AnotherOD

Haven't seen this one linked here, some nice background on coach TD: https://www.dailycal.org/2017/11/04/change-coming-defensive-coordinator-tim-deruyter-bears-walking/

Coach just dropped his article and I hadn't even thought of a pass rush heavy "2-4-5" with something like a K.Williams-Dorlus front, Funa and KT as walked up OLBs, ISM (or Flowe) and Sewell inside LBs, and whichever 5 DBs. That's putting together a lot of 4 (or 5) player pass rushing ability on the field together while still allowing for 7 (or 6) player coverages.

Always seemed like a good kid and teammate; but, they tried to run him a little against USC and it was: 8 carries for 13 yards (with a long of 3 yards) His only carry of the 1st half was 3 yards for a 1st down. Second half rushes: 1, -1, 2, 3, 2, 1, and 2 One carry in the bowl game, start of the 4th quarter, 3rd and 1 for no gain forcing a punt. He did have a nice 26 yard catch and run from AB in the 2nd. Might be a good fit reuniting with Arroyo, pairing with RB Charles Williams at UNLV.

"4-3"/"3-4" likely makes for a good topic for off-season discussion. I'd still be surprised to see a base "4-3" and I'm not sure exactly how it appears to be a better fit for returning defensive personal? Popo should be able to step into the nose backed up by Jayson Jones. The following several seasons Jones is about as nose tackle as you are gonna find. I'm not sure about turning Funa in an every down DE either. KT-Popo-Williams-Funa would be a pretty smallish "4-3" front. The OLBs on both sides of the DeRutyer "3-4" are considered to be a rush LBs anyway, one side especially so, often manned by a converted DE. You could put ISM at the more traditional OLB spot and then pair Sewell and Flowe inside. If you end up on obvious passing downs (or whenever desired) you can sub in a nickle and walk Funa up in a "4-2-5". With Pickett gone, instead of replacing him, Hill could move into the other S position. Isn't the greater preference in today's college football towards "3-4s" and variations with a (full time) base nickle defense about getting more guys who can play in space on the field against different types of spread offenses? Returning to a base "4-3" seems to be counter to that approach? One thing for sure (Total PLAYS last 5 games): UO 64 UCLA 82 UO 66 OSU 82 UO 60 Cal 79 UO 60 USC 80 UO 46 Iowa State 85 (Drives of 10+ plays and result) OPPONENT'S 10+ play drives (17) 19 plays (td) - Cal 16 plays (td) - OSU 15 plays (td) - Iowa State 14 plays (td) - Iowa State 13 plays (td) - UCLA 13 plays (td) - Cal 13 plays (downs) - OSU 13 plays (fg) - Iowa St. 12 plays (td) - USC 12 plays (fg) - USC 12 plays (td) - USC 12 plays (td) - UCLA 11 plays (fg) - OSU 10 plays (td) - OSU 10 plays (fg) - OSU 10 plays (td) - UCLA 10 plays (fumble) - Iowa State OREGON'S 10+ play drives (6) 14 plays (td) - USC 13 plays (fg) - UCLA 11 plays (fg) - USC 11 plays (td) - OSU 10 plays (td) - OSU 10 plays (fg) - Cal something a little more aggressive will be welcomed. "Bend but don't break" still needed to get off the field at some point - and didn't do so very well in 2020. The big total play discrepancy and long drives allowed these last 5 games are trends that needs to go away in 2021.

Well past time to move on for sure. When people suggest the Pac-12 has had little conception of "urgency", to it's detriment, this appears an excellent example.

Doing some reading around different programs, the message board fan opinion tends to lean toward OC and DC becoming less and less a primary recruiting positions? I don't know if it is now a even stronger emphasis/responsibility put upon position coaches, or an expansion of the role of support staff? Don't really have any conclusions on the matter, but it seems to be out there?

