Starling is a cheeky dude

[Hujan]

Hujan, your argument seems to boil down to the fact that Taylor will never be Andrew Luck in the passing game. Wouldn't you also concede that Andrew Luck will never be Taylor in the running game? Wouldn't you also concede that there's a place for both a great running QB and a great passing QB in college football, and that a player does not have to be both to win?

A QB doesn't need to have both, but he cannot succeed by being only a "great running QB." In order to succeed, an offense needs to carry the threat of the deep play (downfield passing) as well as the run. A QB that is a great runner but a deficient passer does the offense a disservice because now there is no real downfield threat. In a sense, it becomes redundant because there are already players who can run (we call them "Running Backs"), so having a QB who can run but not pass makes the offense too one-dimensional. Defenses respond by crowding the box, and you have what we saw as the season wore on.

Having a pure passer with limited running ability does not diminish the offense's ability to be two-dimensional because, again, you will have running backs to keep the defense from overplaying the pass, and the quarterback will keep the defenses from overplaying the run.

This, of course, is why you will see successful teams led by pure pocket passers far more frequently than successful teams led by pure scrambling QBs with little or no passing skills. Regardless of how fast and agile he is, at some point a QB who cannot pass effectively will be about as useful as an ejection seat on a helicopter.

In any event, I was not condemning Martinez for failing to be the passer that Andrew Luck is. I was simply using Andrew Luck as an example of how truly great QBs do not go from being "above average" to "great" in the span of several seasons. They go from "almost great" to "great" in that span. Thus, anyone expecting Martinez to suddenly blossom into an amazing all-around QB in a year or two should probably think twice.

Taylor will get marginally better in a few key areas. He will eventually learn to throw the ball away, take sacks without getting thrown around, being content with smaller but more regular gains, etc. All of that is maturity. But to truly succeed with Taylor we are going to have to recognize him for what he is: A great running QB who is a passing liability. As such, we are going to have to simplify the passing game for him as much as possible. This means shorter routes, throwing screens, throwing off the bootleg, and throwing off of I-form play actions to a hot route receiver. (The playaction pass to a hot route receiver---for example, a Kyler Reed streaking down the field---is excellent because the play is either there or its not. If it's there, we get a big downfield play; if not, Martinez can throw it away or check down.)

My opinion is that the less heroic throws we expect from Taylor in the passing game, the happier we will be with him as our QB. The play book should come to Taylor, not the other way around.

 

[Hujan]

I remember a QB by the name of Scott Frost that went to Stanford to be coached by a legend, was in that program for two or three years trying to be a QB. Transferred to Nebraska because Walsh told him he was not a QB. His first year he played pretty good, but was on poo list, the next he won a NC. Here is a kid that had the best training available from high school on, and never really made it till his senior year.

Martinez won 9 games this year, a couple of losses that were far from his fault. He is a Freshman All American. Just how much do you expect from him.

He gave it his all every single game, played when he shouldn't have because no one on the bench was as good as he was injured.

Give the kid some credit, let him grow and develop.

If we would have depended on Green my guess is the losses would have been greater.

Holiday Bowl our great defense got ran all over, Taylor had nothing to do with it.

I did not want him to start, I was and still am a Lee supporter, but Taylor did a very good job and will only get better if and a big if, the fan base gets off his a$$.

Actually, Taylor won 8 games: In a 10-win season, Cody Green steered us to two of them (Iowa State and Colorado).

 

[huskerswrkhavoc]

I remember a QB by the name of Scott Frost that went to Stanford to be coached by a legend, was in that program for two or three years trying to be a QB. Transferred to Nebraska because Walsh told him he was not a QB. His first year he played pretty good, but was on poo list, the next he won a NC. Here is a kid that had the best training available from high school on, and never really made it till his senior year.

Martinez won 9 games this year, a couple of losses that were far from his fault. He is a Freshman All American. Just how much do you expect from him.

He gave it his all every single game, played when he shouldn't have because no one on the bench was as good as he was injured.

Give the kid some credit, let him grow and develop.

If we would have depended on Green my guess is the losses would have been greater.

