What Taylor needs to improve upon...

[knapplc]

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base.

Absolutely incorrect. Mike Rozier was a BOSS. Eric Crouch was good. There is a very distinct talent gap between the two.

This is what I'm talking about regarding time - people forget, or gloss over, the reality of the situation. Suddenly Crouch is this paragon that we just wish Martinez was like. Ten years ago about half our fans couldn't wait for Crouch to graduate and get out of the program - that's how much he was disliked.

Suddenly, Crouch is so good that he's on par with one of the single greatest players in the history of college football - and this is a guy who's widely regarded as the worst Heisman trophy winner in the past 20 years.

The point you're trying to make about Gill, Rozier and Fryar actually goes in favor of what I'm saying. Rozier played on a team of giants. And among those giants, he stood taller than the rest. Put Crouch on that team and he's barely an impact player.

 

[3rd and long]

His running is actually starting to bother me more than his passing, as crazy as that sounds.

When it's a designed run and he's got a clear field - look out. But on option plays where the lanes aren't as obvious, or when he has to scramble a little bit, he stutter steps a lot and gets nowhere. He's like Crouch if Crouch didn't have the shifty moves.

Or the power, or the toughness, etc.

Basically, Taylor is not much like Crouch except that both are very fast.

Basically, J. Montana was not much like T. Brady except that both were good passers.

Except that there is a big difference between being fast and being a good runner of the football.

Crouch was miles ahead of Taylor in terms of running ability. Vision, power, physicality, ability to make a defender miss, etc. All Taylor has going for himself is speed. He shys away from contact, doesn't read lanes very well, has fumbling issues, the list goes on.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Taylor supporter, but when it comes to running the football, he is not like Crouch (not even close).

That is exactly correct. However with many, presenting something like this is pointless. Even if you do support TM, if you point out the fact that there are deficencies you must be a TM hater and really want Carnes to play. While I admire the level of some's support, their refusal to acknowledge the weaknesses have me no longer posting anything that is not gushing accolades in regards to the QB, might as well go beat your head against the door rather than say anything that might be construed as critcal, regardless of if what you say has merit.

Lol! What a load.....

Tmart gets ripped apart by our own fans every single day on this forum. "Any" rumor is suffice to assassinate his character for the last full year and more. To pretend it's all or even a majority being objective analysis of his assets and liabilities on the field requires a firm and unshakable belief in the tooth-fairy.

I've never seen even one single poster here claim he was a great passer, doesn't make mistakes, doesn't fumble, etc, etc. Not one. "Nobody", despite your BS claim, denies his liabilities.

However, to some posters here and to our HC & OC he is still on balance a serious offensive threat. At the very least the best we have. The truly endlessly repeated harping on those liabilities simply gets old. That's all.

GBR!!

I didn't see anywhere is that post where his character was assissinated. Someone made a very objective comparrison between TM and Crouch, and you jumped in with the Montana/Brady line, which was in no way relevant. I've read ton's of very objective analysis of his game on here, and most of it lately has also given him credit for the way he has played in the last game and a half. Guess what, no one is denying the fact that he is a huge offensive threat, but you can also OBJECTIVELY discuss areas that need worked on. Again, this is why I've tried to stay out of the TM threads lately. You can't have a logical discussion about him anymore.

 

[caveman99]

In all fairness, Crouch had been running a option style offense since he was playing KWAA football. This is only Taylor's 3rd year playing QB. The coaching staff really needs to bring in someone to help get the QB's developed. Frost would have been a huge hire for this staff as a QB coach. Crouch or Frazier would also be a big help to have on staff. I also heard Turner may be looking for a job at the end of the season. I know they have Coach Osborne, but they need someone on the field at every practice. As for skills between Crouch & Martinez they are not close. Taylor is faster in a strait line race but, Crouch is better in every other facet of the game. Crouch would juke you one play & then lower his shoulder on the next & run you over.

Not sure Taylor is faster, I am guessing that it depends on the distance. I know Crouch used to run really low 10 second 100M dashes.

 

[knapplc]

...this is why I've tried to stay out of the TM threads lately. You can't have a logical discussion about him anymore.