Whoa a bit surprised but my first (and not especially knowledgeable) glance looks good. Some notes I came across from a Cal site: * It's a normal, base 3-4 alignment, with the defensive ends in a '5 technique' in front of the tackles and the nose playing on top of the center. Both outside linebackers are stand-up pass rushers and the top priority for players moving to that position is their ability to rush the passer. *That being said, there isn't a concrete form for this defense... they're going to move around, "be multiple", use a lot of different blitzes and line stunts to confuse protection schemes. When they go to a nickel, it'll be a 4-2-5, with those rush outside linebackers coming down to the defensive end spots. * A big part of a DeRuyter defense is aggressiveness, blitzing, feigning blitzes, causing confusion to the point of forcing turnovers, sacks, and tackles for loss... as far as actual scheme goes, DeRuyter is willing to send both rush ends on a blitz, while trusting his linebackers to provide contain on a blitz. Other times, they'll lay off and rush four, sending one of the rush linebackers into coverage. It's likely that Cal will use converted DEs on one side of the linebacking core, but the other side should be a more traditional outside linebacker that can drop and cover, like on this play...The defense provides solid pressure with a four man rush ...other times, a DeRuyter defense will show blitz, back off, bring pressure from elsewhere, and run a line stunt. *What DeRuyter has brought to the table in past stints as a DC: an aggressive defense that can cause havoc and force mistakes. As far as coverage goes, with the amount of blitzing expected, there should be more man defense played by the Bears... Not the most recent article though:

Found this over on another board (Notre Dame Rivals) for this past year on ratings this year. From something called Sports Media Watch. Had not seen if but forgive if it is a repeat. Who is watching this Pac-12 conference? Most games televised Most viewers in tota Viewers per gamel Change in avg viewership from prior year equivalent game 1: Bama - 12 / 87.6M / 7.3M / 3% 2: N Dame - 12 / 70.5M / 5.9M / 104% 3: Ohio State - 8 / 69.6M / 8.7M / 21% 4: Clemson - 9 / 60.2M / 6.7M / 33% 5: Florida - 11 / 44.3M / 4M / 10% 6: Georgia - 5 / 34.7M / 6.9M / 20% 7: Oklahoma - 10 / 30.7M / 3.1M / -30% 8: Auburn - 8 / 28.7M / 3.6M / 7% 9: Texas A&M - 8 / 27.4M / 3.4M / 47% 10: Iowa State - 12 / 27.1M / 2.3M / -1% 11: Texas - 9 / 26.2M / 2.9M / 3% 12: N Carolina - 8 / 24.2M / 3M / -13% 13: OK State - 11 / 23.9M / 2.2M / -15% 14: LSU - 6 / 23.3M / 3.9M / -8% 15: Miami (FL) - 7 / 21.7M / 3.1M / 24% 16: N'western - 7 / 21.6M / 3.1M / 85% 17: Michigan - 5 / 19.9M / 4M / 22% 18. Oregon - 7 / 19.8M/ 2.8M/36% 19: Penn State - 7 / 18.3M / 2.6M / 69% 20: Indiana - 7 / 18.2M / 2.6M / 10% 21: Wisconsin - 6 / 17.6M / 2.9M / 33% 22: Michigan St - 7 / 17.5M / 2.5M / 43% 23: Tennessee - 5 / 17.3M / 3.5M / 27% 24: Cincinnati - 8 / 16.5M / 2.1M / -12% 25: West Virginia - 10 / 15.5M / 1.6M / 4% 29: USC - 6 /13.4M/ 2.2M / -17.75 65 Power Five teams and, if this is accurate, only two in the top 30? Not exactly new news but still interesting to see in black-and-white. All factors considered, a decent number for Oregon I"d suggest? Other Numbers: The Fiesta Bowl finished 6th in bowls with 6.6M, behind the 3 BCS games and the Peach (Georgia-Cin) and Cotton (A&M-NC). The Pac-12 Championship had 3.85M, ahead of the Big 12 Championship (Oklahoma shows State) at 2.99M. The Huskies had a later game schedule, their 4 games drawing 0.74M, 1.14M, 2.02M, 1.3M for an average of 1.3M per game, which wasn't ranked in the available chart I saw.