Holiday Bowl our great defense got ran all over, Taylor had nothing to do with it.

I did not want him to start, I was and still am a Lee supporter, but Taylor did a very good job and will only get better if and a big if, the fan base gets off his a$$.

Actually, Taylor won 8 games: In a 10-win season, Cody Green steered us to two of them (Iowa State and Colorado).

Even at that, the kid is a freshman.. Holy lord.. He very well should of won us the A&M game also... I was the farthest thing from wanting Taylor to start from the beginning.. but the kid developed quickly over the first half of the season.. If he avoids the injuries, we were playing UCONN in the Fiesta Bowl.... How much more do you really want from a freshman

 

[Hujan]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

 

[bshirt]

Hujan, your argument seems to boil down to the fact that Taylor will never be Andrew Luck in the passing game. Wouldn't you also concede that Andrew Luck will never be Taylor in the running game? Wouldn't you also concede that there's a place for both a great running QB and a great passing QB in college football, and that a player does not have to be both to win?

case in point, Michael Vick learned a qb is a passer first and a runner when he has to be...if TM can't make all the throws the defenses will crowd his running and short passes, he will never successfuly stretch the field, the defenses will never respect the long ball, hence the whole playbook is not available to us...but nothing new there.

IN THE NFL. That's a HUGE difference there, Hunter. HUGE.

It's amazing to me how the people on this board seem to have completely lost touch with players like Turner Gill, Steve Taylor, Tommie Frazier, Scott Frost, Eric Crouch and Jammal Lord. In college you don't HAVE TO BE a passing quarterback to win championships.

Just ask Cam Newton.

Newton's passer rating this season was 182, which I believe ranks among the top ten ALL-TIME in the FBS (Colt Brennan holds the all time record at 186). 66% completion, 30 TDs to 7 INTs, and over 10 yards per attempt. Of course he's no Peyton Manning, but as a college passer he is excellent.

As for the Huskers: Turner Gill was more a true dual-threat than those others. Frazier and Frost benefited from a brilliant OC who had just hit his stride as a play-caller, not to mention phenomenal I-backs and world-class offensive lines. Crouch and Lord had pretty much just as much talent but none of those other three (crucial) helpers.

I think Martinez can be serviceable enough in the passing game to win us Big 10 titles, but probably not unless Cotton and/or Wats are replaced.

Simply an excellent post, JTrain. Bloody great post. Your NU qb analysis is 100% on the money, imo. Frazier/Frost indeed had WAY, WAY more talent around them than Crouch or Lord. Also a monster difference at OC. A huge factor that 99% of NU fans will never acknowledge or even ever be aware of.

However, I would argue even more so relative to Tmart. At least Crouch & Lord had serviceable smashmouth Olines and an identity. They at least knew what they were trying to do and the will to accomplish it if possible.

Tmart had none of the above on his side but still tore things up in a big way until injury. As a freshman. I also agree that our offensive staff simply does not gell together "and" totally lacks the expertise needed for the offense Bo wants.

I think Tmart is a seriously dangerous qb and good coaching would have us rip the Big10 to shreds next year. It would be sickening to an extreme to waste that talent. It's Bo's call. I gotta believe he'll make it.

 

[Hercules]

Hujan, your argument seems to boil down to the fact that Taylor will never be Andrew Luck in the passing game. Wouldn't you also concede that Andrew Luck will never be Taylor in the running game? Wouldn't you also concede that there's a place for both a great running QB and a great passing QB in college football, and that a player does not have to be both to win?

A QB doesn't need to have both, but he cannot succeed by being only a "great running QB." In order to succeed, an offense needs to carry the threat of the deep play (downfield passing) as well as the run. A QB that is a great runner but a deficient passer does the offense a disservice because now there is no real downfield threat. In a sense, it becomes redundant because there are already players who can run (we call them "Running Backs"), so having a QB who can run but not pass makes the offense too one-dimensional. Defenses respond by crowding the box, and you have what we saw as the season wore on.

