For the "We need a running QB" crowd...

[timnsun]

Okay timnsun. You've doubled down and tripled down on this agenda thing, all the while agreeing with what I said. I have no desire to get in a running feud with you, or really anyone for that matter.

If you want to call it an agenda, fine with me. The OP post title reads "for the we need a running qb crowd". I took it as a glib statement and it overlooks our deficiencies on the OLine. So, I go get data and give my opinion. That's it, no secret agenda.

Gerry DiNardo, the former D1 coach, is viewed as not knowing what he's talking about. Yet, some analyst that gets paid to count QB hurries is some kind of unquestionable expert. I disagreed with the analyst's assessment that skill positions was the concern and that the OLine was solid.

Agree, no need for a running feud. To your earlier point, if I had to be concerned about a position group this year, it would be the OLine. The reason I couldn't figure out your motive is because the NFL guy was less concerned about the OLine, which actually put me more at ease then I have been. That's why I struggled with you posting the way you did.

I got heated, and it showed in my responses. My apologies.

 

[bshirt73]

Our OLine last year is the worst NU oline I've ever seen. So now we'e going to win big by going hard-core fluff-ball. Riiiight. 0 - 2 vs Wisconsin & Iowa. wooHOO!

MR hasn't won diddly squat anywhere in cfb but "now" that we're a real-deal fluffball team.....why, the sky is the limit! 15 - 11.....a true-blue Vince Lombardi clone I suppose. Even with the ultra-cushy schedules done for the next few years. So, we'll see.....

 

[timnsun]

Our OLine last year is the worst NU oline I've ever seen. So now we'e going to win big by going hard-core fluff-ball. Riiiight. 0 - 2 vs Wisconsin & Iowa. wooHOO!

MR hasn't won diddly squat anywhere in cfb but "now" that we're a real-deal fluffball team.....why, the sky is the limit! 15 - 11.....a true-blue Vince Lombardi clone I suppose. Even with the ultra-cushy schedules done for the next few years. So, we'll see.....

Nice contribution to the board. Thanks for the positivity.

 

[big red22]

I agree with most of this. They are a year older. Possibly stronger. And while I recognize the defensive end for Tennessee is an NFL guy, and Gates was not 100%, I've never seen one guy wreak havoc quite like that. There was never a pocket developed in that game. He was in our backfield as soon as the ball was snapped.

You must of never watched Nebraska back in 2009 then, because Suh made Olineman look silly!

 

[big red22]

Our OLine last year is the worst NU oline I've ever seen. So now we'e going to win big by going hard-core fluff-ball. Riiiight. 0 - 2 vs Wisconsin & Iowa. wooHOO!

MR hasn't won diddly squat anywhere in cfb but "now" that we're a real-deal fluffball team.....why, the sky is the limit! 15 - 11.....a true-blue Vince Lombardi clone I suppose. Even with the ultra-cushy schedules done for the next few years. So, we'll see.....

I'll give you this... You are dedicated to your dislike towards Riley. This does give you a free pass to continue to rag on him if this season goes south, but if it doesn't what are you going to do?

 

[Bugeater]

You must of never watched Nebraska back in 2009 then, because Suh made Olineman look silly!

Both Texas and OU that year had good O-linemen, and Suh made a few of them look like high schoolers.

 

[big red22]

I agree with most of this. They are a year older. Possibly stronger. And while I recognize the defensive end for Tennessee is an NFL guy, and Gates was not 100%, I've never seen one guy wreak havoc quite like that. There was never a pocket developed in that game. He was in our backfield as soon as the ball was snapped.

Suh vs Oklahoma's Jarvis Jones

 

[bigboxes]

I'll give you this... You are dedicated to your dislike towards Riley. This does give you a free pass to continue to rag on him if this season goes south, but if it doesn't what are you going to do?

Change his screen name once again.

 

[Iwillnotpostdrunk....]

Fwiw, As an Iowa Fan I am giddy at the Idea you guys are going to a 3-4 Defense, there will be growing pains and you have not exactly been run stoppers, and you also want to go to more a of "pro-style" QB. We play wiscy tough every year and always have. I do think it will put you in a better position against the Ohio St's and Psu's of the world where your more athletic LB's will be able to keep up with their playmakers,as wiscy has shown, but on a cold November Day where its going to come down to the big uglies instead of a mobile qb (example NW always being a thorn for us) Iowa will be in that game every year.

P.s. Sorry to hear about Mcquitty no one wants to see a team take an Injury and best of luck against Sconny

 

[Huskercigar]

Nice contribution to the board. Thanks for the positivity.

So its only a contribution if it supports your position?

 

[timnsun]

So its only a contribution if it supports your position?

Did I not say, nice contribution?

Of course, I was being facetious about the nice part of it, but it's still a contribution... even if it sucks a bit.

 

[bshirt73]

I'll give you this... You are dedicated to your dislike towards Riley. This does give you a free pass to continue to rag on him if this season goes south, but if it doesn't what are you going to do?

I'll gladly eat crow by the gallon.

 

[1949 tackle]

By God we would never want a QB LIKE THIS GUY FROM LOUISVILLE!!

 

[gd81]

Success this year really hinges on a strong OL. Hope to see results of offseason conditioning out there. We need maulers, not doughboys.

