Tommy Armstrong

[Junior]

Tommy obviously has several things to work on and get better, but he's already light years ahead of where Taylor was as a freshman skillset wise. There are so many positives for him to build on.

Yeah...this is not even remotely close to accurate.

What exactly did Taylor do as a freshman other than run dead sprints on the read option (admittedly very well)?

Tommy's mechanics are substanially better, he obviously needs work on his accuracy, but that's easier to fix than poor mechanics. Right now his pocket awarness is as good as Taylor's in his final year. His footwork is better, his armstrength is at least as good and probably better.

I'm not trying to demean Martinez at all, but lets face reality, he was an athlete playing QB. Tommy has actuall QB attributes and if you can't see the difference between them at this stage of their career then I don't know what you're looking at.

As a freshman, Martinez completed 59.2% of his passes. Armstrong completed 51.9%. Martinez threw 10 touchdowns and 7 interceptions, Armstrong 9 and 8. Martinez averaged 6 yards per carry, Armstrong 3 ypc. QB rating: Martinez 138.8. Armstrong 124.3. All-in-all, they look fairly similar, with the numbers leaning in Martinez's favor.

 

[Junior]

That pass to Turner was perfect, yes. But lets not forget the reason we were at the 1 cm line on that 99 yard pass. A bonehead fumble that he tried to pick up and run with. And that INT he threw was pretty bad. Perhaps solid coaching can improve his accuracy. Personally, I'd like to see a full time QB coach on the staff, so that he doesn't have to go hire his own QB coach in his spare time, but that's just me.

That fumble which led to the 99-yard TD wasn't Tommy's fault. The snap was a bullet at his knees and he's lucky to have gotten a hand on it at all. That could easily have gone past Tommy or between his knees and been a safety. It wasn't pretty by any means but it was not his fault at all.

It was low, but it wasn't terribly impossible to catch. The most boneheaded part was trying to pick it up and run with it in the rain. And it probably shouldn't have been a shock... that has been a fairly consistent problem with our shotgun offense over the last few years. Maybe it is with shotgun offenses in general, I'm not sure.

 

[3rd and long]

What exactly did Taylor do as a freshman other than run dead sprints on the read option (admittedly very well)?

Tommy's mechanics are substanially better, he obviously needs work on his accuracy, but that's easier to fix than poor mechanics. Right now his pocket awarness is as good as Taylor's in his final year. His footwork is better, his armstrength is at least as good and probably better.

I'm not trying to demean Martinez at all, but lets face reality, he was an athlete playing QB. Tommy has actuall QB attributes and if you can't see the difference between them at this stage of their career then I don't know what you're looking at.

Can you explain to me how you're defining "skillset wise" before I respond please?

Sorry, maybe in my original post I should have said QB skills. I can see where that might have been confusing, espcially considering Taylor's speed was definitely a skill. I'm talking about traditional QB skills, throwing mechanics, footwork, etc. Physical skills that are taught at QB camps. Tangilble attributes that can be built upon to make a QB better. And intangibles like leadership and pocket presence appear to already be on par if not better, but those are so subjective to each person.

 

[Landlord]

What exactly did Taylor do as a freshman other than run dead sprints on the read option (admittedly very well)?

Tommy's mechanics are substanially better, he obviously needs work on his accuracy, but that's easier to fix than poor mechanics. Right now his pocket awarness is as good as Taylor's in his final year. His footwork is better, his armstrength is at least as good and probably better.

I'm not trying to demean Martinez at all, but lets face reality, he was an athlete playing QB. Tommy has actuall QB attributes and if you can't see the difference between them at this stage of their career then I don't know what you're looking at.

Can you explain to me how you're defining "skillset wise" before I respond please?

Sorry, maybe in my original post I should have said QB skills. I can see where that might have been confusing, espcially considering Taylor's speed was definitely a skill. I'm talking about traditional QB skills, throwing mechanics, footwork, etc. Physical skills that are taught at QB camps. Tangilble attributes that can be built upon to make a QB better. And intangibles like leadership and pocket presence appear to already be on par if not better, but those are so subjective to each person.

In that case, I won't entirely disagree with you, but will add that Taylor significantly outperformed Tommy in their respective freshman seasons, despite a 'poor' skillset.

So what does that say about Armstrong, or about the worth of having a good QB skillset?

 

[Enhance]

Don't want to derail the thread, but how is Stanford's oline excellent if ours isn't? Only common opponent was MSU and we had more total yards and more rushing yards while also having more turnovers. If you ask me, this line may not have been excellent, but it was definitely better than just "above average".

A significant difference exists between the scheme Nebraska and Stanford run. MSU is better built to attack the scheme Stanford uses. Stanford has one of the best lines in the country, and if you watch their performance across the whole season, their line's performance was far better.

And yes, I'm even taking injuries into account. The line played pretty well this year, but if I had to give them a letter grade, it wouldn't be more than a B- or B. And if you consider a C average, then we were slightly above average.

 

[74Hunter]

I guess I'm one of the few that wasn't impressed with his less than 50% completion rate, his horrible INT, and his fumble that darn near led to a game killing safety.