Having a pure passer with limited running ability does not diminish the offense's ability to be two-dimensional because, again, you will have running backs to keep the defense from overplaying the pass, and the quarterback will keep the defenses from overplaying the run.

This, of course, is why you will see successful teams led by pure pocket passers far more frequently than successful teams led by pure scrambling QBs with little or no passing skills. Regardless of how fast and agile he is, at some point a QB who cannot pass effectively will be about as useful as an ejection seat on a helicopter.

This simply isn't true.

The offense as a whole needs to be balanced, and that can be achieved in different ways. A "running QB" usually adds to the offense's ability to run the ball, and that in turn opens up the passing game. That's what we saw from Taylor before he got hurt - teams crowded the line of scrimmage to stop the run, and we went over the top. It was only after he got hurt that they didn't have to worry about defending the run anymore, which forced Taylor to be a dropback passer, which he isn't.

On the other hand, you see plenty of teams with "passing QBs" where that does limit the offense's ability to be two-dimensional. There are many teams that are unable to establish a strong running game, and while they might succeed for a while with a strong passing game, great defenses will eventually focus on shutting down their running game and force them into being one-dimensional passing teams.

There's a reason that every single defensive coordinator goes into every game with the same idea in mind: stop the run. That is the most important part of any offense. Championships are won by teams who run the football well, and who play great defense.

Again, just look at the history of college football, and you're going to see a plethora of national championship-winning QBs who used their running game to open up the pass. Cam Newton (against Darron Thomas), Tim Tebow, Vince Young, Tee Martin, Scott Frost (whose offense outscored Peyton Manning's offense by 25 head to head), Tommie Frazier, Charlie Ward, etc...

Taylor Martinez doesn't have to be a great passing QB. He needs to be a healthy QB, and we've already seen that when he's healthy, his ability to run the ball opens up the pass enough that even he can exploit defenses with his arm (as long as his receivers catch the ball when it hits them in the hands).

 

[Hercules]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

What we say on this message board in NO way actually affects anything with regard to who gets a chance and who doesn't. Bo holds open QB competitions, he's made that clear - the best man will win the job - at least that's what I believe. I don't think we erred in starting Martinez this year, I think that before he was injured he made it pretty clear why he won the job.

The fact that I actually believe this and trust the coaches also makes it pretty easy for me to say that if Brion Carnes is named the starter next year, I'll be completely behind it. I'll trust that he did what it took to earn the job, and be behind him 100%. The only difference for me between him being named a starter and Taylor being named a starter is that I'll have higher expectations with Martinez.

Carnes would just be another RS freshman who's going to make a bunch of the same mistakes that Taylor made. He's going to miss reads and lock on to receivers and make poor decisions with the ball and all of it. He's not going to be some magical redshirt freshman that is somehow one of the best QBs in Nebraska history right away.

Anyways, as easy as it would be for me to support Carnes, I'm willing to say right now that it's not going to happen, barring injuries. Taylor's the guy.

 

[zoogs]

The offense as a whole needs to be balanced, and that can be achieved in different ways. A "running QB" usually adds to the offense's ability to run the ball, and that in turn opens up the passing game. That's what we saw from Taylor before he got hurt - teams crowded the line of scrimmage to stop the run, and we went over the top. It was only after he got hurt that they didn't have to worry about defending the run anymore, which forced Taylor to be a dropback passer, which he isn't.

On the other hand, you see plenty of teams with "passing QBs" where that does limit the offense's ability to be two-dimensional. There are many teams that are unable to establish a strong running game, and while they might succeed for a while with a strong passing game, great defenses will eventually focus on shutting down their running game and force them into being one-dimensional passing teams.

That is how Taylor succeeded early in the year. It isn't that he is a great passer - many claimed he was and just pointed to stats - but it is that he can be an effective passer if teams have to load up and focus on stopping his running ability. The term I have latched on to and really like is "high production-to-talent ratio." Pat White is well over a 60% passer in his college career with a 56-23 TD-INT ratio. He is not close to being that good of a passer though, technically. His speed just enabled that kind of production out of him and it's the kind of thing we hope for from guys like Taylor.

