QB depth

[Hujan]

Personally, I want the guy who gives us the best chance to win to play, don't care what number is on his jersey. I don't care what you think about Martinez or any other Husker player. I was just pointing out how your logic is reeeeeeally flawed Hujan.

Why?

Because I don't like the way Martinez answers questions in an interview?

Because I don't like the fact that Martinez missed practices when he was upset he wasn't named the starter earlier than he was?

Because I don't like the fact that Pelini felt compelled to bench Martinez against Texas?

Because I don't like the fact that he chose to break team rules by calling his dad during the Texas A&M game?

Because I don't like the fact that he skipped a team meeting the next day? (Something Taylor's father admits.)

Because I don't like the fact that he appeared to not celebrate with the team when they would score later in the season?

Because I don't like the fact that Martinez appeared to be disinterested when he was on the sideline later in the season?

I am sure there is a totally benign explanation for most if not all of the above. But one could also draw some unflattering opinions about Martinez from things as well. True, his interview style could be because he is shy and introverted. Or it could be because he is a cocky SOB. Same deal with his sideline demeanor.

You guys want to criticize anyone who looks at that information and comes to the conclusion that there might be a problem with Martinez just because Bo Pelini has not come out and said, "Martinez is a diva"? Or because he hasn't yet been kicked off the team? To me that's disingenuous.

When you guys come up with benign explanations for how Taylor looked on the sideline or how he interviews, all you are doing is arguing with me about how to interpret what I saw. But I saw what I saw, and I didn't like it. You are free to disagree, but please don't disagree by insulting my intelligence.

Are you serious? It's gotten to the point where I honestly think you're just yanking our collective chain for fun during the offseason. This cannot be real.

If you're even remotely being serious, you're setting the bar so high that several Husker legends, including Tommie Frazier, Eric Crouch, Joel Makovicka, Jason Peter, Mike Rozier, Gerry Gdowski, Steve Taylor and Zac Taylor can't possibly measure up. Every one of these guys has either been benched or flubbed an interview or broken team rules or missed a practice or failed to celebrate with their teammates after a TD or appeared disinterested on the sidelines. Every single one.

And you're either lying about Taylor skipping a team meeting or you're not reading very well. Or maybe you're so hell-bent on proving your point and damn the facts that you failed to notice that Taylor, according to the article you linked, missed a treatment session for his injury, not a team meeting. I mean come on, Hujan, read the article you linked to. Read where it says he's an introvert, that he's uncomfortable off the field, that he's shy.

Why not believe what you read? Why look for the worst possible explanation about a Husker?

First, the "activity" Martinez missed has been described variously as a treatment session, a meeting, or a team workout session. Whatever you want to call it, Martinez decided to skip it, and it's clear from Casey Martinez's comments that it wasn't a good idea.

Second, I am being serious. Martinez did not "flub" an interview. Every time he's had the camera in his face, he acts in a manner that could be the result of an introverted personality, or it could be cockiness. I used to think it was the former, and---believe it or not---actually got into arguments with buddies where I DEFENDED Martinez. (Heart attacks, I know.) But in view of the other stuff, I have started to come around to the view that maybe he does have a bit of diva in him.

More importantly, those guys you listed may have done one or more of those things, but did they do all of them? It's the aggregate of all those things that gives me some concern about Martinez.

 

[Hercules]

I'm bored.

 

[Hujan]

If you're going to claim something about Taylor Matinez, the burden of proof lies on your shouders. You can't say "it hasn't been disproved, therefore it's true". Doesn't work that way. That's a logical fallacy.

You do realize the ridiculousness of what you posted, right? You are claiming that Martinez IS a leader, etc. Why should you not be held to the same burden-of-proof standard? Because you threw out your opinion first? Why is the status quo that Martinez is all things great and he who doubts that must prove it beyond all doubt?

The status quo is that Martinez is an unknown. Everything else, whether positive or negative, is an opinion and nothing more until proven otherwise. Can we at least agree on that?

