[Husker] Crouch...of course

[weldoc at juno.com]

I hate to imagine what the 2005 and 2006 seasons would have been like if
Zac T. HADN'T had the degree of familiarity of the WCO offense in his
head as he arrived in Lincoln. Has NU EVER been as reliant on a QB
performing well as it has seemed necessary under BC ?--Bill L.
______________________

There was this guy named Crouch that played in 2001 that I think was as,
if not more. important to the success of the team in answer to your
question number four.--Doug Martin, MD
___________________________

Excellent point; guess I had a "senior moment." Those Crouch-led teams
really did rise and fall on his success. 

Comparing the Devaney and pre-option Osborne eras, the QB in those days
seemed a smaller part of the overall offense. 

Even after the option was installed it seemed to me (someone with more
coaching expertise could explain this) that the offense wasn't so heavily
dependent on the individual play of ONE guy. Gill and Frazier were
standouts and took control of the game but they had a lot of help.

Maybe someone else can better define it, but it seems that the WCO
"system: is increasingly more dependent on the QB's abilities to make
quick and quality decisions. I hope Keller is up to it next year.

Thanks,

Bill Laughlin
Wichita, KS