Armstrong update

[jmfb]

If the offense sustained one or two drives, let the defense catch their breath and regroup, that game would have been completely different. I can't understand how you can defend that absolutely terrible offensive performance the second half. Or how about the offense sustaining just a FOUR MINUTE drive at the end of the first half instead of two 3 and outs? How about not going 3 and out 5 out of the last 9 drives of the game? How many teams have an offense sputter like that against good teams and still win? Not many, no matter how good or bad the defense is.

 

i'm not asking the offense to go out and score every possession, thats unrealistic, but can I get a score at some point in 10 drives? This shouldn't be tough, considering the offense is one of the best in the B1G. I'm sorry, but the offensive performance in the latter part of the UCLA game can't be defended. Your complete overlook of that is biased as hell.

 

I'm not defending the offense's performance in the second half. They went scoreless, and that sucked. But that is entirely irrelevant to the far greater problem of our defense giving up 38 points when spotted an 18-point lead, including 28 points and 248 yards in an 11-minute stretch of one quarter.

 

So what if the offense gets a score in one of those ten drives? It wouldn't have been enough when the defense utterly collapsed. Let's say the offense gets two TDs in that span - still not enough.

 

With an 18-point lead, a VERY loud crowd and an opponent on their heels that defense shouldn't have needed anything from anyone to win that game.

Thats not the whole story

 

When you get the defense off the field to regroup and get a breather- that helps the defense, and there are fewer possessions for the other teams offense.

When you get the defense good field position, that helps the defense

Like you always say, it's a team game- both work together

 

Defense was awful, offense didnt help matters from midpoint of 2nd quarter in.

 

I'm providing the other half of the story. trouble and yourself are on about the offense in the UCLA game. That's one half of the story. I'm discussing the other - and far greater - problem in that game. Providing the other half of the story.

My exact WORDS, second time around:

Defense was awful, offense didnt help matters from midpoint of 2nd quarter in.

[KJ.]

I'd say that is because we (think) we know the cause of our offensive issues (Taylor) while on defense it is harder to pinpoint (excluding Wiscy CCG last year, where it was brutally obvious that Stafford was getting dominated).

 

No, it's because "the quarterback" is low-hanging fruit, and people are too lazy to learn the game enough to know how to properly gripe about the defense. People gripe about Martinez because it's easy.

The quarterback is also low-hanging fruit for people like you to give way too much credit when something good happens.

 

Martinez did not win a single game by himself in the last four years. He also didn't lose a single game. Of course games come down to far more than a few plays, and if you really want to make an argument for "if this play doesn't happen then the outcome of the game changes" you can name several more players who have "won" or "lost" games.

 

Who made the throws to win the Northwestern and Michigan State games last year? Did Rex sneak in when nobody was looking?

Who caught the passes to win those games? Who called those plays? Who blocked to give Martinez time to make those throws?

[The King]

I'd say that is because we (think) we know the cause of our offensive issues (Taylor) while on defense it is harder to pinpoint (excluding Wiscy CCG last year, where it was brutally obvious that Stafford was getting dominated).

 

No, it's because "the quarterback" is low-hanging fruit, and people are too lazy to learn the game enough to know how to properly gripe about the defense. People gripe about Martinez because it's easy.

The quarterback is also low-hanging fruit for people like you to give way too much credit when something good happens.

 

Martinez did not win a single game by himself in the last four years. He also didn't lose a single game. Of course games come down to far more than a few plays, and if you really want to make an argument for "if this play doesn't happen then the outcome of the game changes" you can name several more players who have "won" or "lost" games.

Martinez may not have been the only reason for those comeback wins last year, but without him we don't win any of those games....

 

Not true. Maybe we aren't put in a position to be down early, because he doesn't make a bad read and turn the ball over.

 

It works both ways. Fact of the matter is, he made bad decisions that cost the team significantly (fumbles, ints), he overcame them, and we won. I am 100% grateful for that.

[trouble]

Had the offense sustained a drive and scored a TD at the beginning of that first half or after they scored a TD, that very well may have changed the entire game.

 

Defense gives up a big score, gets down on themselves. Offense comes out, punts in 58 seconds. Do you not think if they offense spent more than a minute on the field that the defense would have responded better?

 

 

The problems very well may lie deeper than the players themselves, but you cannot absolve the offense of some of the blame in that game.

 

 

Momentum...it's kind of a big thing.

 

If the offense ran down the field and scored, it would have been a big boost to that defensive unit that had some issues the prior drive. Does that come down to a lack of mental toughness? Sure, which is why the experience and leadership of that offense needs to come through and step up to make a play.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Momentum is a powerful thing. An offensive score would have probably slowed UCLAs production. It's hard to think that it would if you look at it without any regard to momentum.

 

Case in point to jmfb. Again - it's not the offense's fault the defense took 2 1/2 quarters of the UCLA game off. No matter how you spin it.

 

I've said that. The direction of causality can't be determined. With regards to momentum, what might have happened if the defense would've forced a three and out or if they forced a turnover? I wonder what would've happened had Abdullah not fumbled. Would the defense actually played?

[knapplc]

I'd say that is because we (think) we know the cause of our offensive issues (Taylor) while on defense it is harder to pinpoint (excluding Wiscy CCG last year, where it was brutally obvious that Stafford was getting dominated).

 

No, it's because "the quarterback" is low-hanging fruit, and people are too lazy to learn the game enough to know how to properly gripe about the defense. People gripe about Martinez because it's easy.

The quarterback is also low-hanging fruit for people like you to give way too much credit when something good happens.

 

Martinez did not win a single game by himself in the last four years. He also didn't lose a single game. Of course games come down to far more than a few plays, and if you really want to make an argument for "if this play doesn't happen then the outcome of the game changes" you can name several more players who have "won" or "lost" games.