 

[knapplc]

First, the "activity" Martinez missed has been described variously as a treatment session, a meeting, or a team workout session. Whatever you want to call it, Martinez decided to skip it, and it's clear from Casey Martinez's comments that it wasn't a good idea.

Second, I am being serious. Martinez did not "flub" an interview. Every time he's had the camera in his face, he acts in a manner that could be the result of an introverted personality, or it could be cockiness. I used to think it was the former, and---believe it or not---actually got into arguments with buddies where I DEFENDED Martinez. (Heart attacks, I know.) But in view of the other stuff, I have started to come around to the view that maybe he does have a bit of diva in him.

More importantly, those guys you listed may have done one or more of those things, but did they do all of them? It's the aggregate of all those things that gives me some concern about Martinez.

So you're building your case on the words of blog writers? Blog writers who are hundreds, if not thousands of miles from Lincoln? You believe guys like Dave Ubben. I'm going to believe Bo:

On if Taylor Martinez missed team meetings yesterday
“Yeah, but it had nothing to do with...it was a completely separate issue.”

On what the separate issue was

“Why he wasn’t at team meetings? He was excused from team meetings.”

On if he had a conflict for the Sunday team meeting

“It’s not a team meeting, it’s a team shake out. We don’t meet as a team on Sunday. I don’t know where that came from, but we don’t meet as a team on Sundays.”

On if Martinez has ever missed a Sunday team shake out

“Yeah, there are a number of guys who have missed shake outs. For instance, Alex Henery was excused from a team shake out. The guys are excused from that a lot.”

LINK

I'm going with Bo trumps Ubbs. You, apparently, think Ubbs is a more reliable source. Sucks to be you, but OK.

But here's where your reasons for ripping on Martinez get really flimsy:

There's another player who answers interview questions awkwardly.

There's another player who skipped team meetings.

There's another player who appears disinterested on the sidelines.

There's another player who not only "appears" not to celebrate with the team when they score, but more often than not doesn't.

And you're not ripping on that guy.

Want to know who he is?

Alex Henery.

Checkmate, Hujan.

 

[The Dude]

If you're going to claim something about Taylor Matinez, the burden of proof lies on your shouders. You can't say "it hasn't been disproved, therefore it's true". Doesn't work that way. That's a logical fallacy.

You do realize the ridiculousness of what you posted, right? You are claiming that Martinez IS a leader, etc. Why should you not be held to the same burden-of-proof standard? Because you threw out your opinion first? Why is the status quo that Martinez is all things great and he who doubts that must prove it beyond all doubt?

The status quo is that Martinez is an unknown. Everything else, whether positive or negative, is an opinion and nothing more until proven otherwise. Can we at least agree on that?

Because I didn't claim he was a leader, now you're just blatantly making stuff up.

You claimed that the rumors about Taylor must have at least some truth to them because they haven't been disproved. Sorry my man, logic simply doesn't work that way.

 

[Saunders]

If you're going to claim something about Taylor Matinez, the burden of proof lies on your shouders. You can't say "it hasn't been disproved, therefore it's true". Doesn't work that way. That's a logical fallacy.

You do realize the ridiculousness of what you posted, right? You are claiming that Martinez IS a leader, etc. Why should you not be held to the same burden-of-proof standard? Because you threw out your opinion first? Why is the status quo that Martinez is all things great and he who doubts that must prove it beyond all doubt?

The status quo is that Martinez is an unknown. Everything else, whether positive or negative, is an opinion and nothing more until proven otherwise. Can we at least agree on that?

 

[zoogs]

I agree, Bo is always totally forthcoming when it comes to sensitive details about the team and has demonstrated as such.

--

Come on, we bring out the Bo card when it's conenient to do so. Anyone should realize that Bo won't be and shouldn't be revealing in situations such as this. He sticks up for his players and he will, and should always say the right things to keep the flak off of them.

