Armstrong Leading the QB Race

[BigRedBuster]

Shouldn't we want to win now rather than getting a freshmen experience if he is not the best qb we have?

That's a strange idea.

[Enhance]

Beck just talked about how good of a runner Fyfe is, so whatever talking heads are saying the running game is gone with Fyfe need to shut their heads.

 

“He’s a shifty runner,” Beck said, smiling. “He’s lot quicker and more elusive than people might give him credit for. He’s so gangly looking. He doesn’t look like (a good runner), but he is.”

 

 

LINK

 

So we don't run the Option. We ran it what, four times a game last year, even when Tommy was in, and he's the clear best Option QB we've had since Jammal Lord.

I'm sure this Ryker not running the option talk will get some more attention now, maybe coaches even getting specifically asked about it after practice.

 

I'm with you. If we don't run it with Ryker, so what. That said, I'd like to hear a coach's perspective on it because the media members do get to watch practice. Somewhere, somehow, they get the idea in their mind that he can't run the option very well, accurate or inaccurate. I just want to know what gives them that impression - is it because of the way he runs in general, or is it because he's failed to successfully run the option consistently in practice?

[papersun87]

 

I don't expect my backup to run the entire playbook. Get the team to the line and hand the ball to Ameer Abdullah.

I'm fine with that.

 

never pass again

[TGHusker]

 

Fyfe looked good in the Spring Game, and frankly I couldn't care less if he beats out a four-star athlete from California or even if he beats Tommy and takes the #1 spot. If he's our best quarterback, #1 recruit in the nation or unheralded walk-on, put him under center & let's go.

 

It's possible to miss a guy in recruiting. It's possible all the lights just came on for Fyfe and he's the second coming of Vince Ferragamo today. If we win games with him starting, who cares?

 

 

EDIT - Scottie Pippen wasn't offered a single scholarship out of high school, joined some po-dunk college as a walk-on, and turned into one of the 50 greatest NBA players of all time.

 

The light turns on at different times for different people. Let the starter be the starter regardless of stars.

I agree. However, there seems to be some fans who think it's alarming that a walk on is that close to starting. I just don't get it.

 

I don't think it is alarming - because it does not diminishes the other 2 QBs. I do find it surprising - in a good way. We know what TA is capable of, we know the potential that JS has - now we have the additional benefit that Fyfe is another very strong and it appears good option. Alarmed, no, surprised - yes in a good way. Gives me more confidence. I hope all three get plenty of play time in the 4 non conf games. & I agree wt Knapp - doesn't matter to me which one starts - just start the best one for the O.

[Saunders]

 

 

First off, the news that Fyfe is #2 isn't news at all. By all accounts that's been the case since at least spring ball.

B. There's no QB controversy. Armstrong is your starter.

3rdly, we'll probably end up using all three guys at some point in the season, and people will try really hard to argue Fyfe and/or Stanton are no good when they struggle a bit.

Possible we use Stanton like OU used Bell before he became the starter? i.e. jumbo package

He's third string. Why don't we work on developing our sophomore starting QB, and maybe get his backup, Ryker Fyfe, a few reps in mop up duty as well. Like most places do. Why would we steal reps from a sophomore starter, and his zero experience backup, to create a special jumbo package for the third string QB? I just don't get t.

 

Do you not remember the Saga of Taylor Martinez?

[True2tRA]

 

 

 

First off, the news that Fyfe is #2 isn't news at all. By all accounts that's been the case since at least spring ball.

B. There's no QB controversy. Armstrong is your starter.

3rdly, we'll probably end up using all three guys at some point in the season, and people will try really hard to argue Fyfe and/or Stanton are no good when they struggle a bit.

Possible we use Stanton like OU used Bell before he became the starter? i.e. jumbo package

He's third string. Why don't we work on developing our sophomore starting QB, and maybe get his backup, Ryker Fyfe, a few reps in mop up duty as well. Like most places do. Why would we steal reps from a sophomore starter, and his zero experience backup, to create a special jumbo package for the third string QB? I just don't get t.

 

Do you not remember the Saga of Taylor Martinez?

 

 

[hskrfan4life]

 

 

 

First off, the news that Fyfe is #2 isn't news at all. By all accounts that's been the case since at least spring ball.

B. There's no QB controversy. Armstrong is your starter.

3rdly, we'll probably end up using all three guys at some point in the season, and people will try really hard to argue Fyfe and/or Stanton are no good when they struggle a bit.

Possible we use Stanton like OU used Bell before he became the starter? i.e. jumbo package

He's third string. Why don't we work on developing our sophomore starting QB, and maybe get his backup, Ryker Fyfe, a few reps in mop up duty as well. Like most places do. Why would we steal reps from a sophomore starter, and his zero experience backup, to create a special jumbo package for the third string QB? I just don't get t.

 

Do you not remember the Saga of Taylor Martinez?

 

Taylor.....????