It's definitely a fair point. Though perhaps onto a different one to the original thought regarding TS vs. AB. It may actually be a point answering those who see AB's BC numbers and say, "No way (unless no other options)" though. Far from a Boston College expert, but I believe over 2017-2019 they were a pretty run-heavy (two TE), pro-style, play action, drop back vertical passing offense (behind AJ Dillion who rushed for 1600, 1100, and 1700 yards those years, BC appears to have been about 65/35 run versus pass). It's likely playing in that offense is going to show up in the numbers. The concern with AB at Oregon probably would more be learning/fitting into a more RPO/RO offense (where he seemed fine but not a lot to judge) rather than poise, throwing out of the pocket, seeing the field, comfort with vertical throws.

Nobody is going to turn down a Haloti Ngata, but as I understand it (and as far as this terminology still applies), Avalos preferred a "single gap" approach on the DL as opposed to the "two gap" approach previously employed by Aliotti, Pellum, and Hoke. Probably means a recruiting preference for a downsized more athletic DL, rather than more bulky and hard to move ones. I think the UW runs a similar 5 DB base, but has employed "two gappers" up front (Shelton, Vea, Qualls, Gaines). The "single gap" maybe makes more sense if the defense is going to regularly be aggressive up front (UO 2019 maybe more so than UO 2020). Washington I think tends to prefer to play a lot of coverage, so their big guys need to tie up space and eventually collapse the pocket Somebody correct any and all of that which is wrong.

Wilner reported in February Cal's AD had lost $89 million over the previous five years; and, the NYT projected a $24 million 2020 shortfall might reach $55 million with COVID. Not sure exactly on those numbers, but if accurate probably a tough environment to hand out huge coordinator matches (if somebody comes calling). With Sirmon being named co-DC (and apparently given play calling duties last March), keeping both might be seen as even more a luxury. I guess DeRuyter is thought to be interested in being a HC again, and was in the UNLV mix before Arroyo was hired. A name that would surprise me a bit.

I haven't seen anyone suggest Anthony Brown was coming in with some sort of perfect career arc. If so, he probably wouldn't have been a transfer. As for trajectory, its a nice idea, but going back to before Bill Musgrave, I can't see a single case of a starting Duck QB actually fitting that narrative? Marcus is maybe the only one close to it, but Marcus was great as a freshman, a bit better as a sophomore, and a bit better as a junior. He went from like an A- to an A to an A+ over his 3 years. The rest of the guys generally were better as seniors sure, but: Justin Herbert: PE rating went from 149 to 168 to 145 to 157. Completion % started at 64% and ended at 67%, dropped to 59% as a junior. His TD/INT percentage was 0.83 as a freshman and 0.84 as a senior. Darron Thomas: two years as a starter, great as a sophomore and slightly better as a junior. 62% completions both years, passing efficiency 151 to 159, TD/INT 30/9 then 33/7. Jeremiah Masoli: PE rating went from 132 to 130 to 121. TD/INT started 13/5 went to 15/6 finished 14/13. Completions 57% then 58% then 56%. Dennis Dixon: PE rating from 142 to 121 to 161. TD/INT from 6/3 to 12/14 to 20/4. Completion percentage 66% to 61% to 68%. No real trajectory between so and jr. 2007 Chip Kelly era magic as sr. Kellen Clemens: PE rating from 140 to 132 to 153, completions 60% then 60% then 64%. TD/INT 18/9, 22/10, then 19/4. Like Dixon, first year better than second, jumped in third. Joey Harrington: sophomore and junior years very similar statistically, a bit better as a senior (PE 133 to 125 to 144, completions 53%, 53%, 59%, TD/INT 10/3, dropped to 22/14 then improved to 27/6). Tony Graziani: 7 games then 11 games then 6 games, finally threw less picks as a senior but completion percentage 54% all 3 years, PE 120 down to 111 up to 131. Danny O'Neill: PE rating 118 Up to 149 down to 124, completions 56% to 62% down to 53%. INT did improve 11/10 to 22/15 to 22/9. Bill Musgrave: all four years roughly the same: PE rating (137 to 123 to 132 to 130), completions (59 to 51 to 58 then 58), TD/INT (13/8, 8/4, 22/16, 17/12). As odd as it may sound, the one guy on this list that probably "fits" this narrative best is Anthony Brown at BC over his 3 years. PE rating went from 103 to 135 to 155. Completions went from 52% to 55% to 59%. TD/INT ratio improved from 0.55 to 0.69 to 0.82.

