Another Appreciation of Tommy's Progress

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

I can't believe I'm in a conversation with someone trying to compare Tommy Armstrong and Taylor Martinez abilities with Turner Gill and Eric Crouch by using their respective teams defenses as an excuse for how they themselves actually played quarterback...

 

 

Not how they actually played, chief, but how many games they won.

 

And whether a Frazier, Gill or Crouch who went 9-4 with a lesser team would command the same level of reverence.

 

Seriously, do you not see a drop off in team wide talent in the last decade, to the point where it might affect the success of the quarterback?

 

And more mind-warping, can you really look at the last 5 seasons of Nebraska football and blame the offense for the defensive freefall?

 

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

I don't know anyone who doesn't see problems with Nebraska's offense. But you are the first person to suggest the defense hasn't been the bigger liability.

 

Last year I believe we had the #19 scoring offense and the #57 scoring defense. You will tear both hamstrings trying to stretch that into Tommy Armstrong's fault.

[Bowfin]

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

Uhmm...Armstrong didn't keep him off the field?...

[suh_fan93]

 

 

 

I can't believe I'm in a conversation with someone trying to compare Tommy Armstrong and Taylor Martinez abilities with Turner Gill and Eric Crouch by using their respective teams defenses as an excuse for how they themselves actually played quarterback...

 

 

Not how they actually played, chief, but how many games they won.

 

And whether a Frazier, Gill or Crouch who went 9-4 with a lesser team would command the same level of reverence.

 

Seriously, do you not see a drop off in team wide talent in the last decade, to the point where it might affect the success of the quarterback?

 

And more mind-warping, can you really look at the last 5 seasons of Nebraska football and blame the offense for the defensive freefall?

 

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

I don't know anyone who doesn't see problems with Nebraska's offense. But you are the first person to suggest the defense hasn't been the bigger liability.

 

Last year I believe we had the #19 scoring offense and the #57 scoring defense. You will tear both hamstrings trying to stretch that into Tommy Armstrong's fault.

 

 

So you're switching what you're trying to say now yet again? I can't keep up with it. First you proclaimed that Tommy Armstrong was on his way to be one of the most prolific Huskers in the history of the program. Then you tried saying you implied that he wasn't going to be considered one of the greats even though the statement I mentioned was literally all you said. Then you resorted to bringing defense into the picture by trying to compare Turner Gill's, Scott Frost and Eric Crouch's defense vs Taylor's and Armstrong's to justify your ever changing argument. Then you went switched whatever argument you're going for yet again by referencing W-L records when no one made mention of anybody's win/loss record except for yourself.

 

I'm gonna let you have the floor there kimosabe. You're all over the place after simply making one statement but then continually re directing whatever argument you were probably wrong about to begin with when you tried defending said statement.

 

Cocaine is a helluva drug kids.

[Sargon]

Tommy steps forward at times. Still steps backward too often.

[Sargon]

W/r/t KK, here's the % of total yards gained rushing per B1G team in descending order:

 

Ohio State 53.16% Northwestern 53.06% Iowa 51.29% Michigan 49.36% Maryland 47.47% Minnesota 44.65% Penn State 43.26% Rutgers 41.19% Nebraska 40.97% Indiana 38.11% Michigan State 37.46% Wisconsin 37.45% Purdue 36.24% Illinois 33.36%

 

 

 

Who knew MSU's and Wisky's coaches were dumber than ours?

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

I can't believe I'm in a conversation with someone trying to compare Tommy Armstrong and Taylor Martinez abilities with Turner Gill and Eric Crouch by using their respective teams defenses as an excuse for how they themselves actually played quarterback...

 

 

Not how they actually played, chief, but how many games they won.

 

And whether a Frazier, Gill or Crouch who went 9-4 with a lesser team would command the same level of reverence.

 

Seriously, do you not see a drop off in team wide talent in the last decade, to the point where it might affect the success of the quarterback?

 

And more mind-warping, can you really look at the last 5 seasons of Nebraska football and blame the offense for the defensive freefall?

 

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

I don't know anyone who doesn't see problems with Nebraska's offense. But you are the first person to suggest the defense hasn't been the bigger liability.

 

Last year I believe we had the #19 scoring offense and the #57 scoring defense. You will tear both hamstrings trying to stretch that into Tommy Armstrong's fault.

 

 

So you're switching what you're trying to say now yet again? I can't keep up with it. First you proclaimed that Tommy Armstrong was on his way to be one of the most prolific Huskers in the history of the program. Then you tried saying you implied that he wasn't going to be considered one of the greats even though the statement I mentioned was literally all you said. Then you resorted to bringing defense into the picture and trying to compare Turner Gill's, Scott Frost and Eric Crouch's defense vs Taylor's and Armstrong's to justify your ever changing argument. Then you went switched whatever argument you're going for yet again by referencing W-L records when no one made mention of anybody's win/loss record except for yourself.

