. Since that seems to be the issue we can't overlook. Damn that Beck and his record setting "pared down" offense.

 

Thats nice, but I'll become more of a believer when it occurs during games that matter...