I loved watching Crouch when I was younger, but I know some (da skers) have some pretty damn harsh words reserved for him, despite all he accomplished here. So I don't think it is ridiculous to have some doubts about Taylor based on similar information which may or may not be correct. It's possible some people just have a natural dislike for the guy that came from nowhere and are launching huge grassroots campaigns to tear the kid down. Or it's possible that where there's smoke, there's fire.

I think the truth may lie somewhere in between. My feeling is that some of the vets on the team last year, specifically the senior class that was the backbone of the team, did not take to Taylor's ascension very well. It's an aspect of that choice I would still criticize Bo for. I think it caused problems last year. But that was all last year. Those seniors are gone, and Taylor is well positioned to start making this team his own, starting this year. It wouldn't exactly be Taylor's fault he was tapped for starting QB by Bo, anyway.

I can definitely agree with some of the concerns still expressed about Taylor, but it's not like I actually want Brion to start next year. That would be a disaster scenario and just a really bad way for Brion to step into the starting role. We're going to ride the TM train for better or for worse this year.

The whole TM thing...it seems like more of a "He's our guy, optimism is what you SHOULD have. Show some support, man." And how can you argue with that, really. Just don't claim that it's the stance of reason or logic. Few things are when it comes to sports and things where there aren't really any facts to be had, only rumors, thirdhand accounts and PR. You can either be optimisitc or pessimistic.

 

[The Dude]

It's never a good idea to just throw out reason and logic. I honestly can't bring myself to care about what Hujan thinks of TM. Hate on the kid all you want, but if you're insisting rumors about Martinez are true, then back it up. That "it's true because you haven't disproved it" line of reasoning doesn't hold up.

 

[ronsss]

i am just wondering how taylor martinez,s injury is coming along, getting info on him is like trying to find a good fishing spot in the middle of arziona. it seems like he is taking one heck of a lot of time to heal, beginning to wonder if maybe he should have not taken 6 months off from practice or any type of activity.

as for green, it,s still a mystery to me why he shot out of lincoln..must have been something going on in practice that diminished his hopes of ever starting at nu? green was as far as i know the #2 guy, and would have a good chance of playing due to t martinez injuries he endures, and i do believe he will get hurt again

 

[The Dude]

i am just wondering how taylor martinez,s injury is coming along, getting info on him is like trying to find a good fishing spot in the middle of arziona. it seems like he is taking one heck of a lot of time to heal, beginning to wonder if maybe he should have not taken 6 months off from practice or any type of activity.

It takes a long time for high ankle sprains and turf toe injuries to heal. Especially when you're not given the chance to let it heal. This is something I've criticised Bo for several times. I agree he should have been given more time. They brought him back to soon, only to have the ankle reinjured several times. That's something that just shouldn't happen.

 

[bshirt]

I think that's a very, very good point.

The old geezers like me don't overly worry about Tmart's passing qualities because we've seen NU for decades crush opponents like bugs with qbs like Crouch, Frazier, Frost, etc who were all at best marginal pocket passers. Actually "very" marginal. Their passing stats while small were efficient due to them only having to hit wide-open wrs on PA that simply didn't require a Joe Montana. Oh boy, they were WIDE open so frequently. Yeah, Tmart isn't going to be a D. Marino but can he pass the ball as well as those guys? No sweat.....

That is fine and all, but this isn't the early 90's. This isn't a S&C program that is 10 steps ahead of every other in the country. This isn't a Tom Osborne offense. And this isn't a Milt Tenopir coached offensive line.

You cannot live on the past and expect it to be able to predict the future. Reality is that when we were on top, we had so many advantages over our opponents it was unreal. We had a genius leading our offense in Osborne. We had without question the top S&C program in the country, BY FAR. We had the best OL coach in the country. And we had a pretty good player or two on those squads.

Now, we don't have that offensive genius. We don't have, IMO, even a good offensive line coach. We have a good S&C program, but not a great one. And the talent level isn't that high on our offensive line.

