All time top NU QBs

[Joe_5700]

Too many variables go into winning football games to give the Qb all the credit , or blame. Hardware, other than individual awards, shouldnt really matter as far as rank goes. Offensive schemes and things like better o-lines and receivers can make or break a Qb too. I would rank them differently based on some of those things.

1. Best runners - Frazier,Crouch, Martinez, Jamal Lord ,Gill,and Frost

2. Best passers- Z. Taylor, Ferigamo, Keller (we haven't had many pure passers so the list is short)

3. Both - Frazier, Crouch, Martinez, Gill ,Ganz

I didn't see Tagge play or he might b in there too. It was a different time so maybe comparisons aren't so valid anyway.

Tommie was a terrible passer. His completion % hovered around 50%, and he threw a lot of picks.

Crouch, Gill and Ganz were all "both." We'll see if Marty gets there with his passing - he's improved, that's for sure.

. Wow really ? I don't remember frazier being that bad, probably should have looked it up. Compared to Frosty the shotputter, and Jamal throwing bullets into the ground he was great. Seems like Martinez can make all the throws if he has time and sets himself , just makes bad decisions under pressure. I look for him to work more this off season and have even a better year next year.

You are thinking about the NC games too much. I remember many, many ankle level (or in the turf) passes he made to receivers. Tommie was a 48-52% passer.

 

[Big Red 40]

Too many variables go into winning football games to give the Qb all the credit , or blame. Hardware, other than individual awards, shouldnt really matter as far as rank goes. Offensive schemes and things like better o-lines and receivers can make or break a Qb too. I would rank them differently based on some of those things.

1. Best runners - Frazier,Crouch, Martinez, Jamal Lord ,Gill,and Frost

2. Best passers- Z. Taylor, Ferigamo, Keller (we haven't had many pure passers so the list is short)

3. Both - Frazier, Crouch, Martinez, Gill ,Ganz

I didn't see Tagge play or he might b in there too. It was a different time so maybe comparisons aren't so valid anyway.

Tommie was a terrible passer. His completion % hovered around 50%, and he threw a lot of picks.

Crouch, Gill and Ganz were all "both." We'll see if Marty gets there with his passing - he's improved, that's for sure.

. Wow really ? I don't remember frazier being that bad, probably should have looked it up. Compared to Frosty the shotputter, and Jamal throwing bullets into the ground he was great. Seems like Martinez can make all the throws if he has time and sets himself , just makes bad decisions under pressure. I look for him to work more this off season and have even a better year next year.

Yeah, that's true. Crouch could throw well enough, and Lord could throw a nice long pass, but anything shorter than 20 yards and Lord was terrible. And I turned off the Missouri game in 1997 because we had to drive like 78 yards with just over a minute to go, and Frost The Shotputter wasn't going to get that done. Luckily, curiosity got the better of me and I turned it back on in time to see Wiggins' foot work its magic.

Marty has improved remarkably, and for a guy who's not a natural QB he did a very good impression of a QB - at times - this year. Hopefully he keeps at it, and even goes back to that QB guru, and improves even more.

BTW - quite off topic here, but think of the money this Calhoun guy is making via Taylor Martinez. If he can take a guy who's basically just a raw athlete and convert him into a passable QB (no pun intended) in just a few short sessions, what could he do with other "project" guys? This guy's summers are going to be booked for a decade if Martinez keeps this up.

I agree on Calhoun, and if he could throw in a class on ball security that would be great too. Gotta love that wiggins play 4 sure. Lol Frost could usually get it there if I remember right , just not pretty.

 

[Big Red 40]

Too many variables go into winning football games to give the Qb all the credit , or blame. Hardware, other than individual awards, shouldnt really matter as far as rank goes. Offensive schemes and things like better o-lines and receivers can make or break a Qb too. I would rank them differently based on some of those things.

1. Best runners - Frazier,Crouch, Martinez, Jamal Lord ,Gill,and Frost

2. Best passers- Z. Taylor, Ferigamo, Keller (we haven't had many pure passers so the list is short)

3. Both - Frazier, Crouch, Martinez, Gill ,Ganz

I didn't see Tagge play or he might b in there too. It was a different time so maybe comparisons aren't so valid anyway.

Tommie was a terrible passer. His completion % hovered around 50%, and he threw a lot of picks.

Crouch, Gill and Ganz were all "both." We'll see if Marty gets there with his passing - he's improved, that's for sure.

. Wow really ? I don't remember frazier being that bad, probably should have looked it up. Compared to Frosty the shotputter, and Jamal throwing bullets into the ground he was great. Seems like Martinez can make all the throws if he has time and sets himself , just makes bad decisions under pressure. I look for him to work more this off season and have even a better year next year.

You are thinking about the NC games too much. I remember many, many ankle level (or in the turf) passes he made to receivers. Tommie was a 48-52% passer.

probably true. Tommie was such a dynamic player on such a great team I'm sure my memory is clouded by that.

 

[Mavric]

It's pretty sad that we all talk up Pelini (and his 9 wins) and bash Callahan,

The difference between Callahan and Pelini has more to do with culture than wins and losses.

True. But did I dream this up or did Callahan win nine games exactly one time and had two losing seasons?