 

I'm gonna let you have the floor there kimosabe. You're all over the place after simply making one statement but then continually re directing whatever argument you were probably wrong about to begin with when you tried defending said statement.

 

Cocaine is a helluva drug kids.

 

 

I'll go slow. It's pretty simple.

 

Tommy Armstrong is on pace to become Nebraska's all-time total offense leader.

 

My position was basically "how do you feel about that?"

 

So technically there were no wrong answers. Although you've certainly come the closest.

 

My personal feelings are conflicted. Much as with Taylor Martinez, Tommy Armstrong is long on statistics and short on big wins, but also responsible for some terrifically exciting plays and games.

 

You suggested some Husker fans would always be wowed by big stats, but they don't tell the story. My only disagreement is that I know virtually zero Husker fans who would take Taylor Martinez over the quarterbacks you listed.

 

There's nothing wrong with being conflicted.

 

So I wondered aloud how Taylor and Tommy might have done with the assets of a great Husker team.

 

And conversely, how Frazier, Gill or Crouch might have done with a substandard offensive line and the #57 defense in college football.

 

That's apparently where your panties got in a bunch, but I'm unclear what specifically you're disagreeing with. I made it clear I'd still take Frazier and Gill over Martinez and Armstrong.

 

I brought up W/L records because they do seem to be a dividing line between legendary QBs and statistically gifted QBs, none of which contradicts anything we've been talking about.

 

It was an interesting discussion there for awhile. My agenda was to waste some perfectly good time on a work day.

 

But if we can now look at last year's Wisconsin game and blame Tommy Armstrong for Melvin Gordon then we've slipped into Bizarro World, and all bets are off.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

 

 

 

I can't believe I'm in a conversation with someone trying to compare Tommy Armstrong and Taylor Martinez abilities with Turner Gill and Eric Crouch by using their respective teams defenses as an excuse for how they themselves actually played quarterback...

 

 

Not how they actually played, chief, but how many games they won.

 

And whether a Frazier, Gill or Crouch who went 9-4 with a lesser team would command the same level of reverence.

 

Seriously, do you not see a drop off in team wide talent in the last decade, to the point where it might affect the success of the quarterback?

 

And more mind-warping, can you really look at the last 5 seasons of Nebraska football and blame the offense for the defensive freefall?

 

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

I don't know anyone who doesn't see problems with Nebraska's offense. But you are the first person to suggest the defense hasn't been the bigger liability.

 

Last year I believe we had the #19 scoring offense and the #57 scoring defense. You will tear both hamstrings trying to stretch that into Tommy Armstrong's fault.

 

 

So you're switching what you're trying to say now yet again? I can't keep up with it. First you proclaimed that Tommy Armstrong was on his way to be one of the most prolific Huskers in the history of the program. Then you tried saying you implied that he wasn't going to be considered one of the greats even though the statement I mentioned was literally all you said. Then you resorted to bringing defense into the picture and trying to compare Turner Gill's, Scott Frost and Eric Crouch's defense vs Taylor's and Armstrong's to justify your ever changing argument. Then you went switched whatever argument you're going for yet again by referencing W-L records when no one made mention of anybody's win/loss record except for yourself.

 

I'm gonna let you have the floor there kimosabe. You're all over the place after simply making one statement but then continually re directing whatever argument you were probably wrong about to begin with when you tried defending said statement.

 

Cocaine is a helluva drug kids.

 

 

I'll go slow. It's pretty simple.

 

Tommy Armstrong is on pace to become Nebraska's all-time total offense leader.

 

My position was basically "how do you feel about that?"

 

So technically there were no wrong answers. Although you've certainly come the closest.

 

My personal feelings are conflicted. Much as with Taylor Martinez, Tommy Armstrong is long on statistics and short on big wins, but also responsible for some terrifically exciting plays and games.

 

You suggested some Husker fans would always be wowed by big stats, but they don't tell the story. My only disagreement is that I know virtually zero Husker fans who would take Taylor Martinez over the quarterbacks you listed.

 

There's nothing wrong with being conflicted.

 

So I wondered aloud how Taylor and Tommy might have done with the assets of a great Husker team.

 

And conversely, how Frazier, Gill or Crouch might have done with a substandard offensive line and the #57 defense in college football.

 

That's apparently where your panties got in a bunch, but I'm unclear what specifically you're disagreeing with. I made it clear I'd still take Frazier and Gill over Martinez and Armstrong.

 

I brought up W/L records because they do seem to be a dividing line between legendary QBs and statistically gifted QBs, none of which contradicts anything we've been talking about.