I completely agree there, but disagree a bit on the second point. If a team can shut down the OL and stop the run, you are probably not going to make much a difference with a mobile QB. It all starts up front. If your OL is getting worked, sure your electric QB could give you say, 70ish yards on 15 carries, that's pretty darn good. But it's not much. We've seen plenty of games this year where you look at our running game and can say wow, we did a damn fine job on the ground. Why was the game a struggle? Because we had no passing game.

Teams with immobile passing QBs that are no good, limit their offense's ability to be two dimensional. I mean, any QB who is no good will limit a team period.

I think from a skills perspective, Taylor can certainly be pretty successful. There are points I have severe reservations about, however: his streakiness, for one thing, and his lack of pre-snap reads. This absolutely kills us. Stats and everything aside. A QB has to recognize blitzes and coverages on at least a passable level, and be able to adjust to them. They also need to be able to check to a different play if need be. Taylor hasn't just been inadequate in this regard, he has been a total liability, and that is what has killed us against the better defenses we faced. That is something that has nothing to do with injury, but I will acknowledge the injury played a huge part in the decline of the offense's performance this year.

 

[Hujan]

Hujan, your argument seems to boil down to the fact that Taylor will never be Andrew Luck in the passing game. Wouldn't you also concede that Andrew Luck will never be Taylor in the running game? Wouldn't you also concede that there's a place for both a great running QB and a great passing QB in college football, and that a player does not have to be both to win?

A QB doesn't need to have both, but he cannot succeed by being only a "great running QB." In order to succeed, an offense needs to carry the threat of the deep play (downfield passing) as well as the run. A QB that is a great runner but a deficient passer does the offense a disservice because now there is no real downfield threat. In a sense, it becomes redundant because there are already players who can run (we call them "Running Backs"), so having a QB who can run but not pass makes the offense too one-dimensional. Defenses respond by crowding the box, and you have what we saw as the season wore on.

Having a pure passer with limited running ability does not diminish the offense's ability to be two-dimensional because, again, you will have running backs to keep the defense from overplaying the pass, and the quarterback will keep the defenses from overplaying the run.

This, of course, is why you will see successful teams led by pure pocket passers far more frequently than successful teams led by pure scrambling QBs with little or no passing skills. Regardless of how fast and agile he is, at some point a QB who cannot pass effectively will be about as useful as an ejection seat on a helicopter.

This simply isn't true.

The offense as a whole needs to be balanced, and that can be achieved in different ways. A "running QB" usually adds to the offense's ability to run the ball, and that in turn opens up the passing game. That's what we saw from Taylor before he got hurt - teams crowded the line of scrimmage to stop the run, and we went over the top. It was only after he got hurt that they didn't have to worry about defending the run anymore, which forced Taylor to be a dropback passer, which he isn't.

On the other hand, you see plenty of teams with "passing QBs" where that does limit the offense's ability to be two-dimensional. There are many teams that are unable to establish a strong running game, and while they might succeed for a while with a strong passing game, great defenses will eventually focus on shutting down their running game and force them into being one-dimensional passing teams.

There's a reason that every single defensive coordinator goes into every game with the same idea in mind: stop the run. That is the most important part of any offense. Championships are won by teams who run the football well, and who play great defense.

Again, just look at the history of college football, and you're going to see a plethora of national championship-winning QBs who used their running game to open up the pass. Cam Newton (against Darron Thomas), Tim Tebow, Vince Young, Tee Martin, Scott Frost (whose offense outscored Peyton Manning's offense by 25 head to head), Tommie Frazier, Charlie Ward, etc...

Taylor Martinez doesn't have to be a great passing QB. He needs to be a healthy QB, and we've already seen that when he's healthy, his ability to run the ball opens up the pass enough that even he can exploit defenses with his arm (as long as his receivers catch the ball when it hits them in the hands).

You're comparing apples to oranges. Obviously a dual-threat QB is the ideal scenario since he would have the best of both. But Taylor is not a "dual-threat" QB. He is a running QB. All of the QBs you mentioned are as exceptional of passers as they are runners. Taylor had a single game in which he threw the ball very well.