I'm not really seeing the difference in numbers supporting any argument. The biggest difference is possibly QB efficiency and the difference between 160 and 155 is about 4 spots out of 126 QBs. Most of Brown's numbers came from playing for a poor Boston College team, with several years of not so hot offenses, with Arizona/Oregon State rated talent around him, mixed around a pair of leg injuries. Eyeball test shows some similarities between the two QBs, especially with more basic throws from clean pockets; but, a difference in handling pressures, and consistent proper decision making (look at the read at 3:17 in the 2nd quarter of the bowl game on Brown's 16 yard TD run, that's the sort of play that is there - that helps make this offense work - that TS misses regularly). Brown's BC tape and limited time at Oregon does not show this massive trouble processing things and not breaking down the first sign of trouble. Also, as the season progressed, it was obvious downfield passing under TS had all but disappeared. Maybe Brown had a mixed bag at BC, but one thing not missing was the ability to stretch the field. Mistakes? Sure, but the game doesnt look 10x too fast for Brown, nor does he seem to especially panic with pressure. Its possible this goes away for TS, but at this point he has played enough to suggest its a gamble. Brown did fumble but it was an effort play and very, very close to being down. He missed a throw - but threw a nice ball for a TD called back the play before. I think we all saw four years of Herbs throwing a few regular head scratchers. I think he is allowed a couple? Especially on something like his 14th pass of the year?

"Tyler Shough's floor is Anthony Brown's ceiling. The numbers bear that out." SHOUGH: 160.4 (2020: 7 games UO) 63.5% for 1,559 yards 13 TDs and 6 INT, 9.4 ypa, 4.1 ypc BROWN: 154.5 (2019: 5.5 games BC) 59.1% for 1,250 yards 9 TDs and 2 INT, 9.1 ypa, 3.9 ypc 153.8 (2020: 2 games UO) 65.2% for 164 yards 2 TDs and 0 INT, 7.1 ypa, 5.7 ypc Brown Combined 2019 and 2020 (7.5 games): 60% for 1,414 yards 11 TDs and 2 INT, 8.8 ypa, 4.2 ypc There may be another set of numbers out there? If so, they would be interesting to review. These numbers above could be picked over for tiny differences but appear to be essentially the same.

If one has followed the Jayson Jones story, hard not to really be pulling for the kid. In the hardcore fan file, his teammate TJ Gilbert came to Oregon as a preferred walk-on. 6-2 and 235 pound LB, GoDucks listed him as #56.

Yes. Heading into next year I'd label about 5 out of the top 47 as "experienced": KT, Wright, Funa, Redd, and ISM. That's really about it. A couple guys like Steven Jones, MAL, Stephens, and A. Jackson have been around for a bit, but really haven't played that much yet. So, here is the top 50 Ducks according to 247 with grade. Anything over about 0.900 is a top 300 recruit. 5 Star: 1. KT - 0.9987 2. Justin Flowe - 0.9967 3. Sewell - 0.9935 4. Manning - 0.9841 4 Star: 5. Suamataia - 0.9831 6. Franklin - 0.9824 7. Thompson - 0.9808 8. Devon Williams - 0.9791 9. Wright - 0.9783 10. Thornton - 0.9735 11. Tauanuu - 0.9695 12. Funa - 0.9681 13. Walden - 0.9635 14. Pittman - 0.9578 15. Addison - 9.9552 16. Keith Brown - 0.9488 17. Stephens - 0.9430 18. Shough - 0.9422 19. Wilhoite - 0.9412 20. Dollars - 0.9387 21. Davies - 0.9356 22. Butterfield - 0.9352 23. Matavao - 0.9328 24. A. Jackson - 0.9313 25. Crocker - 0.9274 26. Brevard - 0.9263 27. Redd - 0.9243 28. Seven - 0.9241 29. Light - 0.9214 30. Delgado - 0.9182 31. Hutson - 0.9158 32. Ferguson - 0.9138 33. David - 0.9131 34. MAL - 0.9128 35. Webb - 0.9103 36. S. Jones - 0.9100 37. Herbert - 0.9090 38. Jaramillo - 0.9085 39. Ware-Hudson - 0.9065 40. Miller - 0.9034 41. Ashford - 0.9006 42. Jonathan Flowe - 0.9002 43. Navarrette - 0.8984 44. Denis - 0.8968 45. J. Jones - 0.8964 46. Keanu Williams - 0.8952 47. ISM - 0.8919 3 Star: 48. Kristian Williams - 0.8897 49. Benson - 0.8897 50. B. Williams - 0.8892 Edit: I did forget at least one, a transfer though, so the 247 ratio wouldn't include him but: DJ Johnson (4 star, would be 13 at 0.9648).