One things for sure the most recent O Lineman do not have the visual stout biceps of those in the PipeLineman of those dominant years. No sure why that is since Boyd Eppley is back in the fold.

 

[timnsun]

By God we would never want a QB LIKE THIS GUY FROM LOUISVILLE!!

View embedded media

How would this guy from louisville do in our current offense?

We have to make things work with the offense we have, and I don't think he would be as successful in this offense as a guy like Tanner Lee. I don't have time to watch the video, but how good is he in a pro style system?

If you want to change offenses, that's one thing, but throwing a youtube video of Jackson on the screen will not make us significantly better than we would be under Tanner Lee, unless he is a pro style player who can run... admittedly, I only watch the huskers, didn't see much of him last year.

If we were a running team, I would love to have him in the fold. Everyone here would. No one is saying we would never want a guy like that. But not for this system, unless he is a pro style player, which I suspect he is not.

 

[huskerfan1414]

For every jackson, there are two armstrongs.

 

[NorthWillRiseAgain]

I'll gladly eat crow by the gallon.

I eat beef by the gallon and drink milk by the pound.

 

[bigboxes]

For every jackson, there are two armstrongs.

Nothing wrong with Armstrong. He was recruited for an offense that he would have excelled at. Just because he's not made for a pro-style offense does not mean he sucked as a QB. He was the best we had in the transition. Better than Dailey. Haha! I had to look that up. Forgot all about him. Does anyone think that TM would have done well in Riley's offense? Not me.

 

[RedSea]

I guess the other way you could see it is that too often there wasn't a pocket for TA to step up in, and that he had to bail a lot due to weak OL play. I think it was some of both, TA didn't have a trust-your-OL-and-step-up-in-the-pocket attitude, but with some justification. Really interested to see how things play out with the pocket passer.

 

[huskerfan1414]

Nothing wrong with Armstrong. He was recruited for an offense that he would have excelled at. Just because he's not made for a pro-style offense does not mean he sucked as a QB. He was the best we had in the transition. Better than Dailey. Haha! I had to look that up. Forgot all about him. Does anyone think that TM would have done well in Riley's offense? Not me.

No,
He was recruited for Bos and becks offense. Now im not saying he was bad, or that he was at fault for all our woes because he certainly wasnt, but he certainly wasnt a championship caliber qb. You cant argue that.

 

[bigboxes]

No,
He was recruited for Bos and becks offense. Now im not saying he was bad, or that he was at fault for all our woes because he certainly wasnt, but he certainly wasnt a championship caliber qb. You cant argue that.

I never said he was championship caliber. Where did I say that? I said he was not as bad as many on here say he is. In the right system he's pretty darn good. Riley did the best he could with Armstrong (other than run a different offense). I see no sense in bagging on him further.

 

[huskerfan1414]

I never said he was championship caliber. Where did I say that? I said he was not as bad as many on here say he is. In the right system he's pretty darn good. Riley did the best he could with Armstrong (other than run a different offense). I see no sense in bagging on him further.

You must have misunderstood my previous post, then.
Teddy is a championship caliber dual threat qb. You can win a title with him. Michael vick types are few.
Armstrong was not. I didnt say he was bad.
Dual threat qbs show flashes of brilliant athletic play, but many lack the consistency of a pocket passer who makes better decisions and plays within the offense. Thats what i meant by 2 to 1.
Now you can argue armstrong would have been better in a true option offense of the 90s, but thats a different story, they dont exist anymore so its hard to tell.

 

[schuele]

I've never really thought the Huskers "needed" a running QB. I've just felt that for the past seven years they've had running QBs who didn't throw particularly well - which is the only reason I wanted them to run more and throw less. I certainly don't want that from Lee, who I'm hoping will have a great year throwing the ball.

 

[Huskercigar]

You must have misunderstood my previous post, then.
Teddy is a championship caliber dual threat qb. You can win a title with him. Michael vick types are few.
Armstrong was not. I didnt say he was bad.
Dual threat qbs show flashes of brilliant athletic play, but many lack the consistency of a pocket passer who makes better decisions and plays within the offense. Thats what i meant by 2 to 1.
Now you can argue armstrong would have been better in a true option offense of the 90s, but thats a different story, they dont exist anymore so its hard to tell.

What the F? Dual threat QBs lack the consistency of a pocket passer? They make better decisions and play within the offense better? That's a blanket statement with no proof to it. Its like you are saying dual threat QB's are dumber.

 

[suhnami]

One things for sure the most recent O Lineman do not have the visual stout biceps of those in the PipeLineman of those dominant years. No sure why that is since Boyd Eppley is back in the fold.

Less steroids.

 

[huskerfan1414]

What the F? Dual threat QBs lack the consistency of a pocket passer? They make better decisions and play within the offense better? That's a blanket statement with no proof to it. Its like you are saying dual threat QB's are dumber.

Its just an observation. sorry you took it so hard.

 

[Husker Sledge]

I think I'll just sit back and enjoy watching the QBs Riley has recruited and not worry about it. We're in great shape!

 

[GBR_Atlanta]

For every jackson, there are two armstrongs.

I agree with this, and this isn't a bag on TA. Players like Lamar Jackson, Michael Vick and DeShaun Watson are hard to find. All "dual threat" means to me is the ability to scramble with a mediocre arm.