How many successful teams can you think of that feature running QBs without any real ability to throw? I can't think of any. How many successful teams can you think of that feature pure pocket passers? I can think of dozens.

You act like you can't have a successful offense without a dual-threat QB and Stanford, USC, Boise State, TCU, and countless others would beg to differ.

You understand that when a team lines up in the pro set with a QB under center and a tailback behind, the defense has to anticipate both the run and the pass, yes?

 

[huskerswrkhavoc]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

Or Taylor could be everything that we think Taylor is. Or Carnes could be a complete flop. You don't know. And guess what, the coaches have proven before that the best player will play, regardless of age.. So there is nothing to worry about for that. As far as people saying to ease up on Taylor, they are right. The kid is still just that, a freaking kid, he's going to grow into everything, but it really is pretty petty for some of the grown men on here to talk down on him or any student athlete that is out there busting his/her a$$ for your entertainment.

 

[bshirt]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

What we say on this message board in NO way actually affects anything with regard to who gets a chance and who doesn't. Bo holds open QB competitions, he's made that clear - the best man will win the job - at least that's what I believe. I don't think we erred in starting Martinez this year, I think that before he was injured he made it pretty clear why he won the job.

The fact that I actually believe this and trust the coaches also makes it pretty easy for me to say that if Brion Carnes is named the starter next year, I'll be completely behind it. I'll trust that he did what it took to earn the job, and be behind him 100%. The only difference for me between him being named a starter and Taylor being named a starter is that I'll have higher expectations with Martinez.

Carnes would just be another RS freshman who's going to make a bunch of the same mistakes that Taylor made. He's going to miss reads and lock on to receivers and make poor decisions with the ball and all of it. He's not going to be some magical redshirt freshman that is somehow one of the best QBs in Nebraska history right away.

Anyways, as easy as it would be for me to support Carnes, I'm willing to say right now that it's not going to happen, barring injuries. Taylor's the guy.

Heh...I love Huskerboard. Posts like this are why I don't miss the LJS or OWH in any way at all.

I too would back Carnes 100% if he beats out Tmart next year. The odds of his doing that are very, very small however. Tmart's got that outrageous gap speed that's a HUGE, huge asset and the couches aren't blind to what that brings. That's why he beat out a senior returning starter.

That's also why, if healthy, he'll start next year and two years after that.

 

[Hujan]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

What we say on this message board in NO way actually affects anything with regard to who gets a chance and who doesn't. Bo holds open QB competitions, he's made that clear - the best man will win the job - at least that's what I believe. I don't think we erred in starting Martinez this year, I think that before he was injured he made it pretty clear why he won the job.

The fact that I actually believe this and trust the coaches also makes it pretty easy for me to say that if Brion Carnes is named the starter next year, I'll be completely behind it. I'll trust that he did what it took to earn the job, and be behind him 100%. The only difference for me between him being named a starter and Taylor being named a starter is that I'll have higher expectations with Martinez.

Carnes would just be another RS freshman who's going to make a bunch of the same mistakes that Taylor made. He's going to miss reads and lock on to receivers and make poor decisions with the ball and all of it. He's not going to be some magical redshirt freshman that is somehow one of the best QBs in Nebraska history right away.

Anyways, as easy as it would be for me to support Carnes, I'm willing to say right now that it's not going to happen, barring injuries. Taylor's the guy.

I guess where you and I differ is that you think Taylor's injury caused his productivity to tail off, while I think it's because defenses adjusted and took away most of what he could do. He was electric . . . for awhile.

But even if you think it's totally due to his injury, does it concern you at all that the kid seems to have a glass jaw? How many games did he start after Mizzou when he appeared to be running alright on the ankle, only to be tackled and come up limping? It happened at A&M, against Washington (v2), and may have even happened in the CCG. I don't know whether the kid is fragile or just feels compelled to use injuries as an excuse when he isn't playing well, but neither scenario is very reassuring.