 

It was an interesting discussion there for awhile. My agenda was to waste some perfectly good time on a work day.

 

But if we can now look at last year's Wisconsin game and blame Tommy Armstrong for Melvin Gordon then we've slipped into Bizarro World, and all bets are off.

 

 

 

As for as your posts go and your 'agenda' which changes like the wind blows I must have missed that part...

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't believe I'm in a conversation with someone trying to compare Tommy Armstrong and Taylor Martinez abilities with Turner Gill and Eric Crouch by using their respective teams defenses as an excuse for how they themselves actually played quarterback...

 

 

Not how they actually played, chief, but how many games they won.

 

And whether a Frazier, Gill or Crouch who went 9-4 with a lesser team would command the same level of reverence.

 

Seriously, do you not see a drop off in team wide talent in the last decade, to the point where it might affect the success of the quarterback?

 

And more mind-warping, can you really look at the last 5 seasons of Nebraska football and blame the offense for the defensive freefall?

 

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

I don't know anyone who doesn't see problems with Nebraska's offense. But you are the first person to suggest the defense hasn't been the bigger liability.

 

Last year I believe we had the #19 scoring offense and the #57 scoring defense. You will tear both hamstrings trying to stretch that into Tommy Armstrong's fault.

 

 

So you're switching what you're trying to say now yet again? I can't keep up with it. First you proclaimed that Tommy Armstrong was on his way to be one of the most prolific Huskers in the history of the program. Then you tried saying you implied that he wasn't going to be considered one of the greats even though the statement I mentioned was literally all you said. Then you resorted to bringing defense into the picture and trying to compare Turner Gill's, Scott Frost and Eric Crouch's defense vs Taylor's and Armstrong's to justify your ever changing argument. Then you went switched whatever argument you're going for yet again by referencing W-L records when no one made mention of anybody's win/loss record except for yourself.

 

I'm gonna let you have the floor there kimosabe. You're all over the place after simply making one statement but then continually re directing whatever argument you were probably wrong about to begin with when you tried defending said statement.

 

Cocaine is a helluva drug kids.

 

 

I'll go slow. It's pretty simple.

 

Tommy Armstrong is on pace to become Nebraska's all-time total offense leader.

 

My position was basically "how do you feel about that?"

 

So technically there were no wrong answers. Although you've certainly come the closest.

 

My personal feelings are conflicted. Much as with Taylor Martinez, Tommy Armstrong is long on statistics and short on big wins, but also responsible for some terrifically exciting plays and games.

 

You suggested some Husker fans would always be wowed by big stats, but they don't tell the story. My only disagreement is that I know virtually zero Husker fans who would take Taylor Martinez over the quarterbacks you listed.

 

There's nothing wrong with being conflicted.

 

So I wondered aloud how Taylor and Tommy might have done with the assets of a great Husker team.

 

And conversely, how Frazier, Gill or Crouch might have done with a substandard offensive line and the #57 defense in college football.

 

That's apparently where your panties got in a bunch, but I'm unclear what specifically you're disagreeing with. I made it clear I'd still take Frazier and Gill over Martinez and Armstrong.

 

I brought up W/L records because they do seem to be a dividing line between legendary QBs and statistically gifted QBs, none of which contradicts anything we've been talking about.

 

It was an interesting discussion there for awhile. My agenda was to waste some perfectly good time on a work day.

 

But if we can now look at last year's Wisconsin game and blame Tommy Armstrong for Melvin Gordon then we've slipped into Bizarro World, and all bets are off.

 

 

 

As for as your posts go and your 'agenda' which changes like the wind blows I must have missed that part...

 

 

The part you missed was pretty much everything discussed.

[suh_fan93]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't believe I'm in a conversation with someone trying to compare Tommy Armstrong and Taylor Martinez abilities with Turner Gill and Eric Crouch by using their respective teams defenses as an excuse for how they themselves actually played quarterback...

 

 

Not how they actually played, chief, but how many games they won.

 

And whether a Frazier, Gill or Crouch who went 9-4 with a lesser team would command the same level of reverence.

 

Seriously, do you not see a drop off in team wide talent in the last decade, to the point where it might affect the success of the quarterback?

 

And more mind-warping, can you really look at the last 5 seasons of Nebraska football and blame the offense for the defensive freefall?

 

If Armstrong's 2 pick six's in three years has you in a tizzy, how do you explain away Melvin Gordon's 4 TDS in a single game, most of them untouched?

 

I don't know anyone who doesn't see problems with Nebraska's offense. But you are the first person to suggest the defense hasn't been the bigger liability.

 

Last year I believe we had the #19 scoring offense and the #57 scoring defense. You will tear both hamstrings trying to stretch that into Tommy Armstrong's fault.