I might add, its still fluid, but based on who probably comes back and the new recruits, I've got Oregon currently with 47 out of 91 (because of those taking an extra year) "five star or four star" on the 247 Composite. 247 tracks this as their "Blue Chip Ratio". Their theory is that to have ANY chance at a National Championship, the ratio must be 50% or greater, usually 13-16 teams. This is scholarship guys, no walk-ons, and actually no transfers, so its 46/88 for 52%. For 2020, Washington and USC were the only Pac-12 teams represented, UW was 13th (54%) and USC 14th (50%) out of 15 teams total. When it finalizes and is computed, my first glance suggest Oregon will probably be the only Pac-12 team at 50% or greater. Of course, if my numbers don't have errors (there may be a couple in there, forgetting someone, etc., and of course I haven't actually tracked UW or USC, just eyeballing it).

Interesting thoughts on USC. I've seen many of their fans express that 2021 may be the season many/most of them have been waiting for: a middle to bottom finish in the Pac-12 South, and the end of Helton. No one in the Pac-12 lost as much to early departures as USC: Tufele (opt out), Vera-Tucker, Hufanga, St. Brown, Vaughns, Griffin, Tuipulotu. Their 2017 and 2018 classes were both highly ranked but a lot of those classes, and especially a lot of the top rated players in those classes, have already moved on (or are otherwise gone). The bulk of their guys will come from USC's 2019 number 20 rated class and 2020's number 64 class (unlike previous years which were #4, #4, #10, #2).

If so, I believe Oregon still has the Stony Brook Seawolves scheduled, which means it would likely need to add an FBS opponent rather than grabbing a second FCS game. I don't believe the Colonial Athletic Association played this year. One has to wonder if Stony will want to make the long trip out to Oregon, after a year off, with COVID still probably a lingering factor. I don't see Stony as having a history of taking big OOC "payday" type games, so its athletic department is probably at least a little more able to survive missing the game. Some recent Stony forays with the FBS: 2019: at Utah State 7-62 (L) 2018: at Air Force 0-38 (L) 2017: at South Florida 17-31 (L) 2016: at Temple 0-38 (L) 2012: at Syracuse 17-28 (L) It will be interesting to see if there is a lot of schedule juggling overall in college football or not, and when it might start shaping up. As I've read in a few places, one thing COVID has shown is that the need to plan things years in advance probably has been overstated if there is enough motivation.

A number of fans over at one of tOSU boards don't see this game happening. The reasoning that Oregon's not going to travel to tOSU without its return game being rescheduled. I tend to agree there. Ohio State doesn't take road OOC games unless its a high profile home-and-home, and it's booked up for quite a while. Its also not going to add Oregon in a year its already got one tough OOC game. Its not gonna play two OOC road games ever. I see they have: 2022: three OOC home games, including ND 2023: two OOC home games, at ND 2024: only two OOC games scheduled, but at UW 2025: three OOC home games, including Texas and UW 2026: two OOC home games, at Texas 2027: only two OOC games scheduled, Alabama 2028: at Alabama 2029: 2030: at Georgia 2031: Georgia Some suggested tOSU might buy out or reschedule Boston College in 2027, but tough to see them playing Alabama then traveling to Oregon that year. Following the formula, 2029 would be the first opening that makes sense. Oregon if it wants its return is looking at 2029. Would that satisfy the Oregon athletic department and be in tOSU's future plan? That would be at Michigan State, Utah State, and tOSU in 2029 for Oregon, which I could see (or Michigan State being moved around which is far enough out I could see happening). The most simple solution is obviously to cancel the thing, both teams pick up a patsy type, and both to cash in on a money making home game. Put it all in the COVID category and move on.