 

[Hercules]

The offense as a whole needs to be balanced, and that can be achieved in different ways. A "running QB" usually adds to the offense's ability to run the ball, and that in turn opens up the passing game. That's what we saw from Taylor before he got hurt - teams crowded the line of scrimmage to stop the run, and we went over the top. It was only after he got hurt that they didn't have to worry about defending the run anymore, which forced Taylor to be a dropback passer, which he isn't.

On the other hand, you see plenty of teams with "passing QBs" where that does limit the offense's ability to be two-dimensional. There are many teams that are unable to establish a strong running game, and while they might succeed for a while with a strong passing game, great defenses will eventually focus on shutting down their running game and force them into being one-dimensional passing teams.

That is how Taylor succeeded early in the year. It isn't that he is a great passer - many claimed he was and just pointed to stats - but it is that he can be an effective passer if teams have to load up and focus on stopping his running ability. The term I have latched on to and really like is "high production-to-talent ratio." Pat White is well over a 60% passer in his college career with a 56-23 TD-INT ratio. He is not close to being that good of a passer though, technically. His speed just enabled that kind of production out of him and it's the kind of thing we hope for from guys like Taylor.

I completely agree there, but disagree a bit on the second point. If a team can shut down the OL and stop the run, you are probably not going to make much a difference with a mobile QB. It all starts up front. If your OL is getting worked, sure your electric QB could give you say, 70ish yards on 15 carries, that's pretty darn good. But it's not much. We've seen plenty of games this year where you look at our running game and can say wow, we did a damn fine job on the ground. Why was the game a struggle? Because we had no passing game.

Teams with immobile passing QBs that are no good, limit their offense's ability to be two dimensional. I mean, any QB who is no good will limit a team period.

I think from a skills perspective, Taylor can certainly be pretty successful. There are points I have severe reservations about, however: his streakiness, for one thing, and his lack of pre-snap reads. This absolutely kills us. Stats and everything aside. A QB has to recognize blitzes and coverages on at least a passable level, and be able to adjust to them. They also need to be able to check to a different play if need be. Taylor hasn't just been inadequate in this regard, he has been a total liability, and that is what has killed us against the better defenses we faced. That is something that has nothing to do with injury, but I will acknowledge the injury played a huge part in the decline of the offense's performance this year.

There are without question weaknesses in Taylor's game that don't have to do with the injury, that he needs to get better at. But again, that's really par for the course given his youth and inexperience. I never watched him play, but I'm guessing that Andrew Luck struggled with some of those same things his freshman year as well. Every QB does at one point or another, no matter what type of QB they are. It's part of the process - we just have to hope Taylor moves forward in that process.

As for the second point, if your OL is struggling and your RBs are struggling, the only other thing that could possibly help you in your running game is a QB who can run the ball. If he can't help you, then you're screwed. But the greatest passing QBs of all time won't have any success against great defenses without the help (or at least credible threat) of a running game.

Also, you have to be careful about how you analyze statistics depending on the system. 70ish yards on 15 carries could be a great stat for some QBs in certain systems, but for the type of offense we were running this year, it's pretty inefficient unless it helped open up the running game for the other backs. For example, after Martinez was hurt this year, that kind of statistic is basically saying, "Well, Taylor, we're going to focus on stopping your running backs, and then sit back in pass defense where we know you'll make mistakes. Go ahead and run the ball yourself on that gimpy ankle, because we know you're not going to beat us with that when you're at 80%."

 

[Hujan]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

Or Taylor could be everything that we think Taylor is. Or Carnes could be a complete flop. You don't know. And guess what, the coaches have proven before that the best player will play, regardless of age.. So there is nothing to worry about for that. As far as people saying to ease up on Taylor, they are right. The kid is still just that, a freaking kid, he's going to grow into everything, but it really is pretty petty for some of the grown men on here to talk down on him or any student athlete that is out there busting his/her a$$ for your entertainment.

Oh get off it. Honestly. No one is condemning him or attacking his character. We are critiquing an athlete's game. If that hurts his sensibilities, then perhaps he ought to find a new gig.

My God you guys defend Taylor from any criticism like he's your kid brother.

