Who should be our starting QB?

[ColoradoHusk]

5 hours ago, Mavric said:

This is one isolated play so I'm not saying this is necessarily true in a larger sense.  But on our last third down, we ran a route concept that we've seen several times this year: a middle receiver (usually a TE) runs a deep curl in the middle of the field  (usually 10ish yards) while two other receivers run crossing routes from opposite sides of the field then settle down at 6ish yards.  Really nice concept against a zone because it gives three easy targets inside the hashes for the QB to pick from.  It sure looked like Luke locked in on the TE at/before the snap because he never looked anywhere else and forced it to the well-covered TE for an incompletion.  But the receiver crossing from left to right looked to be wide open and probably would have gotten the first down.

 

Now, again, that was one play and it can happen to anyone.  But that's the kind of play that we have to be able to make to move the chains, especially in the four minute drill.

I saw 88 come open across the middle, underneath all of the traffic, as well. That would have gotten NU a huge first down and took more time off the clock. Instead, people want to blame Frost for calling a “risky” pass play where Luke is throwing into the middle of the defense. The play wasn’t risky. Luke made it risky by locking in on one receiver and trying to force it into him in the middle of the defense. 

[3rd and long]

He damn near took the Backjudge’s head off on that throw. 

[suh_fan93]

11 hours ago, WyoHusker56 said:

Luke got the win and did plenty of good today. Most of the criticism I've seen is fair and so is the praise. 

 

The key is how does he look after a team has full game film and preps for him all week. 

 

You need experience for that.  

 

 

[Farms]

On 11/14/2020 at 10:27 PM, GSG said:

 L O L 

 

Sorry the truth hurts your feefees. Luke can't throw a pass over 5 yards. Not a defense of Adrian cuz I didn't even mention him, buddy

No feelers hurt here bud, just don't know why you seem to be going out of your way to rag on Luke.  I think you've made your point that you're not his biggest fan.  

[ZRod]

7 minutes ago, Farms said:

No feelers hurt here bud, just don't know why you seem to be going out of your way to rag on Luke.  I think you've made your point that you're not his biggest fan.  

He just needed a burrito and a bed. He'll be good now.

[Guy Chamberlin]

I don't want to kill a quarterback controversy thread because every team needs one, but this appears to be a rare case where fans and coaches are actually in agreement:  Luke McCaffrey has a slight edge on Adrian Martinez in executing an offense that still has a lot of work to do. 

 

So go Logan Smothers or go home, b!^@hes. 

[CAHusker]

7 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I don't want to kill a quarterback controversy thread because every team needs one, but this appears to be a rare case where fans and coaches are actually in agreement:  Luke McCaffrey has a slight edge on Adrian Martinez in executing an offense that still has a lot of work to do. 

 

So go Logan Smothers or go home, b!^@hes. 

 

Ok, that made me laugh out loud.  

[Mavric]

The overall results - especially as compared to expectations - make a lot of difference in how people evaluate individual performances.

 

People were mocking Pelini because even a drunk monkey could be getting #9wins every year.  People expected more so everything that fell below the expectations was viewed as a failure.  Even after we've found out that it's actually pretty hard to win 6 games a year - let alone 9 - people still go out of their way to avoid giving Pelini any credit.

 

Riley's crew had better personalities, flashed on social media and got some high-profile kids to campus.  So everyone was falling all over themselves about how much better our recruiting was, even though the actual results showed that wasn't the case.  And now that barely any of the guys that they recruited ended up being contributors, we're still trying to recover from that.

 

Our offense and QB play were at best the same and probably worse than it was in the first two games.  Against a worse team.  But we won.  So now people are more finding all the good thing to support the belief that we needed a QB change and ignoring evidence to the contrary because they like the overall result better.

 

C'est la vie.

[Farms]

1 minute ago, Mavric said:

The overall results - especially as compared to expectations - make a lot of difference in how people evaluate individual performances.

 

People were mocking Pelini because even a drunk monkey could be getting #9wins every year.  People expected more so everything that fell below the expectations was viewed as a failure.  Even after we've found out that it's actually pretty hard to win 6 games a year - let alone 9 - people still go out of their way to avoid giving Pelini any credit.

 

Riley's crew had better personalities, flashed on social media and got some high-profile kids to campus.  So everyone was falling all over themselves about how much better our recruiting was, even though the actual results showed that wasn't the case.  And now that barely any of the guys that they recruited ended up being contributors, we're still trying to recover from that.

 

Our offense and QB play were at best the same and probably worse than it was in the first two games.  Against a worse team.  But we won.  So now people are more finding all the good thing to support the belief that we needed a QB change and ignoring evidence to the contrary because they like the overall result better.

 

C'est la vie.

I think since we don't seem to have the deep threats to push down field that they feel like Luke gives us the best chance playing small ball since he's so dangerous running (and seems to hit the short passes at least).  If some of those young receivers can get on the field and we feel like we have some deep threats I still think AM is the better option.  And also if we can get our run game going without relying on the QB so much..

[Mavric]

Just now, Farms said:

I think since we don't seem to have the deep threats to push down field that they feel like Luke gives us the best chance playing small ball since he's so dangerous running (and seems to hit the short passes at least).  If some of those young receivers can get on the field and we feel like we have some deep threats I still think AM is the better option.  And also if we can get our run game going without relying on the QB so much..

 

And yet Martinez had better rushing stats in the first two games than Luke did Saturday.  Against a worse defense.

 

Like I said....

[RedSavage]

1 minute ago, Mavric said:

 

And yet Martinez had better rushing stats in the first two games than Luke did Saturday.  Against a worse defense.

 

Like I said....

Just curious, stats aside, do you think we win with Martinez?

[FrantzHardySwag]

I think AM was given ample time to "figure it out", Luke should be given the same courtesy. I don't see a significant improvement with Luke over AM, but that being said, I think the two looked comparable and Luke should be given the opportunity to grow. 

 

AM was given every opportunity to seize the job. He deserved the praise he got for his freshman season. Since then...5-7 record, 10 TD, 10 INT, 4 lost fumbles, a shrinking passer rating and a shrinking completion %. Will Luke grow and get better, I have no idea. But we have to acknowledge the reality that AM is 12 games removed from his freshman season, and he unfortunately showed no signs of growth/improvement.  

[Guy Chamberlin]

21 minutes ago, RedSavage said:

Just curious, stats aside, do you think we win with Martinez?

 

If I may answer for Mavric:

 

Maybe.

Maybe not. 

[Undone]

36 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Our offense and QB play were at best the same and probably worse than it was in the first two games.  Against a worse team.  But we won.  So now people are more finding all the good thing to support the belief that we needed a QB change and ignoring evidence to the contrary because they like the overall result better.

 

You absolutely nailed it.

 

And if we go 4-0 against the worst four teams of our schedule now, it will bolster the 'Luke Bias' to an even further degree.

 

inb4 "Why don't you want Luke to start?" I do want him to start if he's really the best guy that gives us the best chance to win. But I see things exactly as Mavric describes it.

[Farms]

 

14 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

And yet Martinez had better rushing stats in the first two games than Luke did Saturday.  Against a worse defense.

 

Like I said....

Luke had a pretty good day against Ohio St. himself... I guess to me stats don't always paint the whole picture.  In my opinion Luke made some plays Saturday where he had just enough speed to make the play and I'm not sure Martinez would have. Those plays kept drives alive and led to scores.  And for the record I agree that Luke gets a lot of credit for a positive outcome when the defense did him a lot of favors. I don't think we've seen the last of AM.  It wouldn't even shock me if he started next week.