Triphibius

If he is half as good as Rich Brooks, he will be a great contributor. However, I am still disappointed that OBD could not convince Storm Duck to enroll.

The point I am making is that modern football schemes assign somewhat different roles to players, and individual players are better suited for some roles than others. At the website Football Advantage "Coach Martin" states that the split end or X receiver "will go up against man-to-man pass coverage a lot. Cornerbacks will often line up directly opposite them and try to jam them at the line of scrimmage. To be successful at the position, an X receiver has to be either (1) quick or (2) physical enough to break away from this jam consistently. The X's main role is to work the outside of the field, covering both the widest and deepest portion of the field. " Coach Martin speaks only of receiving, not blocking, by the way. Gresham, McClelland, and Lowe are all bout 6 feet tall and 190 pounds. I believe Lowe is thought to have good acceleration. Kasper is 6' 6" and 210; Dickey is 6' 2" and 205. Neither has been consistent up to this point, although both have suffered injuries that have impeded their development. If Kasper and Dickey disappoint, do OBD have anyone on the roster who is well-suited for the X role?

Tough break for Mr. Stewart. On the brighter side, Dillon Gresham looked good in the spring game. The word of mouth on Perry is also encouraging. One question for the cognoscenti.... We used to speak of split ends, flankers and slot guys. Now they use a confusing alphabet soup, which I cannot keep straight. My understanding is that the receiver on the line of scrimmage must be strong or large enough to deal with press coverage, if he is not so fast as to render it impractical. I am not sure who would be best suited for this among the current crop. I thought Lowe and Bryant were slot guys; Moore is not big; Kasper is tall and seems to get open, but does not seem to have reliable hands; Jurrion may not have recovered his burst after the injury. Two tight formations ends might alleviate this.

Judging by team goals, Slim Wintermute.

Bittle was ineffective during the five game losing streak, probably because he was limited by an injury. Fans were complaining on this site that he could not defend the pick and roll. Perhaps that influenced the perception on the part of those who select these honorary teams. In retrospect, I wonder whether it might not have been better to sit him down for a couple of games to enable his foot (or whatever it was) to heal.

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.