 

[Hercules]

The "blame everything on Taylor's ankle" issue is a straw man. Nobody is blaming EVERYTHING on his ankle. It's his ankle, crappy play-calling, a shoddy O Line, his Freshman-ness, and poor receivers.

Despite that, he guided us, as a Freshman, to nine wins, against the 28th-ranked schedule in the country. All any of us are saying is lighten up a little, Francis.

Like I've said many a time - if this is his basement, imagine what his ceiling is. Give the kid a chance.

Again, as mentioned above, he gave us 8 wins. (Admittedly, this is nit picking, but CG deserves his credit, too.)

Regarding your basement comment, the only problem that some of us have is what if Taylor continues to flounder and never gets much better, and stands in the way of other, more deserving QBs. For all we know, Brion Carnes could be everything you all think Taylor is. But we'll never know because we are being implored to give Taylor a chance.

The point is, we are about to have an influx of dual-threat QBs onto this roster. I say that we should open up the competition and let the best man prove himself on the field. I think it's silly to press on with a QB who is not the best man on the job simply because we are afraid of starting yet another RS freshman (or true freshman) at QB. The fact that we might have erred in starting a RS freshman over a senior in 2010 should not prevent us from putting the best man in at QB in 2011.

What we say on this message board in NO way actually affects anything with regard to who gets a chance and who doesn't. Bo holds open QB competitions, he's made that clear - the best man will win the job - at least that's what I believe. I don't think we erred in starting Martinez this year, I think that before he was injured he made it pretty clear why he won the job.

The fact that I actually believe this and trust the coaches also makes it pretty easy for me to say that if Brion Carnes is named the starter next year, I'll be completely behind it. I'll trust that he did what it took to earn the job, and be behind him 100%. The only difference for me between him being named a starter and Taylor being named a starter is that I'll have higher expectations with Martinez.

Carnes would just be another RS freshman who's going to make a bunch of the same mistakes that Taylor made. He's going to miss reads and lock on to receivers and make poor decisions with the ball and all of it. He's not going to be some magical redshirt freshman that is somehow one of the best QBs in Nebraska history right away.

Anyways, as easy as it would be for me to support Carnes, I'm willing to say right now that it's not going to happen, barring injuries. Taylor's the guy.

I guess where you and I differ is that you think Taylor's injury caused his productivity to tail off, while I think it's because defenses adjusted and took away most of what he could do. He was electric . . . for awhile.

But even if you think it's totally due to his injury, does it concern you at all that the kid seems to have a glass jaw? How many games did he start after Mizzou when he appeared to be running alright on the ankle, only to be tackled and come up limping? It happened at A&M, against Washington (v2), and may have even happened in the CCG. I don't know whether the kid is fragile or just feels compelled to use injuries as an excuse when he isn't playing well, but neither scenario is very reassuring.

You're really so cynical as to think that he pretended to limp around because he wasn't playing well? The idea that he was never really fully recovered only to take more and more hits to his already injured ankle, which would cause anyone pain, doesn't cross your mind?

After Mizzou, he was never back to 100% He was never fully recovered.

Defenses did try to take away Taylor. Against Texas, that resulted in WRs running wide open, and dropping the ball. Against Oklahoma State, it resulted in wide receivers running wide open and catching the ball. Against Missouri, who decided they had to take away Taylor running the ball AND passing the ball in the wake of Oklahoma State, it resulted in Roy Helu rushing for 307 yards.

It's like good ol' Watson always said - take what the defense gives you. We had too many playmakers for them to take everything away, so they made their choice, and we then exploited them for it. After Taylor got injured, they didn't have to make that choice anymore. They didn't have to worry about Taylor running the ball, because he was about as threatening as Zac Lee. So they took away the running backs, waited for third and long, and then blitzed an extremely inexperienced dropback passer, or just dropped into a coverage he didn't know how to read yet.

Taylor isn't a good enough all-around QB to deal with that yet, but that is to be expected (or should have been). So it's not all on his injury, but his game was basically taken away from him when he couldn't run the ball anymore. And so was our entire offensive scheme, apparently, although I'll be the first to say we should have had a more coherent Plan B.