Lupoi on Losing the Rose Bowl: A Miscalculation in Preparation?

[Charles Fischer]

This was posted in another thread, but thought it was important since so much discussion has been about this game.  The actual transcript of what Tosh said is a bunch of run-on, run-around sentences that if I were to summarize came down to..."we did not self-scout ourselves enough."

 

Do you get the same impression?

 

Tosh Lupoi opens up about what went wrong for Oregon Ducks vs. Ohio State

DUCKSWIRE.USATODAY.COM

---

Oregon Ducks defensive coordinator Tosh Lupoi opens up about what went wrong against the Ohio State Buckeyes in the Rose Bowl.

 

[HDuck]

Another way of saying it I guess is what I felt was the "mistake."   I felt the Ducks staff spent too much time looking at October game tape, and not enough time evaluating and preparing for what the Buckeyes had shown in other games both before and after October.

 

Not to say Chip wouldn't have had a few new wrinkles like all staffs do, but my impression was the Ducks were under-prepared for potential changes.

[OregonDucks]

I personally don’t believe it’s as much as not scouting ourselves as not scouting and being prepared for adjustments that the opponent made during the season.
 

And that applies to both sides of the ball. 

[Charles Fischer]

On 3/17/2025 at 2:21 PM, HDuck said:

Not to say Chip wouldn't have had a few new wrinkles like all staffs do, but my impression was the Ducks were under-prepared for potential changes.

I believe that after all the coachspeak, and verbal dancing...that is what he was indirectly stating as well. Lanning may have immersed in recruiting, and perhaps this experience may impact his trust in Lupoi to be ready?

 

Or defensive analysts came up short? Or Lanning didn't consider the potential changes?  Who knows?  Unfortunately, this is part of his learning curve and it comes at the expense of everyone. But I also have to count the blessings he brought us that I doubt that few, if any other coaches, could have done this season.

 

And yeah....I think Chip got his NFL job based off his brilliant game plan versus Oregon. It certainly wasn't versus Michigan!

 

 

[30Duck]

There's a great Country band, named "Asleep at the Wheel" and that seems to apply to coaching for Oregon and the Rose Bowl, whether it was getting hosed by the format, osu2 getting a boost by a romp over Tennessee, OBD being lethargic, complacent after the win in October, any adjective, accusation, excuse you can come up with would apply. The good news is it was 1 L after 13 W's, and OBD gets an opportunity to try it again next season. 

[Steven A]

On 3/17/2025 at 11:40 AM, Charles Fischer said:

It certainly wasn't versus Michigan!

 

That was genius rope-a-dope, and we were the dopes.

[Duckhart2]

Not sure even with adjustments we could beat those guys on that day. The 3 1/2 weeks off was the killer in my mind. All teams that had byes lost

[Mike West]

I finally watched the full first half.  Sluggish is an understatement.  One thing for sure though, every foundational weakness was exploited.  Lupoi drags the DEs to middle of the box on the backside of the play-leaving the edge WIDE OPEN.  I thought this was a player thing until I saw both edges routinely slide inside all year.  Chip annihilated that opening, as every running TD attacked that strategy.

 

However, it was clear the players were ‘running at half speed’ the entire half on both sides of the ball.  The secondary literally ran like they had concrete blocks on their shoes.  They were reading and reacting very slowly.  Personally, I just don’t like the coverage rules, and of course you absolutely cannot cover your receivers if you look at the QB (Denzel Burke for OSU did so in October and nearly got burned again in Pasadena as well-so this isn’t just an OBD thing).

 

I just don’t like the defensive front.  In October, Lupoi ran more 4-3, but to little avail (the secondary got shredded, but it did shut their running game down).  I like that and a 5-2 because it totally shuts down the edges.  It does expose the back 4, but they don’t have good coverage rules as a practice-so in my ‘hack’ opinion it doesn’t matter until the coverage rules change ( I personally prefer matchup zone-which is what I think Lupoi actually installed, but seam coverage and overall coverage in the middle of the field was absolutely horrible).

