Spring Position Battles - Quarterback

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

If Riley is smart ,he'll knock off the PC crap and play the best guys. I don't think he has any room for another season of almost wins.

I have seen absolutely nothing that shows me that TA wasn't the best QB on the team last and now.

 

Not sure where you are coming up with your first sentence.

 

You must be a media guy and saw all the practices then, right? You believe we played the best QB available against Purdue? I'd like to hear about what you saw at those practices that brought you to your conclusion. I don't remember seeing any backups ever....and after listening to the local media rant and rave about Bush and Darlington I find the whole season to be more than a little perplexing....thus the comment about PC crap.

 

 

I don't see any of the PC crap you are talking about, nor your own behind-the-scenes insight that would suggest otherwise.

 

What is there to be perplexed about? That Bush and Darlington didn't emerge ahead of either Armstrong or Fyfe?

 

That optimistic pre-season hype is just that? And is every season?

 

That Fyfe was a capable back-up, but not preferable to a healthy Armstrong?

 

Are you suggesting that Mike Riley was determined to leave better game-winning quarterbacks on the bench during his first season as Husker HC?

 

Not sure what you mean about "PC" either, although as others have mentioned, you try not to f#*k with the minds of the guys you need to lead the team, or the teammates you need to follow them.

 

If Patrick O'Brien is as good as advertised, and Tommy Armstrong struggles, Riley won't have any trouble putting POB in the game. Happens all the time.

 

It probably won't happen this year, but it would hardly be shocking.

[Hunter94]

 

I believe that when a team finishes 6-7 for the year there is NO position, and particularly QB, that is 'established' and to say that Patrick OBrien is not going to be in the serious running to be the starting QB by fall is simply wrong. Or, in my view, it should be wrong. Tommy Armstrong did good things and bad things last year and the year before and the year before that. His annual numbers and performances have been steady and mediocre most often. He is surely not to be considered a clear starter. If he is by far and away our best QB simply says we have almost NO QB talent at all. Tommy is NOT an all conference or even honorable mention level player based on three straight years of average play. He is mistake prone and while capable of making great plays he can turn a solid drive into a disaster. POB should be a strong candidate for playing time or his recruitiment should be viewed as a disappointment.

 

 

So you think that we'll repeat breaking in a new offense and defense again this year?

 

Tommy is about to break every single QB record at Nebraska too btw.

 

you mean like lowest average completion percentage?

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

I believe that when a team finishes 6-7 for the year there is NO position, and particularly QB, that is 'established' and to say that Patrick OBrien is not going to be in the serious running to be the starting QB by fall is simply wrong. Or, in my view, it should be wrong. Tommy Armstrong did good things and bad things last year and the year before and the year before that. His annual numbers and performances have been steady and mediocre most often. He is surely not to be considered a clear starter. If he is by far and away our best QB simply says we have almost NO QB talent at all. Tommy is NOT an all conference or even honorable mention level player based on three straight years of average play. He is mistake prone and while capable of making great plays he can turn a solid drive into a disaster. POB should be a strong candidate for playing time or his recruitiment should be viewed as a disappointment.

 

So you think that we'll repeat breaking in a new offense and defense again this year?

 

Tommy is about to break every single QB record at Nebraska too btw.

you mean like lowest average completion percentage?

Thanks for proving you don't know what you're talking about.

[zoogs]

you mean like lowest average completion percentage?

Oooh, that's a #SickBurn on the Huskers' 2016 starting QB, but you are aware of the history of completion percentage at Nebraska, right?

[Mavric]

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

I believe that when a team finishes 6-7 for the year there is NO position, and particularly QB, that is 'established' and to say that Patrick OBrien is not going to be in the serious running to be the starting QB by fall is simply wrong. Or, in my view, it should be wrong. Tommy Armstrong did good things and bad things last year and the year before and the year before that. His annual numbers and performances have been steady and mediocre most often. He is surely not to be considered a clear starter. If he is by far and away our best QB simply says we have almost NO QB talent at all. Tommy is NOT an all conference or even honorable mention level player based on three straight years of average play. He is mistake prone and while capable of making great plays he can turn a solid drive into a disaster. POB should be a strong candidate for playing time or his recruitiment should be viewed as a disappointment.

 

 

So you think that we'll repeat breaking in a new offense and defense again this year?

 

Tommy is about to break every single QB record at Nebraska too btw.

 

you mean like lowest average completion percentage?

 

 

He would have to have a pretty sh**ty season to drop below Eric Crouch, Tommie Frazier, Steve Taylor and Turner Gill.

 

As it stands he's on par with our first "pure" passer, Dave Humm.