Even more, Taylor isn't the kind of tough, rugged runner who can take a consistent beating in the way guys like Frazier, Frost, Crouch, Lord, etc., did. As good of runners as those guys were in our old offense, they do not get as much credit as they deserve for being absolute warriors taking the beating in the way they did. Taylor has a game built almost solely off his speed and finding a wide running lane. He isn't the best instinctive runner, or even a runner who can grind out an extra yard or two the way our old QBs could.

The days of just running over folks like we once did are gone. To expect that to happen again is unrealistic, and just a fantasy for any of us.

Can it happen again? Yeah. And tomorrow I may wake up with a naked Kate Upton laying next to me, too.

So we should just continue with WCO/fluffball & going 3 & out all game long, game after game, year after year vs any team with a decent defense? After seven years of complete failure, we shouldn't even consider going a somewhat similar direction with our offense that worked extremely well for decades?

The "old" days are gone but the last seven years were the Keystone Cops. Sorry, I bet big changes are coming.

 

[kchusker_chris]

My feeling is that some of the vets on the team last year, specifically the senior class that was the backbone of the team, did not take to Taylor's ascension very well. It's an aspect of that choice I would still criticize Bo for. I think it caused problems last year. But that was all last year. Those seniors are gone, and Taylor is well positioned to start making this team his own, starting this year. It wouldn't exactly be Taylor's fault he was tapped for starting QB by Bo, anyway.

I've wondered this sometimes as well. I honestly still believe Zac Lee gave us the best chance to win in 2010. Had he been the guy from the get-go, I strongly feel 2010 would have turned out slightly different. 1-2 more wins. Nothing spectacular, but not nearly as disapointing.

However - that would have dramatically set us back for 2011 and our first year in the Big10. Bo, IMO, chose a mediocre present and great future (potentially), over a good present and good future. That caused some issues w/ the members on the team that wouldn't be there for that future. Just a theory. Crucify me for supporting it.

So we should just continue with WCO/fluffball & going 3 & out all game long, game after game, year after year vs any team with a decent defense? After seven years of complete failure, we shouldn't even consider going a somewhat similar direction with our offense that worked extremely well for decades?

The "old" days are gone but the last seven years were the Keystone Cops. Sorry, I bet big changes are coming.

Just can't agree w/ you here. The failure was defensive and you're arguing against the offense. Even a lot of the offensive struggles hinged on the defense when Callahan was here. 3 & out? How about 3 plays, surrendering 80 yards & 7 points in about 75 seconds. How many times did we see that? Bet the offense felt great heading out after that short breather down another 7. Watson, the 3 years under Bo - shouldn't not be lumped into BC's days.

If you consider the WCO a complete failure, then hypothetically speaking - you'd have to think that we would have still failed w/ Bo Pelini at DC instead of Cosgrove. I don't believe that. A top 25 offense averaging 35 points a game (i think BC averaged 33 or so over those 3 years), paired with a top 15 defense is going to be successful.

 

[tschu]

Personally, I want the guy who gives us the best chance to win to play, don't care what number is on his jersey. I don't care what you think about Martinez or any other Husker player. I was just pointing out how your logic is reeeeeeally flawed Hujan.

Why?

Because I don't like the way Martinez answers questions in an interview?

Because I don't like the fact that Martinez missed practices when he was upset he wasn't named the starter earlier than he was?

Because I don't like the fact that Pelini felt compelled to bench Martinez against Texas?

Because I don't like the fact that he chose to break team rules by calling his dad during the Texas A&M game?

Because I don't like the fact that he skipped a team meeting the next day? (Something Taylor's father admits.)

Because I don't like the fact that he appeared to not celebrate with the team when they would score later in the season?

Because I don't like the fact that Martinez appeared to be disinterested when he was on the sideline later in the season?

I am sure there is a totally benign explanation for most if not all of the above. But one could also draw some unflattering opinions about Martinez from things as well. True, his interview style could be because he is shy and introverted. Or it could be because he is a cocky SOB. Same deal with his sideline demeanor.

You guys want to criticize anyone who looks at that information and comes to the conclusion that there might be a problem with Martinez just because Bo Pelini has not come out and said, "Martinez is a diva"? Or because he hasn't yet been kicked off the team? To me that's disingenuous.