This offense is going to be really bad next year without TMart, the OL, and possibly Ameer

I can immediately think of three drops where the ball was put in the receiver's hands. If those are completed, that completion rate goes up to 64%. I might even be forgetting one drop.

Also, I didn't realize we weren't going to have an O line next year. Man, that is really going to suck.

First, why is Tommy excused for drops when Taylor wasn't? Also, his first td pass was absolutely horrible, and questionable as to whether it was caught.

Also, sorry that you took my OL statement so literary. We lose 5 senior starters/co starters off the OL, it might not be very good. Does that sound better?

 

[carlfense]

In that case, I won't entirely disagree with you, but will add that Taylor significantly outperformed Tommy in their respective freshman seasons, despite a 'poor' skillset.

Some of that can probably be explained by the fact that Tommy didn't get the non-con games to pad his stats. (Although he did get to play against some crappy conference foes.)

Also, IIRC we were debuting something of a secret weapon/new quarterback in an offensive scheme that wasn't on tape at all during TMs first year. Many thought that Zac Lee was going to be the starter and the coaches kept the zone read offense pretty well under wraps.

 

[knapplc]

Tommy got SDSU, didn't he? UCLA wouldn't have padded his stats much, and likely Wyoming wouldn't have the way they played us, but he would have had a heyday against Southern Miss.

 

[Junior]

Some of that can probably be explained by the fact that Tommy didn't get the non-con games to pad his stats. (Although he did get to play against some crappy conference foes.)

Yea, Purdue and Illinois are as bad as any team in FBS, particularly Purdue.

 

[gbr93]

Don't want to derail the thread, but how is Stanford's oline excellent if ours isn't? Only common opponent was MSU and we had more total yards and more rushing yards while also having more turnovers. If you ask me, this line may not have been excellent, but it was definitely better than just "above average".

A significant difference exists between the scheme Nebraska and Stanford run. MSU is better built to attack the scheme Stanford uses. Stanford has one of the best lines in the country, and if you watch their performance across the whole season, their line's performance was far better.

And yes, I'm even taking injuries into account. The line played pretty well this year, but if I had to give them a letter grade, it wouldn't be more than a B- or B. And if you consider a C average, then we were slightly above average.

MSUs d is an attacking defense so it is built to stop the run first. The way they attack the line doesn't matter what type of scheme you run, so in my eyes it's all the same. Granted I wasn't able to watch us play MSU, but I know we were able to move the ball with some efficiency and I was very impressed with our line on that. When Spencer went down there was a game or two in there where there were some struggles because we lost the leader aspect, but they soon found a groove again and were very effective down the stretch. If you ask me I would give them somewhere in the B+ to A- range, possibly even an A with the injuries. I guess to each his own though.

 

[carlfense]

Tommy got SDSU, didn't he? UCLA wouldn't have padded his stats much, and likely Wyoming wouldn't have the way they played us, but he would have had a heyday against Southern Miss.

You're right. Martinez played against Western Kentucky (heh), Idaho, Washington (away, no less) and SDSU (ugly game).

 

[Landlord]

Tommy got SDSU, didn't he? UCLA wouldn't have padded his stats much, and likely Wyoming wouldn't have the way they played us, but he would have had a heyday against Southern Miss.

You're right. Martinez played against Western Kentucky (heh), Idaho, Washington (away, no less) and SDSU (ugly game).

Tommy's worst games were way, way worse than Taylor's worst games.

Taylor's best games were way, way better than Tommy's best games.

All against comparable competition.

 

[In the Deed the Glory]

How do either stack against Tommie Frazier's freshmen season?

What's that, Tommie doesn't play for Nebraska anymore?

What a coincidence, neither does Taylor Martinez...

 

[carlfense]

Tommy's worst games were way, way worse than Taylor's worst games.

Taylor's best games were way, way better than Tommy's best games.

All against comparable competition.

Maybe. I'm not anointing TA as the second coming of Tommie Frazier but I do like his general awareness and composure.

I saw enough of Martinez during his years here to comfortably say that I won't be sad to see him moving on to the next stage of his life.

 

[Saunders]

What exactly did Taylor do as a freshman other than run dead sprints on the read option (admittedly very well)?

Tommy's mechanics are substanially better, he obviously needs work on his accuracy, but that's easier to fix than poor mechanics. Right now his pocket awarness is as good as Taylor's in his final year. His footwork is better, his armstrength is at least as good and probably better.

I'm not trying to demean Martinez at all, but lets face reality, he was an athlete playing QB. Tommy has actuall QB attributes and if you can't see the difference between them at this stage of their career then I don't know what you're looking at.

Tommy is "prettier" at QB, but not nearly as effective at this point. Freshman Taylor torched teams on the ground, and had some decent aerial games as well. He threw for 5 touchdowns and over 300 yards @ Oklahoma state (and rushed for over 100 and set the single game offense record). Until he got hurt his freshman year, he was averaging about 100 more YPG than Tommy, and also scoring twice as many TD's.

Tommy has better pocket awareness and escapability, but the so called "it factor" I haven't seen. He has yet to take over a game and win it. Hopefully that changes.