 

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

Fraziers ability to rise to the occasion in the most important moments overshadowed any deficiencies he had as a thrower.

 

[roadrat]

I don't know how Ferragamo get's on any list. He manged to get himself parked on the bench during a bowl game and we had to watch Terry Luck take on ASU.

 

[Nebula]

This is a list consisting of guys I saw on a regular basis, so you won't see Turner Gill in there, even though he clearly is one the best we've had. But I'm going from my own personal frame of reference.

1.) Frazier

2.) Crouch

3.) Frost

4.) Brook Berringer

5.) Taylor Martinez

6.) Zac Taylor

7, ) Joe Ganz

8.) Jamal Lord

Ranking in throwing cup at female student over parking space/suing gaming companies.

1.) Sam Keller

 

[gobiggergoredder]

I would throw Z.T. in the top 10 somewhere towards the bottom. Kid was a baller.

I had to get to post #38 for this. Also, where is Ganz?

Are they ranking financial planners or QBs? Would UNK start Tagge?

 

[gobiggergoredder]

Too many variables go into winning football games to give the Qb all the credit , or blame. Hardware, other than individual awards, shouldnt really matter as far as rank goes. Offensive schemes and things like better o-lines and receivers can make or break a Qb too. I would rank them differently based on some of those things.

1. Best runners - Frazier,Crouch, Martinez, Jamal Lord ,Gill,and Frost

2. Best passers- Z. Taylor, Ferigamo, Keller (we haven't had many pure passers so the list is short)

3. Both - Frazier, Crouch, Martinez, Gill ,Ganz

I didn't see Tagge play or he might b in there too. It was a different time so maybe comparisons aren't so valid anyway.

If you're going to say someone is the best combination or 'Both', wouldn't you think they would need to be at least average passers? Your top 2 are horrid passers.

 

[greenmonkey51]

Martinez may be able to crack the top 10, but to many other QB's have won multiple conference championships and bowl games for him to jump them without those stats. He's got to win a conference championship otherwise he's just a footnote.

 

[knapplc]

Martinez may be able to crack the top 10, but to many other QB's have won multiple conference championships and bowl games for him to jump them without those stats. He's got to win a conference championship otherwise he's just a footnote.

The only problem with that premise is that he cannot win a conference championship alone. He needs his defense to show up.

We've been a member of conferences with championship games for 15 years and we've played in the conference championship five times (33%, which isn't bad when you think about it). This year we scored, by far, the most points we've scored in any CCG, and yet we got beat by the largest margin of any CCG loss. To wit:

Year - CONF - VS - NU - OPP - RES - MARGIN

1999 - Big XII - Texas - 22 - 6 - W - 16

2006 - Big XII - Oklahoma - 7 - 21 - L - (14)

2009 - Big XII - Texas - 12 - 13 - L - (1)

2010 - Big XII - Oklahoma - 20 - 23 - L - (3)

2012 - Big Ten - Wisconsin - 31 - 70 - L - (39)

The two incongruities there are the number of points scored by both teams in 2012. We scored more than enough under Martinez to win this conference championship. Instead, we end up with the largest margin of defeat in any CCG. That has nothing to do with Martinez.

 

[zoogs]

The two incongruities there are the number of points scored by both teams in 2012. We scored more than enough under Martinez to win this conference championship. Instead, we end up with the largest margin of defeat in any CCG. That has nothing to do with Martinez.

I disagree with this idea that we were playing well enough on offense to win the game and it was just the defense that failed us. It was a full-on dismantling. The score was 42-10 at the half. Most of our points were accumulated after the game was well in hand for the Badgers (our 2nd score came with the scoreboard 49-10; the next one after that with the 'board 63-17). There was Taylor's big run and the long field goal drive in the first half, but the other five possessions ended extremely quickly, two of them in turnovers, one of them a pick-six.

 

[knapplc]

The two incongruities there are the number of points scored by both teams in 2012. We scored more than enough under Martinez to win this conference championship. Instead, we end up with the largest margin of defeat in any CCG. That has nothing to do with Martinez.

I disagree with this idea that we were playing well enough on offense to win the game and it was just the defense that failed us. It was a full-on dismantling. The score was 42-10 at the half. Most of our points were accumulated after the game was well in hand for the Badgers (our 2nd score came with the scoreboard 49-10; the next one after that with the 'board 63-17). There was Taylor's big run and the long field goal drive in the first half, but the other five possessions ended extremely quickly, two of them in turnovers, one of them a pick-six.

You seem to be implying that we couldn't have scored 31 points if they didn't let up... or something. Perhaps you've forgotten our game in October?

 

[zoogs]

This wasn't our game in October. Kudos to our offense for most of the year, really, including the game in October, but yeah. When you score 21 points after being down 49-10, yes, I believe it's fair to say that the offense didn't show up for the game either. Although credit the guys for not laying down to end the game.

 

[knapplc]

So, did our offense not show up against Wisconsin in October? Or Northwestern, Michigan State or Penn State? We trailed in all of those games, thanks to the defense, but the offense seemed to show up. I think we won those games, right?

Maybe, if the defense hadn't collapsed from the first series of the game, and kept collapsing all game long, those 31 points would have been enough. They were enough in October. They would have been enough in any other conference championship game. The only reason they weren't enough this game is, our defense did... nothing.