Medical Redshirt (or Hardship) for TM?

[JackD]

I was in fact referring to Fisher choosing not to come back for a sixth year. He could have but choose Med school and to move on with life

 

[Toe]

You can probably rule out the medical redshirt, BTW: Pelini optimistic Martinez will return for Minnesota game.

 

[Guest]

Assuming Taylor doesn't play, how is it different? I assumed when Fischer was told he was no longer needed it was due to a supply of LB's . I can assure you if Taylor were to come back for a 6th year, we would have a back log of QB's with Armstrong, Stanton, Darlington etc....... No, its time to fish or cut bait, time to move on, this year.

Well, if one of the best QBs in program history, one of the best in the nation, and the best one on the team at this time were injured and could get that year back due to hardship, you would do that every single time. Especially when you lose almost your entire OL and best WR the next year. Unfortunately, for as good of a dude as Fischer is, he will not be mentioned as one of the best.

..but as I've said the past 3 years, we will never win a conference title or National title with TM at the helm.

And you'd be wrong. The reason we are even thinking about getting to Indy is from the apparent progress the defense has made in the past 2 games. It has nothing to due with who is starting behind center. Which, seeing how Tommy played last week, if we DON'T have a mostly healthy TMart, we won't make it to Indy.

Oh thats right, Taylor isn't as articulate in interviews, he has a funny throwing motion (even though he's more accurate that Tommy), the defense played better because Tommy was the QB :weird:........

Tell me, how many jet sweeps Tommy or Ron would have stopped against UW last year if they would have started ahead of Taylor?

 

[Chris]

:hijak::herbie:

 

[Helenahusker]

You can probably rule out the medical redshirt, BTW: Pelini optimistic Martinez will return for Minnesota game.

Exactly. He is going to start and play every game this year barring a repeat of the injury or other unforeseen circumstances. Thank goodness.

 

[valiantsailor]

Well, if one of the best QBs in program history, one of the best in the nation, and the best one on the team at this time were injured and could get that year back due to hardship, you would do that every single time. Especially when you lose almost your entire OL and best WR the next year. Unfortunately, for as good of a dude as Fischer is, he will not be mentioned as one of the best.



And you'd be wrong. The reason we are even thinking about getting to Indy is from the apparent progress the defense has made in the past 2 games. It has nothing to due with who is starting behind center. Which, seeing how Tommy played last week, if we DON'T have a mostly healthy TMart, we won't make it to Indy.

Oh thats right, Taylor isn't as articulate in interviews, he has a funny throwing motion (even though he's more accurate that Tommy), the defense played better because Tommy was the QB :weird:........

Tell me, how many jet sweeps Tommy or Ron would have stopped against UW last year if they would have started ahead of Taylor?

38 unanswered points ring a bell anywhere? How about the OSU game in 2012, here you go.

http://espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=322800194

Any questions?

 

[UNK_Lopers]

Well, if one of the best QBs in program history, one of the best in the nation, and the best one on the team at this time were injured and could get that year back due to hardship, you would do that every single time. Especially when you lose almost your entire OL and best WR the next year. Unfortunately, for as good of a dude as Fischer is, he will not be mentioned as one of the best.



And you'd be wrong. The reason we are even thinking about getting to Indy is from the apparent progress the defense has made in the past 2 games. It has nothing to due with who is starting behind center. Which, seeing how Tommy played last week, if we DON'T have a mostly healthy TMart, we won't make it to Indy.

Oh thats right, Taylor isn't as articulate in interviews, he has a funny throwing motion (even though he's more accurate that Tommy), the defense played better because Tommy was the QB :weird:........

Tell me, how many jet sweeps Tommy or Ron would have stopped against UW last year if they would have started ahead of Taylor?

Taylor's turnovers are absolute insanity. Insanity. Turnovers are the most important aspect of a college football game for both offense and defense. I think you would be surprised how much better a team can be when they aren't turning the ball over left and right. Kansas City Chiefs are a perfect example of that.

Tommy Armstrong won't be the same QB he is at this point by next time next year. He will be better. Better than Taylor? Maybe not. I'm guessing with his intangibles, he probably won't be amongst the leaders in turnovers though.

I do think Taylor is the best option this year. I hope he gets healthy and gets a shot at winning a conference championship. I like watching the kid play, he's electric. I'm not bashing the kid at all, I'm just stating why I think it will be time to move on next year. It's a moot point anyway, I can't see Taylor sitting out rest of the year.

 

[Capn Krunch]

Taylor might play against Minnesota, but I doubt he'll be full speed running-wise. Taylor will be in orthopedic shoes, per Pelini, and possibly wear a pair of glasses with a patch on one side to treat a lazy eye.

 

[MadRat]

I would have liked to see Brion Carnes stick around to have had a shot this last few games. What he displayed in the spring game two years ago and what he did prior to NU was very Tommy Armstrong-like. The same issue with Cody Green the year before. We kept hearing how these backups were light years behind Martinez when the reality is the starter's turnovers were a huge liability. I really can't fathom so much talent not getting game time. I don't think our record would have suffered under the experiment, because as we have seen giving backups reps in real game time is the best way to train them. The DL suddenly filled huge talent gaps using this strategy. Guys like McMullen, who have proven playmakers, weren't getting reps.

Take King Frazier for instance. The guy is a powerful runner. Newby got lots of praise for playing weaker competition in the Wyoming game. Against a senior heavy Purdue defense he didn't look so good, getting flipped by a hit from two fellas at the same time. Frazier came in, ran an identical play and found himself in the identical situation. KF leveled the two defenders and nearly kept his feet. Clearly Frazier is a stud running through the tackles!

