Jamal lord was the best all around athlete out of the bunch. such a violent runner. he should have played either I-back or safety. could have possibly played some outside LB. by no means am i saying he was the best or even a very good qb. he was an average overall qb with his running making up for his lack of throwing accuracy.
Would Tommie Frazier make it today? Stewart Mandel answers this crucial question
- Thread starter knapplc
- Start date
74Hunter
Banned
I would agree with this in his first 3 years, but during his senior year, Tommie threw a very nice ball more often than not. Go back and take a look at some of those games.
I don't know if Tommie would have been able to play WR in the NFL. Robinson has legit 4.4 speed, and if I recall, Tommie ran something like a 4.7 or 4.8 at the combine or during a pro day. He wasn't as fast as many of us remember.
Count 'Bility
Banned
Players were not as fast back then all around. That was damn near 20 years ago. A 4.4 today was a 4.6 back then. And yes, Tommie usually threw a nice ball throughout '95, but generally guys were wide open off play fakes set up by 5 plays and 50 yards of powers and isos.
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
Very true. This was the case with Scott Frost as well. Nebraska quarterbacks of that era rarely looked off or checked down on a receiver, threw a crossing pattern or did any kind of improvisation in the passing game. They got defenses to bite on play action and found their receivers wide open in safe places on the field. Nebraska had a statistically efficient passing game, even with the otherwise unacceptible 50% completion rate.
Count 'Bility
Banned
Efficient is right. It was noted that Brook Berringer when he played so much in '94, wouldve ranked in the top 5 in the nation in passing effiency except for the fact that he was like 30 odd-sumthin attempts below the minimum required.
Jamal Lord was a flat fantastic runner. He had speed, power, YAC, and elusiveness. Plus he was a trooper in that he always played hard and never gave up.
I thought he was pretty good overall...
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
Nebraska's 2009 offense was the hardest offense to watch.
The Jamal Lord led offenses of 2002 and 2003 were a close second. Jamal Lord ran because he had to. A broken play and mad scramble were our best plays. Even then, Lord only averaged 4 yards a carry in 2003. He was a terrible passer. He amassed some career rushing stats because we were a one-dimensional offense, and that one dimension was eye-gougingly boring. He may have been a good athlete and swell human being, but I wouldn't even call him a great runner.
I changed my mind. That Jamal Lord offense was harder to watch than the 2009 offense.
The Jamal Lord led offenses of 2002 and 2003 were a close second. Jamal Lord ran because he had to. A broken play and mad scramble were our best plays. Even then, Lord only averaged 4 yards a carry in 2003. He was a terrible passer. He amassed some career rushing stats because we were a one-dimensional offense, and that one dimension was eye-gougingly boring. He may have been a good athlete and swell human being, but I wouldn't even call him a great runner.
I changed my mind. That Jamal Lord offense was harder to watch than the 2009 offense.
Mierin
Assistant Coach
My memory is really hazy so I'm going to go with the way his name makes my innards feel. The emotions I feel when thinking about him are similar to those I feel when thinking about Niles Paul.
junior4949
All-American
I am not and was not ever a Jamal Lord fan. However, most of what lands at his feet wasn't exactly his fault. Some of the great QB's in the past couple of decades had one thing in common: they had some great RB's behind them. Lord never enjoyed such luxury. If memory serves me correctly, our fourth string RB back in 94' or 95' was Clinton Childs. He more than likely would have been a starter on any other team in the conference. Lord was a poor passer, but so were most of the other QB's he's often compared to.
The biggest knock I had against Jamal Lord was his mental capcity for the game. When he audibled, it was to the exact same play each and every time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist on defense to know what's coming when we audibled. Solich also did a disservice to Lord in 2001 when he was trying to not only win a NC but also win Crouch the Heisman. Lord should have played a lot more that season. 2002 wouldn't probably have been the disaster that it was had Lord had more experience going into the season.
Count 'Bility
Banned
Yes, it would have. Lord was really the ONLY bright spot of that team, period. There were glaring talent issues going into that season, then a few injuries reared their ugly heads. The defense was bad on a good day. The oline was inexperienced and not that great to begin with. Running backs were simply not that good. No amount of minutes in mop-up duty for Jamal was going to make 2002 any better. This whole "experience at mop-up duty" is a very over-exaggerated concept.
Last edited by a moderator:
Guy Chamberlin
Heisman Trophy Winner
They weren't the finest running backs in our storied history, but I'd still welcome Dahrren Diedrick and Cory Ross on my team.
Junior questioned Jamal Lord's mental capacity for the game, and that really is everything when it comes to quarterback. I don't recall Lord's audible skills getting that much better after a full season of starting experience.
Which brings us back on thread. Tommie Frazier had the mental capacity for the game.
Junior questioned Jamal Lord's mental capacity for the game, and that really is everything when it comes to quarterback. I don't recall Lord's audible skills getting that much better after a full season of starting experience.
Which brings us back on thread. Tommie Frazier had the mental capacity for the game.