 

This seems to be primarily against elite offenses however-as this was the third year those teams found every weakness and went to town.  I’m talking about having a party on the way to the end zone kind of attack. But again, I’m no coach, I’m just a hack.

 

My whole problem with coaching today is scheme outweighs basic football.  You can’t stop a great team if you don’t force running the ball inside the box, and you totally can’t cover elite passing games without all three LBs taking away options between the hashes (both the NFL and College hashes).  It takes film study to explain that, but that’s my take.  It’s also why if I’m a head coach, half my practice is forcing my coordinators to take the best of football on offense and defense and forcing each coordinator to defend and attack those elite strategies.  Script the first 7-8 plays each game to attack the general principles of your opponent on each side, and then it’s simply attack what they’re actually doing that day (which means you have prepared for world class offense and defense in advance).

 

My take of course (an NFL coach mentioned something to that effect in the Nineties without really saying that.  I’ve thought about just that-preparing for the elite by being prepared for any elite football scheme known to the history of football ever since).

[Jon Joseph]

 

Mike, please keep on hacking! Kind of like my golf game, but your hacks score.

[Charles Fischer]

I still often think about how...this might be part of Lanning's learning curve as a young coach who doesn't just want to be successful....he wants a 'Natty. That so difficult with all the great programs out there, and you need some luck with injuries.

 

Or catch Chip Kelly on his Michigan day, and not his Oregon day.

 

Lanning is learning pretty well, as the number of losses for each of his three years was three losses, (10-3) then two losses, (12-2) to one loss. (13-1) That is a pretty good trendline!

 

We'll get there...

 

[HDuck]

From a solely W-L standpoint in earliest seasons, it is a better trend line than Dabo Swinney and Kirby Smart.

 

Though NIL and Portal have added complexity.

[Solar]

On 3/17/2025 at 2:38 PM, OregonDucks said:

I personally don’t believe it’s as much as not scouting ourselves as not scouting and being prepared for adjustments that the opponent made during the season.
 

And that applies to both sides of the ball. 

This. 

 

If you want have the best roster in football, that seems to mean you spend the bye weeks recruiting instead of reviewing scout tape on your next opponent and game planning for it.

 

Any casual fan knew OSU was a different team after the Michigan loss yet the entire elite Ducks Coaching roster didn't get the memo.

 

That's legendary head in the sand stuff. That is the lesson for Dan. Sometimes winning the big game is more important than selling a few more recruits.

 

Does anybody really think the benefit of the extra recruiting effort before OSU out weight the recruiting disadvantage of getting blown out?

 

You're young Dan. Please learn the balance.

[Mike West]

On 3/19/2025 at 5:10 PM, Charles Fischer said:

I still often think about how...this might be part of Lanning's learning curve as a young coach who doesn't just want to be successful....he wants a 'Natty. That so difficult with all the great programs out there, and you need some luck with injuries.

 

Or catch Chip Kelly on his Michigan day, and not his Oregon day.

 

Lanning is learning pretty well, as the number of losses for each of his three years was three losses, (10-3) then two losses, (12-2) to one loss. (13-1) That is a pretty good trendline!

 

We'll get there...

 

We have one of the best coaches in the business.  All three current coaches with a Natty had to take their lumps.  And Kirby only beat Nick once . Same with Dabo.

 

After pundits blasted Lanning for the Seattle loss, his words told me all I needed to know.  The way he coached against Ohio State in October confirmed it in my eyes.

 

I believe beating Wisconsin was unfortunate.  We needed the sting of playing mediocre and losing about as much as Ohio State did losing to Michigan.  

 

It also might have helped to lose to Penn State.  Losing truly forces a team to pay attention.  Going undefeated bolstered the thought OBD didn't need to change much.  

 

 

 

[The Kamikaze Kid]

I would take what Lanning has learned in just three years over what Mario's learned in seven any day. Of his six loses, four have come to teams that either played for a championship or won it. He's also 1-2 vs champions. Steps backward are always frustrating but with Lanning so far they have all come with several steps forward. I expect that trend to continue. 

[Jon Joseph]

 

 

It took Day six seasons and three consecutive losses to Michigan plus an expansion of the PO field, which may have saved his job, for TOSU to win a title under Day. THIS, is the football gods at their fickle (not Luke) best. 