When you guys come up with benign explanations for how Taylor looked on the sideline or how he interviews, all you are doing is arguing with me about how to interpret what I saw. But I saw what I saw, and I didn't like it. You are free to disagree, but please don't disagree by insulting my intelligence.

Wow. This is all stuff that is either

a) flat out not true, even proven false if you've been paying attention

b ) highly subjective "don't like the way he answers questions" ?? Why go there?

c) has nothing to do with Martinez's ability to quarterback the team

You realize that you are saying all of this (a lot of which is false to begin with) about an 18-year old FRESHMAN kid who started ONE YEAR, while playing injured for half of the year, at one of the most pressure-filled positions in all of college football (QB at Nebraska). Until someone else comes along that proves they have more ability than Martinez, he's the starter. And last year's experiences will only help him grow. Let me be clear that I don't care who plays quarterback, but right now Martinez is the guy.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Personally, I want the guy who gives us the best chance to win to play, don't care what number is on his jersey. I don't care what you think about Martinez or any other Husker player. I was just pointing out how your logic is reeeeeeally flawed Hujan.

Why?

Because I don't like the way Martinez answers questions in an interview?

Because I don't like the fact that Martinez missed practices when he was upset he wasn't named the starter earlier than he was?

Because I don't like the fact that Pelini felt compelled to bench Martinez against Texas?

Because I don't like the fact that he chose to break team rules by calling his dad during the Texas A&M game?

Because I don't like the fact that he skipped a team meeting the next day? (Something Taylor's father admits.)

Because I don't like the fact that he appeared to not celebrate with the team when they would score later in the season?

Because I don't like the fact that Martinez appeared to be disinterested when he was on the sideline later in the season?

I am sure there is a totally benign explanation for most if not all of the above. But one could also draw some unflattering opinions about Martinez from things as well. True, his interview style could be because he is shy and introverted. Or it could be because he is a cocky SOB. Same deal with his sideline demeanor.

You guys want to criticize anyone who looks at that information and comes to the conclusion that there might be a problem with Martinez just because Bo Pelini has not come out and said, "Martinez is a diva"? Or because he hasn't yet been kicked off the team? To me that's disingenuous.

When you guys come up with benign explanations for how Taylor looked on the sideline or how he interviews, all you are doing is arguing with me about how to interpret what I saw. But I saw what I saw, and I didn't like it. You are free to disagree, but please don't disagree by insulting my intelligence.

Wow. This is all stuff that is either

a) flat out not true, even proven false if you've been paying attention

b ) highly subjective "don't like the way he answers questions" ?? Why go there?

c) has nothing to do with Martinez's ability to quarterback the team

You realize that you are saying all of this (a lot of which is false to begin with) about an 18-year old FRESHMAN kid who started ONE YEAR, while playing injured for half of the year, at one of the most pressure-filled positions in all of college football (QB at Nebraska). Until someone else comes along that proves they have more ability than Martinez, he's the starter. And last year's experiences will only help him grow. Let me be clear that I don't care who plays quarterback, but right now Martinez is the guy.

Actually, he's almost 21 and a redshirt sohpomore - ie: junior. By now, a fair number of people are finishing up their final semesters at NU and about to begin their careers within the next year or so. Don't act like Martinez is some baby fresh off momma's tit. The "freshman" thing is WAY overplayed.

 

[knapplc]

Actually, he's almost 21 and a redshirt sohpomore - ie: junior. By now, a fair number of people are finishing up their final semesters at NU and about to begin their careers within the next year or so. Don't act like Martinez is some baby fresh off momma's tit. The "freshman" thing is WAY overplayed.

He was 20 years old during the bulk of last season. That's not a child, but it's not like he's some jaded veteran, either. It is not overstated to mention the fact that he was making his first career starts last year, his first press interviews at this level, and he was under a spotlight the likes of which he had never seen before. The fact that he didn't handle that spotlight well is not unusual.