Triphibius

The Dutchman.

Bittle was not himself. He looked like someone who had missed a night's sleep, or was under the weather. I thought Shelstad needed to take charge when it was clear that Bittle was off his game.

If I am interpreting Chip Kelly's convoluted insinuation correctly, it is he is implying that the UO won the first game by intentionally keeping12 men on the field. However, our DB deflected the pass on that play. If there had been no penalty, time would still have run off the clock and OSU would have been 5 yards farther back. DL's stratagem had little effect on the outcome that I can see, unless I am missing something. I take JJ's point, but I am still annoyed at Kelly.

It certainly looked to me that Oregon got OSU's A game, and Texas their C game. Some of the penalties were discipline penalties. I am not convinced that Texas's front is that much better than the UO's Harmon, Burch, and Uiagalelei, and hence puzzled by the difference in result. Perhaps O-lineman grab when faced with an opponent who is not necessarily more talented, but aggressive and motivated. I have entertained the hypothesis for a while that when a team expends a great deal of emotion on one game, they will naturally be a bit flat the next time out. Biologically, there is a parasympathetic backlash to the sympathetic system's adrenaline rush. Perhaps the effects last for days. I do not know if sports psychologists have investigated this. That said, Sawyer was great in both games. He changed the flow of the UO game by dominating our right tackle. His strip sack saved a game for OSU that they might have lost.

I beg readers' patience for yet another submission. I would like to turn to the offense. I have read ATQ's analysis, but this is not a verbatim restatement of their conclusions. The UO caught a bad break. Evan Stewart was not available, and Will Stein chose test OSU with a deep pass only once. Possible consequences: 1. Their fine safeties could commit more to run defense, which stymied our rushing attack. 2. Tez had less room to operate underneath, and was less effective than expected. Ferguson did have some opportunities, but mostly after the game was out of hand. 3. The inability to run allowed their pass rushers to anticipate the pass---perhaps contributing to the woeful pass protection. The most striking thing to me was how ineffective the UO offensive line was in pass protection, especially in contrast to their excellent performance in the previous game. It looked like Sawyer manhandled his blocker most of the game. I believe OSU got pressure from other points as well, but that looked like the worst matchup. Why was this? 1. ATQ stated that OSU's DC simplified their system, abandoning blitzes and telling their ends to rely on their athleticism to defeat tackles one on one. The sight of Sawyer pushing our 300 pound tackle back into DG was impressive yet alarming. Is Sawyer that much better? If so, why did this not happen in October? 2. Possibly the layoff or the view expressed by one UO player that the Rose Bowl was a "business trip" contributed to this. Or perhaps some of our guys were sick, as reported. OSU seemed to play with more emotion, but I cannot say whether this was a cause or consequence of their performance. The failure of the UO offense is a bigger puzzle than the struggles of the defense.

Thanks to Intravenous for his explanation. Also, credit to Kelly (not just blame to Lupoi and the UO secondary) for good play design. Regarding run defense, I reviewed some of the tape at ATQ. On the plays available there, the UO had four men at the line of scrimmage and 2 LBs, for a box count of 6, against the standard formation of 1 RB and 1 Tight end. They brough a safety up only when OSU added a RB or an H-back. I thought the right strategy before the game was to play with a six-man box and live with whatever success they had running the ball. I did not see much evidence that Oregon over-committed to the run, but ATQ does not provide the entire game, just plays to illustrate the points their analyst is making. Hint to Fishduck: It would be good to read more analysis of this, if anyone can tolerate studying a decisive defeat.

I get that many just want to forget, but I want to understand. I am sure DL and Tosh think the same. OSU has some fine athletes. But they were the same athletes the UO defeated in October. Why was the result so much worse this time? I just watched the game clips at ATQ. On both of Jeremiah Smith's TDs, he was wide open, not because he beat an overmatched defender, but because there was no one in the vicinity who was unblocked. These two TDs look like failures of scheme or execution. I believe that in both cases, #4 was positioned inside not outside. On another of those clips, Dontae Manning runs stride for stride with Smith for thirty yards. Smith gains separation at the end by pushing Manning. Howard does make a good throw. I am not making excuses, I am just reporting what I see on the tape. On the run play clips on ATQ, the UO often has a DB facing Smith on the line of scrimmage, but also has a safety behind. I am not sure this is a bad strategy. Yes, #4 is big, but if our smaller DB disrupts his route a bit, it might give our pass rushers time to get to Howard. They would get some completions regardless what we tried, given the quality of their players. Sorry for the unintended font size.