We'd never saw backups last year to see this.

 

[UNK_Lopers]

Bo has worked pretty hard over the years to avoid a quarterback controversy. Had Taylor never been hurt, I can promise you that Armstrong's snaps would be next to nothing. Bo's hitched his wagon to Taylor and his ego would never let him go back. It's not like Taylor didn't deserve to start, I just think that the gap between Taylor and a few of his backups were exaggerated. Still though, it's hard to blame a coach for avoiding a quarterback controversy, those things are often nasty and breaks up locker rooms.

 

[Guest]

Taylor's turnovers are absolute insanity. Insanity. Turnovers are the most important aspect of a college football game for both offense and defense. I think you would be surprised how much better a team can't be when they are turning the ball over left and right. Kansas City Chiefs are a perfect example of that.

There is no doubt about that. The most important aspect.....maybe, maybe not, but its certainly at the top of the list.

38 unanswered points ring a bell anywhere? How about the OSU game in 2012, here you go.

http://espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=322800194

Any questions?

Yep. Which 38 unasnwered points? Are you referring to the B1G CCG?? If so, please answer the question, how would Tommy or Ron, or hell, Peyton Manning have stopped the jet sweep?

Thanks for the link to the OSU game. It proves my point, how would have a change in QBs effected the defense and special teams giving up a 10 point lead and having 56 hung on them?

 

[Chris]

^ assumption being that had Taylor not personally had FOUR turnovers the D would had less to deal with.

 

[Guest]

^ assumption being that had Taylor not personally had FOUR turnovers the D would had less to deal with.

So, since I don't recall, lets just say that those 4 TOs led to 28 points, we still lose 42-31. Does that make anyone feel better?

Maybe the defense sucking led Taylor to press, which led to him making stupid plays and turnovers? We can play this game all day. The defense still could have make stops. They didn't. And no matter how you slice it, Taylor didn't give up 600+ yards.

 

[JackD]

What about the 3-and-outs. NU only scored once in the 3rd and 4th quarter if I recall correctly, and had the ball 8 times. 4 TO's 3 Punts and 1 TD.

 

[Guest]

So, since I don't recall, lets just say that those 4 TOs led to 28 points, we still lose 42-31. Does that make anyone feel better?

Maybe the defense sucking led Taylor to press, which led to him making stupid plays and turnovers? We can play this game all day. The defense still could have make stops. They didn't. And no matter how you slice it, Taylor didn't give up 600+ yards.

Oh come on, we all know that teams play differently based on what a score is. The defenses can play far more aggressive with a big lead and the offenses trailing have to gamble to try to catch up. Does 42-31 make me feel better? Your darn right it does, but the point being the landslide was started by TOs leading to quick scores.

 

[Guest]

Maybe the defense sucking led Taylor to press, which led to him making stupid plays and turnovers? We can play this game all day.

:wave:

 

[Guest]

Oh come on, we all know that teams play differently based on what a score is.

Agreed, and you hit it on the head here:

and the offenses trailing have to gamble to try to catch up.

Yes, the offense, led by the QB had to gamble, which led to TOs.

Does 42-31 make me feel better? Your darn right it does...

Hmmm, either way we weren't bringing the trophy back home, so it doesn't matter if if was 1 point or 70, its an L.

but the point being the landslide was started by TOs leading to quick scores.

And if I recall correctly, TMart hit the WR (Bell, I think) right in the hands, and the WR muffed it which led to the pick 6 to start the game. Yet everyone puts that on Taylor. Why is that? He did he part, or should he run out there and catch the ball, too?

I mentioned it during the game last week, but I found it kinda funny and kinda sad that people were complaining about "drops" by the WRs, yet none of those balls were pefectly placed. They were either a step too long, or a little behind, etc. I'd be willing to bet that if it were #3 instead of #4 throwing those balls, they'd be whining about how Taylor throws a crappy ball, his mechanics sucks, etc. etc, but since it was Tommy, they put those "drops" on the WRs.

:wave:

I don't get it......

 

[Chris]

Why on TMart- I think beck's quote from last week about Armstrong summed it up- with Tommy- the teams knopws what the QB is going to do- with martinez you're never 100% certain. Put it on the numbers or not- I think Mart's receiver's are never quite certain enough what's going to happen.

 

[Guest]

Why on TMart- I think beck's quote from last week about Armstrong summed it up- with Tommy- the teams knopws what the QB is going to do- with martinez you're never 100% certain. Put it on the numbers or not- I think Mart's receiver's are never quite certain enough what's going to happen.

I can't disagree. I just wish there was uniformity when judging 1 player v. another. If its a drop, its a drop, doesn't matter who is tossing it out there. And if its a crap throw, its a crap throw. I just think that some people have a preconceived notion about players and nothing will change their minds.

 

[Chris]

If its a drop, its a drop, doesn't matter who is tossing it out there.

Have to disagree.

I think of with a musician's mind ( I used to play professionally) - there's a fluidity of performance wherein the best performer eliminates everything that distracts: uncertainty, tension, confusion, distraction, superfluous movement. When playing a concerto the notes fly by- you need to be in that perfect zone or the chances of failure increase exponentially. Eliminating uncertainly equates to confidence and that might be most important.

In the context of a receiver, if you cannot eliminate the uncertainty that your QB might be on a different page... or if the QB makes you get to a place where there is higher jeopardy of getting clocked, blindsided, never knowing if the ball will be right there... then the chances you do not perform optimally go up. Even if the play appears to be one where it all looked "normal", if the receiver's have that, even subconsciously, in their heads, then no, a drop is not a drop.

That's not putting 100% of it on the QB - but I think some significant blames lies there.