[teachercd]

I am sure the spring game will show us a lot...(Super eye roll)

[Enhance]

 

 

If Riley is smart ,he'll knock off the PC crap and play the best guys. I don't think he has any room for another season of almost wins.

I have seen absolutely nothing that shows me that TA wasn't the best QB on the team last and now.

 

Not sure where you are coming up with your first sentence.

 

You must be a media guy and saw all the practices then, right? You believe we played the best QB available against Purdue? I'd like to hear about what you saw at those practices that brought you to your conclusion. I don't remember seeing any backups ever....and after listening to the local media rant and rave about Bush and Darlington I find the whole season to be more than a little perplexing....thus the comment about PC crap.

My concern is this: how can we criticize the decision of who started against Purdue when the only evidence we have is game footage? There's a reason we didn't see a lot of back-ups last year, and buying into what the media says about individual player abilities sounds more like a personal problem than a team problem. I'm not saying to blindly accept every decision a coach makes, but those decisions are at least based on some semblance of fact. Fans calling for back-ups or the 'best guys' to play is based mostly on assumption and hope, not fact, because we don't get to see what the coaches see.

 

I also don't understand the dig insinuating the coaches care about everyone's feelings and don't play the best guys. Coaches may have egos, but they're going to play whoever they believe gives them the best chance to win. It may not always be right, but Riley showed last year he was willing to pull and bench guys. If he didn't pull a guy, that says to me the person behind him wasn't ready to go.

[QMany]

But for as bad as Fyfe played that game, his actual stats ended up pretty compatible to TA's......

The scariest part is that Armstrong's previous games against Purdue were even worse...

[Army_Allen]

 

But for as bad as Fyfe played that game, his actual stats ended up pretty compatible to TA's......

The scariest part is that Armstrong's previous games against Purdue were even worse...

 

TMagic played well against Purdue....

[84HuskerLaw]

The most important measurement (statistically speaking) in my view when measuring the success and capabilities of the QB is the win/loss record at the end of the year. If the team wins, the QB has almost surely done well. If the team loses, the QB has likely not done well. Of course no team lives or dies by its QB play alone. But, if the QB does his job well, the receivers, RBs, etc. have a chance to be successful. The team will be relatively mistake free and have a chance to win most games. As many so often state on this board, the QB first and foremost should be a 'game manager' and get the offense executing the plays properly, timely and confidently. The QB is the leader of the offense and should be a take charge, bold and assertive commander. He can lead by example but he also needs to be the 'conductor' and directing the performance by his 10 teammates on each play. He needs to know the plays, the roles of each of the players on the field and be a 'field general', with a thorough understanding of the game plan, the playbook, the times and places and situations where each play would or would not be appropriate, etc. He needs to be coach-like in many ways. Cool, calm and mentally under control and be able to see the big picture.

 

A QB who can do all of the above, and also be a tremendous athletic specimen with great break away running skills (speed, power, balance, agility, strength, toughness, heart, ability to throw and catch, etc.) is extremely rare and special. All teams should covet and recruit for these traits. But focus on first getting the mental and leadership skills. The physical gifts come second, in my view.

 

Hopefully, POB has plenty of the former and good dose of the physical tools too! I think Tommy Armstrong has the physical skills to be a tremendous QB but has not yet shown all the consistant abilities in the 'field general' areas. If he manages to grow into the true leader we want him to be, he will long be remembered for the great team he led to the Big Ten championship. If he performs comparably with his first three seasons, no matter how many yards he has in the 'total offense' records, he won't be remembered as one of the Husker greats.

[BigRedBuster]

The most important measurement (statistically speaking) in my view when measuring the success and capabilities of the QB is the win/loss record at the end of the year. If the team wins, the QB has almost surely done well. If the team loses, the QB has likely not done well. Of course no team lives or dies by its QB play alone.

You just contradicted yourself.

[Guy Chamberlin]

If the Nebraska Defense had not been languishing in the bottom half of the NCAA the past few years, we might look at our same offense quite differently.

[Landlord]

Would like to see POB get one series a game or one a half to prep him for 2017. PInKle has done this in the past Wirth pretty good long term success. Seems to me that Chase Daniel did this as a freshman even though they had a 3 yr starter returning

 

 

 

You're thinking of Blaine Gabbert during Daniel's senior year. Regardless, a lot of people said they wanted this in the past, then Bo and Watson finally did it with Cody Green in 2009 and people then decided it was the worst idea ever.

[Mavric]

 

The most important measurement (statistically speaking) in my view when measuring the success and capabilities of the QB is the win/loss record at the end of the year. If the team wins, the QB has almost surely done well. If the team loses, the QB has likely not done well. Of course no team lives or dies by its QB play alone.

You just contradicted yourself.

 

 

No he didn't. He said one thing is the most important thing but it's not the only thing. That's not a contradiction.