Rather than Rob's speculation of the starting OTs, doesn't it seem at this stage Aumavae-Laulu and Moore might be best as maulers at OG? If Suamataia can step in a similar manner as Sewell at OT, I sort of like: Suamataia-Jones-Forsyth-MAL-Moore Massive flexibility and legit rotation options with Baas and Walk (who play) and MAL and SJ's ability to move outside at times.

Difficult to grill Moorhead too much on the QBs. He was hired, then COVID hit, and it looked very much like the Pac-12 was still going to bag the season after other conferences had already started playing. As well, he is working with guys he didn't recruit, and walked into a situation with a dynamic set in place before he even took the job. Its also the second instance where there has been open speculation/debate as to whether the Duck OC has complete say over the direction of the offense.

OSU in 2016 had to be rock bottom. Painful to say but Taggart did go 6-1 with Herbert with one 2 point road loss (ASU). Went 1-4 with Burmeister, but sort of hard to put all that all on Taggart. I guess he recruited Burmeister, but other than JH, there wasn't a lot else in the QB room, and a true frosh playing meaningful snap probably wasn't in the thrown together plan. When Burmeister was in HS, he was the all time CIF San Diego Section career passing leader (11,512 yards and 127 TD passes). Who really knew he wouldn't be ready to complete a downfield D1 pass for about 4 years when signed? Oregon needed somebody to sign in the 2017 class. With Herbert healthy, Oregon maybe goes 9-3. 8-4 reasonably likely. Win the bowl? 10-3 or 9-4. JH's first 2 games back that year after injury, Oregon put up 117 points. If Herbert gets hurt (again) in 2018 or 2019, and misses some significant time, it is possible the whole Cristobal narrative looks a bit different right now. No real shocker AA goes to Boise State, and no real shocker Taggart goes to FSU for $5 million a year. How he handled it? Poorly. How would it have gone after 2017? Probably badly - but who knows. 10-3/9-4 looks pretty fair compared to 4-3 and an embarrassing bowl loss and performance.

IMO a tough year to reach too many conclusions. More just more food for thought. The 61.1 plays per game on offense is a pretty low number (75.9 defended). The prior two years were 73 and 68. That's going to skew the offensive numbers and one would expect (hope) it was a bit of an aberration. 21.6 first downs per game is also tied with 2018 for the lowest amount since 2009 (20.2). Still not a really low number. The 6.8 yards per play on offense also isn't bad, 5th best out of the last 10 years. Chip's best offense could spit out an average of 300 yards rushing per game (7.2 to 7.5 yards per play). Mario's not wanting to play that way - nor does his approach likely even aspire to produce rushing yards in the same amount or manner, or overall games with those higher numbers of plays or possessions. I'd think again more like Wisconsin. UW perhaps has had some similarities, except maybe attempting to be a little more "pro style" and multiple. They still have averaged 177 yards per game rushing the last decade. Stanford from 2008-2017 might be another in line with Mario? 201.9 rushing yards per game. Maybe that the plan isn't outrageous (debatable), but signs the results just aren't great. I'd say by year 4, if things are heading in the right direction, the Ducks should hit an average 200+ yards rushing per game. It shouldn't be a 10 year process. That is, unless Moorhead is allowed to put in something else, then that's to be reassessed.

Given the way Cristobal wants to play, I'd suggest the goal should be between 180-230 rushing yards per game. The offense barely hit the minimum in his first year (181), missed it slightly the next year (177), and missed it pretty badly this year (167). If you are bound and determined to do it a certain way, you probably need to be showing more success. A team that comes to mind Cristobal might want to play like would maybe be Wisconsin? Wisconsin has averaged 232.4 yards rushing over the last decade and hit an average of over 200 yards in 8 of 10 seasons.