[zoogs]

I don't see us developing a special package for a backup QB just for the sake of doing it. Maybe if it really adds something for the offense. Given the differences in strengths of these quarterbacks, it actually just might.

 

Our depth at this position will have no experience this year, so I hope that Fyfe and Stanton will both get some series early in games in some of our nonconference slate. Regular offense work. It's important to cover the bases and for those guys to get their feet wet.

[lo country]

 

 

 

 

First off, the news that Fyfe is #2 isn't news at all. By all accounts that's been the case since at least spring ball.

B. There's no QB controversy. Armstrong is your starter.

3rdly, we'll probably end up using all three guys at some point in the season, and people will try really hard to argue Fyfe and/or Stanton are no good when they struggle a bit.

Possible we use Stanton like OU used Bell before he became the starter? i.e. jumbo package

He's third string. Why don't we work on developing our sophomore starting QB, and maybe get his backup, Ryker Fyfe, a few reps in mop up duty as well. Like most places do. Why would we steal reps from a sophomore starter, and his zero experience backup, to create a special jumbo package for the third string QB? I just don't get t.

 

Do you not remember the Saga of Taylor Martinez?

 

Taylor.....????

 

The 4 yr starter with no back ups so his senior year when he's hurt 2 guys with 0 playing time get called on? yep, dumb idea to think about getting guys reps in real games.

[jsneb83]

 

 

 

 

First off, the news that Fyfe is #2 isn't news at all. By all accounts that's been the case since at least spring ball.

B. There's no QB controversy. Armstrong is your starter.

3rdly, we'll probably end up using all three guys at some point in the season, and people will try really hard to argue Fyfe and/or Stanton are no good when they struggle a bit.

Possible we use Stanton like OU used Bell before he became the starter? i.e. jumbo package

He's third string. Why don't we work on developing our sophomore starting QB, and maybe get his backup, Ryker Fyfe, a few reps in mop up duty as well. Like most places do. Why would we steal reps from a sophomore starter, and his zero experience backup, to create a special jumbo package for the third string QB? I just don't get t.

Do you not remember the Saga of Taylor Martinez?

Taylor.....????

The 4 yr starter with no back ups so his senior year when he's hurt 2 guys with 0 playing time get called on blowout victories for the back ups to get in and get game experience? yep, dumb idea to think about getting guys reps in real games.

FIFY

[True2tRA]

The 4 yr starter with no back ups so his senior year when he's hurt 2 guys with 0 playing time get called on? yep, dumb idea to think about getting guys reps in real games.

Who in the sam hell said don't get any backups reps in real games? Don't fail at your original argument then go ahead and pull a false argument out of your ass in an attempt to be right. I never once said don't get backups reps. I said play Tommy Armstrong, he's the damn starter. If we get up big, play Fyfe as much as possible. Hell, even throw a few snaps in there for Stanton if you want to, although I would much rather work on developing a starter and the backup like the rest of the world does. What I would not do, is develop a 'special package' on offense based entirely on the skill set of the third string quarterback. That was your original point, and it's boneheaded. We have a sophomore starter who needs all the teaching and reps he can get in this offense. If he goes down, we are in the same situation with his backup, only this backup has no game experience. It's asking quite a bit of a coach and these players to then develop a 'special package' on offense, for Stanton, all because some of you here have a boy crush on him.

[Scratchtown]

You gotta be up by a big margin to let back ups play. When the defense is giving up a bunch of points you gotta keep scoring.

Oregon's backup (Jeff Locke) basically plays as much as Mariota does.

[lo country]

 

The 4 yr starter with no back ups so his senior year when he's hurt 2 guys with 0 playing time get called on? yep, dumb idea to think about getting guys reps in real games.

Who in the sam hell said don't get any backups reps in real games? Don't fail at your original argument then go ahead and pull a false argument out of your ass in an attempt to be right. I never once said don't get backups reps. I said play Tommy Armstrong, he's the damn starter. If we get up big, play Fyfe as much as possible. Hell, even throw a few snaps in there for Stanton if you want to, although I would much rather work on developing a starter and the backup like the rest of the world does. What I would not do, is develop a 'special package' on offense based entirely on the skill set of the third string quarterback. That was your original point, and it's boneheaded. We have a sophomore starter who needs all the teaching and reps he can get in this offense. If he goes down, we are in the same situation with his backup, only this backup has no game experience. It's asking quite a bit of a coach and these players to then develop a 'special package' on offense, for Stanton, all because some of you here have a boy crush on him.

 

self delete

[irafreak]

We need backup experience...the more variety of quarterbacks we can play the more MULTIPLE our offense can be...

[Mavric]

Brian Christopherson ‏@HuskerExtraBC 3h

Separation between QBs on depth chart most obvious today. Armstrong and Fyfe took all the reps against top defenses. #Huskers

Dan Hoppen ‏@danhoppen 3h

I thought this was one of Tommy Armstrong's best practices of the fall. He's looked much better over the last week or so.

Hopefully things are clicking for Tommy now. Much better reports the last few days than the first week.