I understand that DL does not want to provide excuses, but biology sets some limits on human performance. Yes, I recall Kareem scoring 35 points when he had a headache or some other malady. Or course there is Willis Reed's dramatic entry into the Knick's championship game. The sympathetic nervous system can mask pain to a great extent, but there are limits. Stomach problems are different, however Mr. Marsh is correct. Stomach viruses are not only distracting but weaken the patient--for days. (BTW, my best wishes to him and all infected for a swift recovery.) This could explain why our players fared so poorly at the line of scrimmage, especially the tackle protecting DG's blindside. The biggest surprise of the game for me was the Ducks lack of success at the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball. My best guess was that the layoff and the sports psychology were the explanation. This may be a simpler and more convincing one.

He left before I learned to pronounce his name. Oh well.

Two points, one specific, the other general. First point. Where will Oregon ever find another receiver like Tez Johnson? Well, there is only one Tez, but note the following news item from 24/7 sports. Oregon signee Dakorien Moore takes Under Armour All-America Game MVP honors Second, DL is still a young coach. He is bright, he recruits players well, he has brought in effective offensive coaches, and I think he is generally a good motivator. I do think he has some growing to do both as a game coach and as a long-term strategist. I think he intends to stay at Oregon. He is good, and will get better. I would not bet against him.

I understand that DL does not want to make excuses, and I respect his assumption of responsibility for the disappointing result. As an Oregon fan, however, I want to understand what happened. Why was Oregon so soundly defeated by a team they previously defeated? Specifically, why was our defense so unsuccessful? There have been many references to "Jimmies and Joes" in this and other threads. Yes, OSU has excellent athletes, but they had the same athletes in October. What changed? Here are some hypotheses: 1. OSU got better. Contrary to the predictions at ATQ, Kelly and Day did not repeat their mistakes from the Michigan game, but made effective changes. However, see point 4. 2. The layoff affected Oregon. Plausible, in that all four bye teams lost. This may be related to point 3. 3. DL's sports psychology approach may have been faulty. (The Rose Bowl was being described as a "business trip.") In baseball, a manager down 3-2 cannot lost game 6 by saving his best reliever for game 7. Emotionally, Oregon needed to commit everything to the OSU game psychologically at the risk of being flat the next week against a weaker opponent. 4. Defective scheme or execution. Jeremiah Smith is an impressive talent, no doubt. On two of his TDs, he was running free with no defender near him. Bassa was animated before the first TD, as if he recognized there was an assignment error in the making. As others have pointed out, there was game film from Tennessee. I am emphatically not calling for anyone's head here. We have capable young coaches, but I think they need to develop further to achieve their ambitious goals for the program.

Sorry if my response seemed contentious, Oregonducks. Boettcher, a fellow Axeman and German, is a favorite of mine. Thank you for your response. He is athletic enough to play center field and get drafted by the Astros. He did not appear to me too slow yesterday pursuing Henderson. I would admit that Bassa, although no doubt knowledgeable and of high character, has physical limitations. I cannot argue with you on the tape, as I have no access to it. On that coach's clinic, Boettcher was singled out for an outstanding play that compensated for others' errors against PSU. We can agree to disagree on this. Personally, I hope BB comes back and calls the signals next year, but he needs to do what is best for him. If that is the Astros, it will no doubt be better for his body in the long run.

I do not get the criticism of the LBs. Boettcher was the fourth rated ILB in college football per PFF.

The schedule was beyond the control of the players and coaches. The article above suggests that the layoff hurt Oregon, and that may be true. I prefer to analyze football in terms of match-ups and schemes, but I want to consider this debacle from the perspective of sports psychology, which is one of the many elements of coaching The psychology of baseball, the sport that I played, is entirely different than football. Baseball must be played with calm determination; football requires emotion. I say this as an observer, not a participant. I could certainly be wrong, not in the characterization, but in the weight that I am ascribing to this factor. My point is this. When it was reported at 24/7 that Oregon was approaching the Rose Bowl as a "business trip," I felt uneasy. I understand that DL was looking at the situation as a 16 game season, in which his team could not afford to expend all its emotional resources on one game. The risk of this was that Oregon would come out flat and lacking in alertness when they faced their hardest test. I wonder how much of the difference between October and yesterday was a result of the emotional state of the two teams, and how this manifested itself especially at the line of scrimmage.

Early observations, with the caveat that I turned the sound off and did not read all of the game thread comments: 1. On two of Jeremiah Smith's touchdowns, there was no defensive player near him. I am not denying him credit, but there appeared to be somewhat wrong with the defensive scheme or execution. If Oregon out-coached OSU before, it looked like Chip got the better of Tosh this time. OSU appeared better prepared with one week's practice than Oregon with three. Puzzling. 2. Jack Sawyer won his matchup with Cornelius. He had a big impact, including pass deflections. 3. Evan Stewart was not available at some point. I do not know what happened, but that must have affected our offensive scheme, as he was integral to our first game success. 4. I was confident that Burch and Uiagelelei would put heavy pressure on Howard. I am shocked at how well their patchwork offensive line held up against our defensive front, both running and throwing. Again, puzzling. 5. Oregon had a great year. This was a tough end to it, but congratulations and thanks to our players, coaches and staff for their success.