 

A loss to Wisconsin would have produced the same conference champ game of 1-loss OBD vs. 1-loss PSU. A champ game win, with Georgia with 2-losses and Clemson with 3-losses would have OBD as the same No. 1 PO seed. 

 

The fickle finger of fate was kind to the Buckeyes but not kind to the Ducks. In any rationale postseason format, Oregon would have played the winner of Boise State at Indiana in the Rose Bowl. Instead, a PO format designed for five Power 5 champs with four champs competing, handed OBD the smelly end of the stick. Very rarely is a No. 8 seed in a PO field going to capture a title.

 

This is not a defense of the staff being unprepared to play a rematch against a revitalized team with the best roster in CFB in 2024-25, but a tip of the cap to Kismet, Destiny, Fate, what-have-you. 

 

Oh, and if Howard slides earlier, and Dan didn't conjure up a Houdini out of the rule book, we may have had a conference champ game rematch with Ohio State.  

 

"Bowls, Polls, and Tattered Souls." And PO Formats!

[30Duck]

On 3/20/2025 at 3:05 AM, Mike West said:

It also might have helped to lose to Penn State. 

No doubt about this one. The Wisconsin win was good for meeting the challenge, handling adversity. But if Penn State and Oregon had switched places via the B1G Championship in the CFP? Absolutely yes!

[Drake]

A month off during the holidays and the seeding of the playoff format played a significant role in OBD demise. 
 

The Ducks shook off the cobwebs of inactivity by the 2nd half, but by then, it was already over. 
 

Virtually every college football analyst agreed that Oregon’s path to a championship game was the most difficult. 
 

By losing the BIG Championship, Penn State arguably ends up with the easiest path to the Championship game. Anytime losing a game becomes a more favorable option seems wrong. 

 

 

[30Duck]

On 3/20/2025 at 9:58 AM, Drake said:

Anytime losing a game becomes a more favorable option seems wrong. 

As Herm Edwards said, "You play to WIN the game!"

[Jon Joseph]

On 3/20/2025 at 2:48 PM, 30Duck said:

As Herm Edwards said, "You play to WIN the game!"

 

"And don't be afraid to cheat in the process!"

[Mike West]

On 3/20/2025 at 11:48 AM, 30Duck said:

As Herm Edwards said, "You play to WIN the game!"

Normally I would agree with you, but history does not.  The Miami Dolphins are the only NFL team to go undefeated in the modern football area start to finish.  
 

The Dolphins played 17 games that year.  New England almost did, but had to play 18.

 

Michigan, Georgia and Clemson all went 15-0.  They all played in a two playoff game format.  Now college football is in NFL territory, with at least a three playoff game gauntlet.  
 

It will be astronomically difficult in this era of parity at the elite level to win all your games facing at least four or five elite teams the same year. A loss, in my opinion reminds you how much you must focus just to be in the field of dreams. 
 

Ohio State, easily the most talented team in a number of years, lost by a total of four points last year.  Those four points channeled more motivation-especially with the intent on embarrassing OBD-to prove their worth. 
 

Miami was so humiliated by their SuperBowl loss, they just went out and took it to every opponent the next year-and went undefeated. So…you know where I’m going with this.  Will Lanning finally go to the specialist and fix his woes on defense against elite offenses and go undefeated?

 

The past three years the title went to the team with an abundance of talent.  This year will be the first where I believe NIL takes that away completely.  
 

Texas is probably the most talented team on paper, but even they lost a good chunk of talent.  Penn State is an elite WR away from having an offense that would give everyone fits. 

 

So if DL and Lupoi can fix their problems with elite WRs…maybe just maybe.

[30Duck]

On 3/21/2025 at 5:23 PM, Mike West said:

Normally I would agree with you, but history does not.

History doesn't say, "Play to Win, except this game." No way does a team play to lose a game. If a loss happens, some benefits can come from it, that's the silver lining aspect. Say the Patriots had lost a game during the season, that doesn't mean they'd end up winning the Super Bowl. The L's to Washington two years ago sure didn't help Oregon, if Washington had lost one of them, would they have then beat Michigan and won the Natty?

