Yo! Morty! Did you see it?
- Thread starter GreenBayCat
- Start date
Hey GreenBayCat, did you see him scramble so well under pressure tonight? You know why he didn't do that as much when he was at NU? Because he was banged up most of the time.
I saw a guy tonight who really didn't have much time in the pocket. He (most of the time) got the passes off quickly, and he often had blitzers coming at him from all directions. Carolina tried their best to get him to commit mistakes under pressure, and Trevor held his own.
I saw a guy tonight who really didn't have much time in the pocket. He (most of the time) got the passes off quickly, and he often had blitzers coming at him from all directions. Carolina tried their best to get him to commit mistakes under pressure, and Trevor held his own.
Well.I don't know what GreenBay was thinking but maybe he thinks Morty should have put more pressure on Fitz to change up the coaching staff on offense.
I'm personally not a subscriber to the "clean house carousel of staff" is an answer to all of NU's problems but I get the logic and Fitz is faithful sometimes to a fault so he could need pressure to make that call.
Trevor wasn't able to run ten feet while injured at NU! What a shame we didn't get him at his best!
We had a fairly good QB named Dan Persa when Trevor hit campus, and Trevor had to overcome a tendency that many young QBs with a good arm have — trying to force the ball in to receivers who weren't open.
True and it definitely shows that the NU coaches did not use Trevor like they should have.
Playing him instead of Persa? Behind an OL that couldn't pass block while throwing to WRs who couldn't separate or catch?
Regardless, as I've been saying for years now, Trevor was MUCH better during his NU career than he gets credit for.
I suppose he needed more than a couple of weeks but I always wished they would have let one of the other QB's practice with the first squad for a couple of weeks to more fully recover. We lost those games anyway.
GCG03,
Did I say "fault"? No, I lay no blame on Morty. No doubt he saw the game and took note to sick his fundraising hounds on the newly successful alumnus. I just wanted him to be aware of another aspect of the win.
And I could not agree with you more: Trevor was indeed much better at NU than he got credit for.
So your reaction to Sieiman's successful professional football debut was to assume NU would be on the horn to try to get some of his (relatively meager) NFL money? Interesting world you live in.
No, just his senior year when there were no eligible WR's who the staff could remotely consider for the role.
Siemian should NEVER have played instead of Persa and I can't see ANYONE arguing that even today. He should have been on the bench then.
But, the years when Kain Colter was our starting QB? That's another story altgother. And you're right, Trevor was MUCH better during his NU career than he gets credit for, and it was clear to more than a few people we were starting the wrong QB back then. It's not like this wasn't a debate that is all of a sudden new now that he just beat Carolina and starts and is undefeated for the defending Super Bowl Champions.
The debate was relevant back then. Not sure why you insist on rehashing it with such vigor.
Because people are stubborn enough to hold on to their obviously flawed reasoning in spite of overwhelming evidence in an attempt to tango. It takes two.
LOL! I enjoy your posts. They're so wrong...like putting ketchup on a hotdog.
TS was injured both his junior year (badly bruised heel) and his senior year (high ankle sprain and torn ACL)
TS was very good when he was healthy, not so much when he wasn't. I don't miss his pick-6's which cost us games against Minnesota, Nebraska, and Ohio State.
Have you checked Mark's running with TS at QB versus when KC was QB? Obviously not. That might blow up your "overwhelming" evidence.
Last edited:
Not just the O-line, but having receivers who can get separation and hold on to the ball.
Actually, the re-worked Denver O-line was much better at opening holes for the run game than at pass protection (should get better as the season goes along as 4 are new starters with 2 having been injured for much of the pre-season).
Siemian was pressured on about 70-75% of his passing attempts, but still completed 69.2% of his passes (so much for all the naysayers who kept pointing to his low completion % while at NU).
The Carolina DC kept giving Siemian different looks and changed things up to take into account the short passing game (contrary to conventional wisdom, Kubiak had confidence in Trevor and had him throwing from the start, which loosened things up for the Broncos run game), but the kids wasn't flummoxed.
Siemian passed for 11 1st downs and ran for 3 more.
So out of the 20 1st downs the Broncos attained by play (and not by penalty), Siemian had a hand in 14 of them.
Um, Siemian was healthy for the Cal and NIU games and apparently Trevor was healthy enough to run prior to the 4th Q of the Michigan game.
That is all on McC who I had long stated didn't use Siemian properly (until the very end).
LOL!
So you placing blame on those losses at Siemian's feet?
Gee, I thought this was a team game.
In that Minny loss, Siemian threw for 269 yds and completed 64% of his passes against a pretty tough Minny D (with some NFL players in the secondary).
While ultimately, the pick is on Siemian as the QB, a dink and dunk O is susceptible to pick-6s (even Brady falls victim to that) as DBs anticipate the short, quick pass and jump the routes.
And as Fitz, himself, had stated, the Minny D put in a wrinkle on that play, moving the DB that made that INT.
So that loss should be pinned on Siemian and not on special teams for giving up that kick-off return for 100 yds (interesting) or for that matter, the O-line for not giving Siemian more time in the pocket to actually go through his progressions (instead of having to rely on short, quick throws, sometimes to a predetermined target) or the receivers for not being able to get open down the field.
This is just like the knee-jerk reactions of all those anti-Siemian posters (including the main writers on MHR) who totally placed blame on Siemian for the 2 picks against the Panthers.
And how generous of you to state that Siemian wasn't good when he was injured.
Gee, what do you expect an immobile QB to do when his O-line can't protect him and his receivers can't get separation?
Actually, I did a post on this a while ago and the diff. is not as great as you make it out to be.
Mark was also effective at running w/ Siemian under center, but in the Colter/Mark combo, the opposing D's would have their safeties playing up so once Mark broke thru, there were no defenders unless a corner was able to break off from a block.
But with a passing QB, the opposing D's would have the safeties playing back, so would be A 10-15 yd gain instead of a 25-30 yd gain.
Similar threads
