Are Armstrong's completions enough?

[TheSker]

 

 

For about 3.3 years, a guy that had ball security issues was horrible, but a guy that has similar ball security issues has "avoided turnovers,"

Turnovers were absolutely a key nemesis for us during the Martinez years. Now if you're saying Armstrong had "similar" issues last season, I'd agree. But this is 2014.

Yet Tommy still stares down receivers and hits defenders right in the hands.

 

I'm not making this up. It happens, too much in fact.

 

I know I'm not the only one who's seen it.

 

Staring down receivers is not on the stat sheet. Turnovers are. Is this clear?

[74Hunter]

 

 

 

For about 3.3 years, a guy that had ball security issues was horrible, but a guy that has similar ball security issues has "avoided turnovers,"

 

Turnovers were absolutely a key nemesis for us during the Martinez years. Now if you're saying Armstrong had "similar" issues last season, I'd agree. But this is 2014.

Yet Tommy still stares down receivers and hits defenders right in the hands.

I'm not making this up. It happens, too much in fact.

I know I'm not the only one who's seen it.

Staring down receivers is not on the stat sheet. Turnovers are. Is this clear?

Wow. Just wow.

[74Hunter]

 

 

 

I'm not trolling a bit. I'm just using the same criteria that we used the past few years to judge QB play.

 

Can you explain your criteria?

Easy, apparently a guy that completed 62-63% of his passes is a horrible qb, yet a guy that completes 52-53% is excellent in all areas.

For about 3.3 years, a guy that had ball security issues was horrible, but a guy that has similar ball security issues has "avoided turnovers,"

For 3.3 years, a guy that has defensive coordinators shaking in their boots sucked, but a guy that defensive coordinators ignore is totes choice.

I guess that sounding better in interviews really is a big deal.

We'll see by the end of the year if Tommy has similar ball security issues, my bet is the difference is night and day for both fumbles and interceptions. I'm talking about this year, last year is history and Tommy was raw as they come.

 

Taylor wasn't the same home run threat after his injury although he still could take it to the house when he was fairly healthy and defensive coordinators had to consider and game plan for the threat. I think they were more like licking their chops knowing he would give them a few, and fwiw, I liked Taylor M. Hated the give aways, but I believe Tommy is a much better field general and may prove to be one of the better ones to grace Memorial Stadium when all is said and done. Time will tell all things.

True. And i hope you're right.

[TheBigRed1]

Oh, btw, just thought that I should add after my last comment that I've been following my Huskers since i was old enough to know football after my family moved out to the SJ Valley in California from Nebraska. Remember watching the Huskers and OU battle it out for a few national championships on Thanksgiving day before the NFL took it over, back when that was about the only Husker game you could catch on TV. Said all that to say this, Tommy has the potential to be a very good to great QB and I've watched a few. Again time will tell all things.

[bisonwiches]

 

 

 

For about 3.3 years, a guy that had ball security issues was horrible, but a guy that has similar ball security issues has "avoided turnovers,"

Turnovers were absolutely a key nemesis for us during the Martinez years. Now if you're saying Armstrong had "similar" issues last season, I'd agree. But this is 2014.

Yet Tommy still stares down receivers and hits defenders right in the hands.

 

I'm not making this up. It happens, too much in fact.

 

I know I'm not the only one who's seen it.

 

Staring down receivers is not on the stat sheet. Turnovers are. Is this clear?

 

And atleast Tommy has mechanics. Last year was what 9 td's 8ints? This year he has already shown a vast improvement from last, he has 10 td's, throwing at a better completion percentage, currently at +21 in the Raw QBR and in each game has had a completion of 40+ yards. He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

[TheSker]

 

He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

He's lost one.

[RedDenver]

 

 

I'm not trolling a bit. I'm just using the same criteria that we used the past few years to judge QB play.

Can you explain your criteria?

Easy, apparently a guy that completed 62-63% of his passes is a horrible qb, yet a guy that completes 52-53% is excellent in all areas.

 

For about 3.3 years, a guy that had ball security issues was horrible, but a guy that has similar ball security issues has "avoided turnovers,"

 

For 3.3 years, a guy that had defensive coordinators shaking in their boots sucked, but a guy that defensive coordinators ignore is totes choice.

 

I guess that sounding better in interviews really is a big deal.

 

No, I'm serious. What's your criteria for being a good QB? Do you even have criteria?

[RedDenver]

 

 

All of this is nice, but next week, those 7, 8, or 20 yard runs aren't going to be there.

They have been against MSU the past 2 years. Why won't they be there this year? Keep in mind our offense has been putting up better numbers than the last 2 years, and MSU's defense isn't putting up the same numbers it was last year.

Were they there last year, because i don't remember him averaging 7,5 yards per tote against MSU last year.

 

You realize that "7, 8, or 20 yard runs" are not the same as averaging 7.5 ypc, right? If you're only going with ypc, then Cross had 16.7 ypc against MSU last year (3 carries for 50 yards and a TD). Abdullah had 123 yards with 5.6 ypc against MSU.

