Armstrong Leading the QB Race

74Hunter said:
HuskerinSunDiego said:
RedDenver said:
You're getting way ahead of yourself there. Can you name a stat where Armstrong is better than Martinez?
Click to expand...
That was the problem with TM. Statistically, he looked great on paper. However, that never translated into real life greatness. Armstrong has a calmness and natural leadership to him that TM never EVER had. Heck, Armstrong is 8-1 as a starter. That's the only stat that matters and it's better than anything TM put up.
Click to expand...
TM never had an oline this good. The defense his last 2.33 years wasnt very good, either. And lets not talk about the performance of his OC.
Yet he led us to 2 CCGs, 1 as a frosh. while on 2 bad legs.

Also, lets not give Tommy too much credit for 2 of those wins , considering that he wasn't good enough to finish the games against PSU and NW. Those games belong to RKIII
Click to expand...
Oh, here we go.......

Who knew? I figured this conversation was gonna happen, but this soon?

 
Pquote name="HuskerinSunDiego" post="1398506" timestamp="1409615793"]

QMany said:
HuskerinSunDiego said:
RedDenver said:
You're getting way ahead of yourself there. Can you name a stat where Armstrong is better than Martinez?
Click to expand...
That was the problem with TM. Statistically, he looked great on paper. However, that never translated into real life greatness. Armstrong has a calmness and natural leadership to him that TM never EVER had. Heck, Armstrong is 8-1 as a starter. That's the only stat that matters and it's better than anything TM put up.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you know TM started 9-1, right?
Click to expand...
You just made my point. He put up great stats, and, yes, started 9-1, but OHHHHHH that one loss was brutally painful. He never recovered after his 9-1 start. Was an average QB with no legs after year one.

Pat Narduzzi I'm sure agrees with you're last sentence

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Abdullah the Butcher said:
Armstrong was injured against Penn State, it wasn't because he wasn't "good enough". Armstrong was responsible for 14 points against Northwestern so it wasn't like Kellogg won the whole game himself. Tommy messed up but that's what freshmen do. You just have irrational hate for Armstrong.
Click to expand...
Fair enough on the PSU game, but he didn't finish nor did he win that game. I don't want to judge anyone's injuries, but I remember his predecessor playing about half of his games while being pretty badly injured.
I don't hate the guy, he seems like a very likeable kid. He's just not very good.

I think it's odd that people want to say he's better than his predecessor just because he gives better interviews and throws a prettier looking ball, even though he's not nearly as accurate.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's odd that people want to say he's better or worse than anybody since he's only played 1 full game, 2 if you count Florida Atlantic. It's a touch early to try to write his legacy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
74Hunter said:
True2tRA said:
The Dude said:
74Hunter said:
TM never had an oline this good.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's coincidence the offensive line has always looked better with Tommy in the pocket.
Click to expand...
Because it isn't and it's been said a thousand times. Some just refuse to listen.
Click to expand...
Even though the coaches, media reports and the numbers say otherwise.You're right, some refuse to listen.
Click to expand...
Coaches, media reports, and the numbers say its not a coincidence that Tommmy makes his offensive line look better?

Please. Give me some evidence of that.

You know....you can't just spew crap and expect people to swallow it.

 
74Hunter said:
The Dude said:
74Hunter said:
TM never had an oline this good.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's coincidence the offensive line has always looked better with Tommy in the pocket.
Click to expand...
Yes,Tommy has better footwork, I just wish that it would equal better results.

But, haven't we been hearing that this is the deepest, most athletic OL in the Pelini era? I know I have.
Click to expand...
Serious question and I'm not coming at your from a confrontational tone, what didn't you like about Tommy's performance on Saturday? He a few bad passes, absolutely. The overthrow to Ameer was bad, the near interception on the pass to Alonzo was a bad decision. The crazy catch with Westerkamp I would call an below average decision (not bad) but the CB made a really good play on the ball. It happens.

I think the 52% (15/29) completion percentage is what sticks out. But if you break that down a little more, you realize it's not terrible.

To start, one of those incompletions was the spike at the end of the first half, so can we agree that shouldn't count in his evaluation? Brings it to 54%.

Next, he very decisively threw 5 passes out of bounds. One can argue that this is actually a positive play. Things that can NOT happen when you throw the ball away include: interception, sack for big loss, fumble and turnover. Effectively brings it to 65%.

Two other incompletions were bombs that missed Kenny Bell grasp by literally inches. Both flew over 60 yards in air and both hit both of Kenny's hands. These aren't completions, but the effect of the throw helps alleviate the box and allows Ameer to operate. If we complete the pass, it's great, but the effect on the defense is greater just by having that as an option.

Overall, Tommy's job isn't to complete 70% of passes, he isn't supposed to Christian Hackenburg. His job is to not turn the ball over and put the defense in bad spots and to keep the down and distance manageable. He had 0 turnovers and I think we had 1 occasions where we were 2nd and greater than 10 and that was due to a penalty. He did his job Saturday.

 
And people said I brought up the T-Mart conversation too much..

Both can be good players, but being a great player and great QB are two different animals.

Isn't that an NFL statement? Some college QBs put up huge numbers, but they aren't the best QB. They are a better player, but that doesn't always translate to a better QB. It doesn't factor in intangibles amongst other things. Some QBs don't have crazy numbers, but they get the job done because of the intangibles, such as leadership...distributing the ball to their other weapons, help maintain a + turnover margin, check out of good/bad plays, make the correct reads, keep the offense on track regarding staying ahead of the sticks.

Tommy will never be the runner T Magic was, but I'll wager that he won't give up as many negative plays trying to run around in circles behind the line of scrimmage, putting us behind in down and distance.

Kind of reminds me of Jameis Winston vs. Nick Marshall (albeit on a much lesser scale talent/ability wise) ... One had significantly better numbers, but one is a significantly better QB.

Taylor will have the better stats... Tommy will have the better record...

The only stat that matters when its comes to QB, is W-L. Some QBs can put up huge numbers and lose, while others focus on the little things, make the correct play, and win.

(Side note: Didn't that article about Grobe not taking the Nebraska job state something about Grobe saying him having a better athlete at QB was actually bad for him? Because it limited/changed his offense?)

 
Back
Top