[GatOrlando]

I think it was clear that Oregon was thinking the rematch would be similar to the original. Unfortunately like most sequels it just really never lived up to that. 

 

Ohio State came into that game angry. They felt like October was a huge miss on their part. Add to that the fact they had to hear how horrible they were after losing to Michigan and having to see Oregon win the B1G in their first year. I think they felt like the only way to get their reputation back was by beating the heck out of the new kids.

[Mike West]

On 3/21/2025 at 5:54 PM, 30Duck said:

History doesn't say, "Play to Win, except this game." No way does a team play to lose a game. If a loss happens, some benefits can come from it, that's the silver lining aspect. Say the Patriots had lost a game during the season, that doesn't mean they'd end up winning the Super Bowl. The L's to Washington two years ago sure didn't help Oregon, if Washington had lost one of them, would they have then beat Michigan and won the Natty?

I think you misunderstood my point.

 

You play to win.  Doesn't mean it's necessarily good to win all your games.

 

Beyond the pressure to continue winning, the odds of winning the next one diminishes .  The odds of winning 16 games in a row is 65,535 to 1.

 

The Cleveland Cavaliers won their 16th game in a row last week, and have lost four straight since.  No one of significance is injured on their roster.

 

Let's put that into Vegas numbers.  After 12 games, every time Cleveland is favored those next four games, your chance of winning by betting they'll lose skyrockets.  In fact, you could triple your bet after each loss and you're guaranteed to win money.

 

I don't gamble like that, but I sure pay attention to it.  One other thing, if you pay attention, not one sports book lays odds on any team going undefeated.  They know no one will risk their money, despite getting favorable odds 

 

Playing to lose doesn't really matter in the long run.  Your odds of losing pretty much takes care of it. 

[30Duck]

On 3/22/2025 at 7:34 PM, Mike West said:

I think you misunderstood my point.

 

You play to win.  Doesn't mean it's necessarily good to win all your games.

No, we're good. Winning is always better, more to learn from a loss than a win. Nobody should bet on a team going undefeated, that really makes winning the tournament going on now the hardest won Natty there is, the winner is the team that goes 6-0. 

[cartm25]

Didn’t love Lupoi’s explanation; not compelling IMO.

 

With 3.5 weeks to prepare, I have a hard time accepting Lupoi’s “reasons”.

 

Any former coaches/ XsOs guys on the forum that can help me understand  the connection between game-plan and adjustments. If the other team is smoking your defense, can you make adjustments to nullify it, or are adjustments restricted by the game-plan?

[Mike West]

On 3/22/2025 at 8:55 PM, cartm25 said:

Didn’t love Lupoi’s explanation; not compelling IMO.

 

With 3.5 weeks to prepare, I have a hard time accepting Lupoi’s “reasons”.

 

Any former coaches/ XsOs guys on the forum that can help me understand  the connection between game-plan and adjustments. If the other team is smoking your defense, can you make adjustments to nullify it, or are adjustments restricted by the game-plan?

It takes most coordinators a half to adjust to what they’re seeing.

[30Duck]

On 3/21/2025 at 7:56 PM, GatOrlando said:

I think it was clear that Oregon was thinking the rematch would be similar to the original. Unfortunately like most sequels it just really never lived up to that. 

This brings me back to my thought right after the game. I think osu2 seriously underestimated Oregon at Autzen, and still almost won. In the Rose Bowl, the kindest thing to be said is that OBD were complacent. It was hard enough for our undersized secondary to deal with Smith, when Chip put some new schemes into play, well, we saw what happened. 

On defense, that osu2 D was full of NFL'ers, and they were ticked off from the first game. 

[Charles Fischer]

13-1.....ONE!

 

That loss should have never happened....forget 13 wins...fire the coordinators for one half of one game of the entire season!

 

I did see the Ohio State only scored seven points in the second half--anyone notice that?  Perhaps some halftime adjustments?  As bad as it sounds...it is true that Oregon outscored Ohio State 14-7 in the second half...right?

 

But fire their butts for the one half....