 

 

So you're switching what you're trying to say now yet again? I can't keep up with it. First you proclaimed that Tommy Armstrong was on his way to be one of the most prolific Huskers in the history of the program. Then you tried saying you implied that he wasn't going to be considered one of the greats even though the statement I mentioned was literally all you said. Then you resorted to bringing defense into the picture and trying to compare Turner Gill's, Scott Frost and Eric Crouch's defense vs Taylor's and Armstrong's to justify your ever changing argument. Then you went switched whatever argument you're going for yet again by referencing W-L records when no one made mention of anybody's win/loss record except for yourself.

 

I'm gonna let you have the floor there kimosabe. You're all over the place after simply making one statement but then continually re directing whatever argument you were probably wrong about to begin with when you tried defending said statement.

 

Cocaine is a helluva drug kids.

 

 

I'll go slow. It's pretty simple.

 

Tommy Armstrong is on pace to become Nebraska's all-time total offense leader.

 

My position was basically "how do you feel about that?"

 

So technically there were no wrong answers. Although you've certainly come the closest.

 

My personal feelings are conflicted. Much as with Taylor Martinez, Tommy Armstrong is long on statistics and short on big wins, but also responsible for some terrifically exciting plays and games.

 

You suggested some Husker fans would always be wowed by big stats, but they don't tell the story. My only disagreement is that I know virtually zero Husker fans who would take Taylor Martinez over the quarterbacks you listed.

 

There's nothing wrong with being conflicted.

 

So I wondered aloud how Taylor and Tommy might have done with the assets of a great Husker team.

 

And conversely, how Frazier, Gill or Crouch might have done with a substandard offensive line and the #57 defense in college football.

 

That's apparently where your panties got in a bunch, but I'm unclear what specifically you're disagreeing with. I made it clear I'd still take Frazier and Gill over Martinez and Armstrong.

 

I brought up W/L records because they do seem to be a dividing line between legendary QBs and statistically gifted QBs, none of which contradicts anything we've been talking about.

 

It was an interesting discussion there for awhile. My agenda was to waste some perfectly good time on a work day.

 

But if we can now look at last year's Wisconsin game and blame Tommy Armstrong for Melvin Gordon then we've slipped into Bizarro World, and all bets are off.

 

 

 

As for as your posts go and your 'agenda' which changes like the wind blows I must have missed that part...

 

 

The part you missed was pretty much everything discussed.

 

 

Ooooh boy....

[Count 'Bility]

 

 

Tommy's completion % by year:

 

2013 - 51.9%

2014 - 53.3%

2015 - 53.5%

 

Cannot rely on that percentage for the offense we are trying to run (103rd in FBS)

 

Nope.

 

And it's not like we need Tommy Armstrong to be Aaron Rodgers, either.

 

This year, a mere 58% passer could be winning these same games.

 

Connor Cook has actually seen his numbers drop from 58.7% his Sophomore year, to 57.5% this year, and he's considered the most NFL ready QB in college football.

 

 

Agreed. The thing Cook does well is he doesn't turn the ball over. 17 TDs 2 INTs this season. Doesn't hurt to have somewhat of a run game and defense as well.

 

Boom. It's not the throws you make. it's the throws you dont make. Easy argument to be made that Tommy is responsible for two losses with throws that were out of the moment and trying to do too much.

 

Yes I know. Those games werent dependent on those one plays. Thought I'd better add this disclaimer

[QMany]

I thought Tommy played very well against MSU, and I was concerned going in.

 

19/33 (57.6%)

320 yards

2 TD passing

2 TD rushing

2 INT (one that was essentially a punt on third and long, one that was more costly)

 

[ColoradoHusk]

Tommy Armstrong is not a problem on this team. Yes, he's limited, but he makes a lot of plays out there. I wish the coaches would use him more in the run game, but that's not Langsdorf's/Riley's strength in coaching.

[Hunter94]

you don't want your starting QB toting the rock too much......for all the good plays Tommie makes, Carriker is right......we all see it, he still throws the ball off his back foot instead of stepping into his throws......

he would be a 60% passer if he could just stop with the bad habit......that and throwing into coverage......

[ColoradoHusk]

you don't want your starting QB toting the rock too much......for all the good plays Tommie makes, Carriker is right......we all see it, he still throws the ball off his back foot instead of stepping into his throws......

he would be a 60% passer if he could just stop with the bad habit......that and throwing into coverage......

I am so sick of this argument. Tommy can just as easily take a hit in the pocket than he can doing some running in the open field. I am not calling for 15-20 carries by Tommy, but 6-8 designed QB runs along with another 2-3 on QB scrambles (on designed pass plays) would be nice to see. Defense is harder to play when it's forced to play 11 on 11.

[Mavric]