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

I'm not trolling a bit. I'm just using the same criteria that we used the past few years to judge QB play.

Can you explain your criteria?

Easy, apparently a guy that completed 62-63% of his passes is a horrible qb, yet a guy that completes 52-53% is excellent in all areas.

 

For about 3.3 years, a guy that had ball security issues was horrible, but a guy that has similar ball security issues has "avoided turnovers,"

 

For 3.3 years, a guy that had defensive coordinators shaking in their boots sucked, but a guy that defensive coordinators ignore is totes choice.

 

I guess that sounding better in interviews really is a big deal.

 

 

There's a lot wrong with this post, but I am bushed tonight.

 

Big Taylor Martinez fan, myself. Defended him often on this board. Look it up if you want.

 

But I'm really excited about Tommy Armstrong right now.

 

Don't see how those two positions conflict.

[bisonwiches]

 

 

He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

He's lost one.

 

I stand corrected, thank you. But it is a far cry from the Taylor days...... I liked the kid but there were tons of fumbles. This link made me shake my head multiple times...

 

 

http://dataomaha.com/documents/husker-turnovers-a-look-at-nebraskas-slippery-slope

[TheSker]

 

 

 

He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

He's lost one.

 

I stand corrected, thank you. But it is a far cry from the Taylor days...... I liked the kid but there were tons of fumbles. This link made me shake my head multiple times...

 

 

http://dataomaha.com/documents/husker-turnovers-a-look-at-nebraskas-slippery-slope

 

Oh, no question and I agree with you.

[Branno]

 

 

 

 

 

He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

He's lost one.

I stand corrected, thank you. But it is a far cry from the Taylor days...... I liked the kid but there were tons of fumbles. This link made me shake my head multiple times...

 

 

http://dataomaha.com/documents/husker-turnovers-a-look-at-nebraskas-slippery-slope

I think the biggest difference between these two sides, it's people see Taylor Martinez as his entire career and people refuse to take into consideration Tommy's year last year saying how he was new. They complain about one quarterbacks completion percentage while saying it doesn't matter for the other.

 

In the end, they are two very different quarterbacks. They have different styles different strengths different weaknesses exactly, and I don't think it's fair to really compare the two. Because for some Martinez is always gonna be the better quarterback, and for others Armstrong will be.

[TheSker]

 

 

 

 

He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

He's lost one.

I stand corrected, thank you. But it is a far cry from the Taylor days...... I liked the kid but there were tons of fumbles. This link made me shake my head multiple times...

 

 

http://dataomaha.com/documents/husker-turnovers-a-look-at-nebraskas-slippery-slope

I think the biggest difference between these two sides, it's people see Taylor Martinez as his entire career and people refuse to take into consideration Tommy's year last year saying how he was new. They complain about one quarterbacks completion percentage while saying it doesn't matter for the other.

 

In the end, they are two very different quarterbacks. They have different styles different strengths different weaknesses exactly, and I don't think it's fair to really compare the two. Because for some Martinez is always gonna be the better quarterback, and for others Armstrong will be.

 

It has been discussed for the past few years that cutting down on our turnovers could likely be the difference between a 9 win season and an 11 win season. The focus of this past offseason was not completion percentage......it was turnovers and field position (special teams).

[Branno]

 

 

 

 

 

 

He also has only taken two sacks this year and I don't believe he has lost a fumble.

He's lost one.

I stand corrected, thank you. But it is a far cry from the Taylor days...... I liked the kid but there were tons of fumbles. This link made me shake my head multiple times...

 

 

http://dataomaha.com/documents/husker-turnovers-a-look-at-nebraskas-slippery-slope

I think the biggest difference between these two sides, it's people see Taylor Martinez as his entire career and people refuse to take into consideration Tommy's year last year saying how he was new. They complain about one quarterbacks completion percentage while saying it doesn't matter for the other.

 

In the end, they are two very different quarterbacks. They have different styles different strengths different weaknesses exactly, and I don't think it's fair to really compare the two. Because for some Martinez is always gonna be the better quarterback, and for others Armstrong will be.

It has been discussed for the past few years that cutting down on our turnovers could likely be the difference between a 9 win season and an 11 win season. The focus of this past offseason was not completion percentage......it was turnovers and field position (special teams).

And nothing Armstrong has shown these past two years, has shown these actually reducing the number of turnovers. Unless you ignore last year and only take into account 5 games against weak competition.

 

But again, there is a divide here. And I don't think us going over the exact same thing over and over and over is going to really make any difference in the long run other than furthering that divide.

[TheSker]

 

And nothing Armstrong has shown these past two years, has shown these actually reducing the number of turnovers. Unless you ignore last year and only take into account 5 games against weak competition.

 

 

I am specifically referring to 2014.....which I believe is this season......Armstrong has 2 INTs and 1 fumble. We want to reduce turnovers.....the quarterback position has been turnover filled the past 4 seasons, including Armstrong last season. Martinez was never able to significantly reduce his turnovers. We wanted to cut that number down in 2014. So far, not quite halfway through the season, Armstrong is delivering. If that continues, we have a great shot heading toward 11 wins or more.