 

Who made the throws to win the Northwestern and Michigan State games last year? Did Rex sneak in when nobody was looking?

Who caught the passes to win those games? Who called those plays? Who blocked to give Martinez time to make those throws?

 

Now we're worried that not everyone is getting credit. That's pretty funny amidst a conversation focusing on one player as the main problem facing this team - on both sides of the ball.

[BaytownHusker]

Martinez should be the starter the rest of the season. This kid has taken us to how many CCG's and bowl games? Granted we may not have won them all. And as big of a Cody Green supporter i was We wouldnt have done it with him back there at QB. TA looks good yes but on a couple of the runs he had sat that were 5 or yrd gains TM would have taken it to the house.

 

Those of you who think TM is the problem and not so much our Defense........ Just imagine what he would do to us if he was the opposing QB.

[Guy Chamberlin]

The offense has been improving since Beck took over and there has been no drop off since TA took over but I agree, that UCLA game was horrendous offensively and made it very hard for our young defense to gather themselves.

 

When you're trying to figure out if the offense or defense was more to blame in a meltdown, it usually goes to the coaching staff. Motivation, focus and discipline are teamwide traits, and it's really been at the heart of Nebraska's frustrating losses, moreso than playcalling or an individual performance.

Not saying you're wrong, but do we then give most of the credit to the coaching staff for keeping the team going and fighting and the ability to engineer several great comeback wins?

 

Sure.

 

It's a bit of a mixed bag, though, because most of last season's great comeback wins came after horrible first halves. Remember how each week was a wake-up call, then each week the team would come out looking utterly lost and confused in the first half?

 

Given the choice, I'll take the halftime adjustment and the win every day.

[knapplc]

It's a bit of a mixed bag, though, because most of last season's great comeback wins came after horrible first halves. Remember how each week was a wake-up call, then each week the team would come out looking utterly lost and confused in the first half?

 

Given the choice, I'll take the halftime adjustment and the win every day.

 

This was an oft-overlooked huge problem in our "win out" streak last year. It's like that team needed to be punched in the mouth before it responded. Happened in most every game following Ohio State except against Minnesota, didn't it?

[trouble]

Martinez should be the starter the rest of the season. This kid has taken us to how many CCG's and bowl games? Granted we may not have won them all. And as big of a Cody Green supporter i was We wouldnt have done it with him back there at QB. TA looks good yes but on a couple of the runs he had sat that were 5 or yrd gains TM would have taken it to the house.

 

Those of you who think TM is the problem and not so much our Defense........ Just imagine what he would do to us if he was the opposing QB.

 

 

Agreed, but ONLY if he is 100% healthy.

[The King]

I'm curious what the average field position was in the second half of the UCLA game... and yes, I think if the offense even gets one touchdown, that helps the defense out a little bit. As Tommy said, he'd go up to the defense and say "don't worry, we'll get a touchdown for you guys." I doubt Taylor does that kind of stuff. Also, Tommy admitted in a presser (although he did somewhat catch himself) saying that between him and the OL at least, they have different chemistry than the other QBs. They can't get enough of that guy.

 

Leadership intangibles are huge. When you're QB goes up to your young defense and tells them "Hey, look, I realize you didn't get a stop. We'll get you a touchdown this time, try and get a stop next time." it goes a lot farther.

 

Once again, I can't stress enough, that if Taylor is 100% healthy, I have no problem with him starting - but I am confident that he won't sniff that this year if he plays.

[BaytownHusker]

Martinez should be the starter the rest of the season. This kid has taken us to how many CCG's and bowl games? Granted we may not have won them all. And as big of a Cody Green supporter i was We wouldnt have done it with him back there at QB. TA looks good yes but on a couple of the runs he had sat that were 5 or yrd gains TM would have taken it to the house.

 

Those of you who think TM is the problem and not so much our Defense........ Just imagine what he would do to us if he was the opposing QB.

 

 

Agreed, but ONLY if he is 100% healthy.

 

 

Yes agreed. I forgot to put when he is healthy.

[The King]

Martinez should be the starter the rest of the season. This kid has taken us to how many CCG's and bowl games? Granted we may not have won them all. And as big of a Cody Green supporter i was We wouldnt have done it with him back there at QB. TA looks good yes but on a couple of the runs he had sat that were 5 or yrd gains TM would have taken it to the house.

 

Those of you who think TM is the problem and not so much our Defense........ Just imagine what he would do to us if he was the opposing QB.

 

Nothing, because he can't run right now.. and he certainly didn't run in the first couple games he played either!

 

And as far as the first bolded statement...and how many has he won? That's what I thought.

[jmfb]

As Tommy said, he'd go up to the defense and say "don't worry, we'll get a touchdown for you guys." I doubt Taylor does that kind of stuff. Also, Tommy admitted in a presser (although he did somewhat catch himself) saying that between him and the OL at least, they have different chemistry than the other QBs. They can't get enough of that guy.

 

Leadership intangibles are huge.

 

Did you watch the one pitch sweep to AA, where TA made a nice cut block on a possible trailing defender?

He is a "football player" that is for sure

[Count 'Bility]

With all due respect Knapp, when youre down two possessions with minutes left-as we experienced a few occasions last year and won-, that horrible defense has to make a stop or three for Martinez to lead us to that victory. It's a team game. Everyone has to do their part.

 

Why were we in those deficits to begin with?

Becuase our defense failed to make stops AND our offense didnt finish drives and committed turnovers. Huge emphasis on the "AND". Again, it's team game. Everyone has to to their part. Sure, more blame can be put on the D is those instances, but they also deserve some of the credit for the comebacks as well. Taylor didnt do that 100% by himself.