Not to mention the fact that they always turn into a Rozier-is-better-than-Crouch argument. I hate it when guys do that! :ahhhhhhhh

 

[Joe_5700]

"And Mike Rozier was miles ahead of Crouch running the football. Rozier was better than Crouch by a greater degree than Crouch was better than Martinez. But somehow, both Crouch and Rozier seemed to have pretty successful careers. "

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base. Crouch was light years ahead of Martinez when he was a Jr at Millard North. The 1984 Husker team was full of offensive talent (Gill, Fryer, Rathman & Steinkuler). Can you name any other skilled postion player on the 2001 team besides Eric Crouch that made a impact?

If Crouch had the Offense we have today in 2001. We would have another Big 12 Championship & would have had a better showing vs Miami.

So our offense is why we gave up 60+ to Colorado? Maybe I am getting old, but I remember Colorado gashing us for big yardage on run plays over AND over again. That is why we lost the game.

 

[bshirt]

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base.

Absolutely incorrect. Mike Rozier was a BOSS. Eric Crouch was good. There is a very distinct talent gap between the two.

This is what I'm talking about regarding time - people forget, or gloss over, the reality of the situation. Suddenly Crouch is this paragon that we just wish Martinez was like. Ten years ago about half our fans couldn't wait for Crouch to graduate and get out of the program - that's how much he was disliked.

Suddenly, Crouch is so good that he's on par with one of the single greatest players in the history of college football - and this is a guy who's widely regarded as the worst Heisman trophy winner in the past 20 years.

The point you're trying to make about Gill, Rozier and Fryar actually goes in favor of what I'm saying. Rozier played on a team of giants. And among those giants, he stood taller than the rest. Put Crouch on that team and he's barely an impact player.

Haha...funny how this is turning but....

NO way I buy that. Crouch had that amazing gap speed that even Rozier didn't have. Give him any crease at all and he exploded the defensive angles of pursuit almost immediately. It's a tough call between him & Gill. Gill being obviously the better passer and Crouch the more explosive runner. No lose scenario really.

The real difference between the two is the Olines they ran behind. That 82 or 83 Oline was light years better than anything Crouch ever had so it's difficult to compare.

Rozier, Gill, Crouch.....they were all superb cfb players. That's my take anyway!

GBR!!

 

[knapplc]

bshirt you're a Rozier hater!

 

[Husker Richard]

Settle down Knapplc. It wasn't me who first compared him to Crouch. I was simply pointing out to another poster (who originally made the comparison) that he is nothing like Crouch when it comes to running the ball. Then you jump down my throat (as is par for the course with you when you disagree) and bshirt calls me out for bashing Taylor. Good lord.

Watch some tape and its pretty obvious Crouch and Taylor are nothing alike when they run the ball. That was my point. Plain and simple. I wasn't using Crouch as a benchmark, a previous poster did that.

And seriously bshirt? What about my original post is bitchy, whiny, sobbing/moaning? I can't point out the fact that Taylor doesn't run like Crouch (something we all probably agree on) without you assuming that I'm complaining?

 

[bshirt]

bshirt you're a Rozier hater!

Oh well...no one is perfect!!

:corndance

GBR!!

 

[bshirt]

"And Mike Rozier was miles ahead of Crouch running the football. Rozier was better than Crouch by a greater degree than Crouch was better than Martinez. But somehow, both Crouch and Rozier seemed to have pretty successful careers. "

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base. Crouch was light years ahead of Martinez when he was a Jr at Millard North. The 1984 Husker team was full of offensive talent (Gill, Fryer, Rathman & Steinkuler). Can you name any other skilled postion player on the 2001 team besides Eric Crouch that made a impact?

If Crouch had the Offense we have today in 2001. We would have another Big 12 Championship & would have had a better showing vs Miami.

Haha.....you can't possibly be serious!

Pray tell, give me "one" Olineman we have that is 10% as good as was T. Fonoti. I seriously doubt we have anybody even somewhat close to D. Volk. That Miami defense would have annihilated our current Oline in about four nanoseconds. At best.

GBR!!

 

[Blackshirt96]

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base.

Absolutely incorrect. Mike Rozier was a BOSS. Eric Crouch was good. There is a very distinct talent gap between the two.

The gap is still much smaller then the one between Eric & Taylor.

This is what I'm talking about regarding time - people forget, or gloss over, the reality of the situation. Suddenly Crouch is this paragon that we just wish Martinez was like. Ten years ago about half our fans couldn't wait for Crouch to graduate and get out of the program - that's how much he was disliked.

The half that didn't like Crouch were the ones crying for Newcombe. Fans also wanted Osborne fired in the late 70's. Fans expect perfection at the QB spot.

