I know this is blasphemous, as TF was a winner, without a doubt, but AM is a much better passer than TF, imo, and very close in the running department. He just doesn’t have the “it” factor that TF must have had. Something about having studs all around TF probably made that much easier. gbr
He was a better passer than T Frazier though. That much is true. Not as good of a player though…obviously.
Debatable … both were great. I go back and forth on that one. The 2 best rbs I’ve ever seen at Neb.
I think Gill was a more complete QB than Frazier. He threw it better and thought he ran it equally well.
The 95 offense was historically great.
Holy smokes how far do ya need to go back for QB’s?🙄
I’m just talking about the arm here man. Do you think AM would have won a lot more games on the 94 and 95 teams BTW? Do you think Frazier would have lost a lot more games on the 2020-2021 teams? If not…don’t know what to tell you. Frazier had the Pipeline, Weigert, Wistrom, Farley, Both Peters, Veland, Tomich, Rucker. Booker. Tyrone Williams, Trev. Shields, Lawrence a Phillips…many many all conference, NFL draft guys. AM…well….he didn’t. Not at all an apples to apples comparison. And, again, Matt Turman was the Qb in 94 when Neb beat nationally ranked KSU at their place (I was there and that was a legit KSU squad). He pretty much just handed the ball off. It shows you the talent Frazier had surrounding him in both sides of the ball.
I'm saying that Amart made us worse. He should have won a lot more games than he did. He didn't win. Tommie did. It doesn't matter if his teams were less talented than Frazier's. He under performed. Tommie excelled.
Open your mind a little. TF was a 53% passer on a team that averaged 400 ypg rushing. He definitely had the it factor that AM doesn’t. Doesn’t change some of the other things from being true. The 95 team would have been tough to beat, even with AM at the helm. gbr
What intangible was Gill missing in 1982 against PSU, the September game given to PSU by the officials that prevented the Huskers from winning a "natty"?
Amart sucked. It doesn't matter what tangibles he had. He under performed. He didn't take his team to new heights. He took them to new lows. You could put him on Frazier's team and they'd not play as well. Now, if you want to substitute Crouch for Frazier on that '95 team you'd have an argument. Amart? Get real.
Gill was an awesome QB. No doubt. He will always be a hero to me. Frazier just went to the next level (repeatedly). That's the question. Which one was better. That would be Tommie. All respect to Turner.
Tagge won two National titles too, but Turner Gill was still the better QB…
I guess my point that Turner never had the same chances as Tommie doesn't play with you. That's cool. My initial response would be that Tommie was better, so a lot of my discussion of Turner is playing devil's advocate as well as standing up for someone I covered as a student reporter at the DN and got to know, just a little.
MeAnd who's to say Vince Ferragamo wasn't better than all of them?
Thank you. The goal of that game was to win the National title - not go for style points while trying to win a National title
Frazier's teams were better on Defense than Gill's. That's why they won nattys.
Gill could be a starter at QB in Whipple’s offense. Frazier would start…just not at QB. He was an awesome running back/athlete playing QB. Kind of like Thomas Lott and JC Watts in the Ok offenses in the 70s.