Suddenly, Crouch is so good that he's on par with one of the single greatest players in the history of college football - and this is a guy who's widely regarded as the worst Heisman trophy winner in the past 20 years.

No one said he was on par with Rozier. Many people regard him as the worst because of what he did in the pro's not what he did in college. Eric is one of the 15 Huskers of all-time huskers.

The point you're trying to make about Gill, Rozier and Fryar actually goes in favor of what I'm saying. Rozier played on a team of giants. And among those giants, he stood taller than the rest. Put Crouch on that team and he's barely an impact player.

My point was there is a much larger gap between Martinez & two players that have won the Heisman Trophy. Martinez still has time to devolop but, he is way behind where Crouch was at this point in his career. You are also dead wrong about having talent around you. Rozier was the best in college of those three, but they made him look better just by being on the field. Eric was the focus of every defense.

 

[knapplc]

Settle down Knapplc. It wasn't me who first compared him to Crouch. I was simply pointing out to another poster (who originally made the comparison) that he is nothing like Crouch when it comes to running the ball. Then you jump down my throat (as is par for the course with you when you disagree)

I responded to your points. If you want to act like that's "jumping down your throat" I would humbly submit that your constitution may not be suited to the rigors of a very tame internet message board conversation. If you're going to take part in the conversation, then be prepared to have your statements discussed without complaining about it.

 

[Blackshirt96]

"And Mike Rozier was miles ahead of Crouch running the football. Rozier was better than Crouch by a greater degree than Crouch was better than Martinez. But somehow, both Crouch and Rozier seemed to have pretty successful careers. "

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base. Crouch was light years ahead of Martinez when he was a Jr at Millard North. The 1984 Husker team was full of offensive talent (Gill, Fryer, Rathman & Steinkuler). Can you name any other skilled postion player on the 2001 team besides Eric Crouch that made a impact?

If Crouch had the Offense we have today in 2001. We would have another Big 12 Championship & would have had a better showing vs Miami.

So our offense is why we gave up 60+ to Colorado? Maybe I am getting old, but I remember Colorado gashing us for big yardage on run plays over AND over again. That is why we lost the game.

They did after our offense went 3 & out on almost every drive of the first half. The time of possession was a huge part in why we gave up so many points. A better showing on offense will take some pressure of the defense & give them time to rest.

 

[Husker Richard]

Settle down Knapplc. It wasn't me who first compared him to Crouch. I was simply pointing out to another poster (who originally made the comparison) that he is nothing like Crouch when it comes to running the ball. Then you jump down my throat (as is par for the course with you when you disagree)

I responded to your points. If you want to act like that's "jumping down your throat" I would humbly submit that your constitution may not be suited to the rigors of a very tame internet message board conversation. If you're going to take part in the conversation, then be prepared to have your statements discussed without complaining about it.

I'm not butt hurt, but I've seen enough of your 16,000+ posts to know that arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall. You refuse to see the other side and you're never wrong. As evidenced by your failure to respond to the rest of my post that you have selectively quoted above.

 

[Joe_5700]

"And Mike Rozier was miles ahead of Crouch running the football. Rozier was better than Crouch by a greater degree than Crouch was better than Martinez. But somehow, both Crouch and Rozier seemed to have pretty successful careers. "

Rozier & Crouch were both amazing in college. I would agree Rozier was better at running with the ball, but to say he was futher ahead then Crouch is to Martinez is way off base. Crouch was light years ahead of Martinez when he was a Jr at Millard North. The 1984 Husker team was full of offensive talent (Gill, Fryer, Rathman & Steinkuler). Can you name any other skilled postion player on the 2001 team besides Eric Crouch that made a impact?

If Crouch had the Offense we have today in 2001. We would have another Big 12 Championship & would have had a better showing vs Miami.

So our offense is why we gave up 60+ to Colorado? Maybe I am getting old, but I remember Colorado gashing us for big yardage on run plays over AND over again. That is why we lost the game.

They did after our offense went 3 & out on almost every drive of the first half. The time of possession was a huge part in why we gave up so many points. A better showing on offense will take some pressure of the defense & give them time to rest.

We scored 23 points in the first half. We lost the game because we could not adjust to a simple RB move at the line of scrimmage. We even went to 5 down D linemen and that did not help that much either. Brown and Purify running wild is why we lost the game. Our offense was just fine minus the timely fumbles in the end.