Glad Oregon lost, but mostly just pissed

Auburndawg

Stanford is a very good football team. But the past two years we have played them dead even. Stanford is not dramatically better than UW. Why can they handle Oregon and we can't?

I just re-watched last night's game. Three things were apparent:

1. Stanford was lucky. Oregon underthrew a wide open TD. They had two fumbles. Failed on 4th and goal. A very close PI call negated an Oregon pick and led to a Stanford TD. That game could have easily been tied at halftime, and that would’ve changed everything.

2. Stanford blitzed far more than we did. Especially in the second half. Mariotta is completely different when he is under pressure. Stanford chose to be aggressive on defense. We chose to be passive.

3. Stanford ran the ball and the clock. Stanford only threw the ball 13 times. They weren’t “balanced,” THEY RAN THE BALL. By doing so they limited Oregon to only 8 offensive possessions. We ran the hurry up. We threw 32 passes. We moved the ball and scored some points, but Oregon got 12 possessions against us – four more chances to score. We tried to beat them at their game, playing their tempo.

Bottom line: Stanford, was lucky, and had the right game plan. Really truly commit to the run. Slow the game down. Run clock. And blitz.

Coaching.

I almost find myself rooting for a catastrophe tomorrow night.

fivehundredmileDAWG

You had to watch the game again to figure that out?

MikeDamone

Yes. Coaching. Recruiting. Same as it ever was.

dhdawg

Auburndawg said:

Stanford is a very good football team. But the past two years we have played them dead even. Stanford is not dramatically better than UW. Why can they handle Oregon and we can't?

I just re-watched last night's game. Three things were apparent:

1. Stanford was lucky. Oregon underthrew a wide open TD. They had two fumbles. Failed on 4th and goal. A very close PI call negated an Oregon pick and led to a Stanford TD. That game could have easily been tied at halftime, and that would’ve changed everything.

2. Stanford blitzed far more than we did. Especially in the second half. Mariotta is completely different when he is under pressure. Stanford chose to be aggressive on defense. We chose to be passive.

3. Stanford ran the ball and the clock. Stanford only threw the ball 13 times. They weren’t “balanced,” THEY RAN THE BALL. By doing so they limited Oregon to only 8 offensive possessions. We ran the hurry up. We threw 32 passes. We moved the ball and scored some points, but Oregon got 12 possessions against us – four more chances to score. We tried to beat them at their game, playing their tempo.

Bottom line: Stanford, was lucky, and had the right game plan. Really truly commit to the run. Slow the game down. Run clock. And blitz.

Coaching.

I almost find myself rooting for a catastrophe tomorrow night.

In other news, water is wet

TierbsHsotBoobs

I like to be AuburndoogFuckingStupid and call Stanford lucky when they kicked Oregon's ass all over the field.

I do that.

loadsock

Obviously what you say is obvious. If you post this on doogman, it would be an interesting contrast of responses.

LawDawg1

Not sure how their lines can manhandle Oregon yet we can play with them. Our lines are horrible.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Stanford has a decent location, shit tradition, and some money. How are they so good at football?

CuntWaffle

Lol that was the biggest 6 point win plunger rape ever. Oregon's asshole is till bleeding from last night.

The conference just sucks.

loadsock

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Stanford has a decent location, shit tradition, and some money. How are they so good at football?

Unlike 7, Stanford realizes that a decent offense and a stellar defense involves recruiting the fuck out of the big ugliest up front. 7 still thinks we can run by them with only finesse and a little speed.

MikeDamone

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

I like to be AuburndoogFuckingStupid and call Stanford lucky when they kicked Oregon's ass all over the field.

I do that.

Exactly. As if Stanford did nothing to cause the fumbles and stop Oregon on 4th down.
You could argue Oregon was lucky to get the 20 points by the same logic.

TommySQC

Auburndawg said:

Stanford is a very good football team. But the past two years we have played them dead even. Stanford is not dramatically better than UW. Why can they handle Oregon and we can't?

I just re-watched last night's game. Three things were apparent:

1. Stanford was lucky. Oregon underthrew a wide open TD. They had two fumbles. Failed on 4th and goal. A very close PI call negated an Oregon pick and led to a Stanford TD. That game could have easily been tied at halftime, and that would’ve changed everything.

2. Stanford blitzed far more than we did. Especially in the second half. Mariotta is completely different when he is under pressure. Stanford chose to be aggressive on defense. We chose to be passive.

3. Stanford ran the ball and the clock. Stanford only threw the ball 13 times. They weren’t “balanced,” THEY RAN THE BALL. By doing so they limited Oregon to only 8 offensive possessions. We ran the hurry up. We threw 32 passes. We moved the ball and scored some points, but Oregon got 12 possessions against us – four more chances to score. We tried to beat them at their game, playing their tempo.

Bottom line: Stanford, was lucky, and had the right game plan. Really truly commit to the run. Slow the game down. Run clock. And blitz.

Coaching.

I almost find myself rooting for a catastrophe tomorrow night.

Get. A. Life.

RaceBannon

Shaw doesn't want Sark to get fired

HTH

HeretoBeatmyChest

RaceBannon said:

Shaw Every coach in the Pac-12 doesn't want Sark to get fired

HTH

Tequilla

I don't read 3 reasons ... I only read 5 reasons

[Deleted User]

If there was luck it was how Oregon was back in the game.

Stanford dominated that game on both sides of the ball.

dnc

Stanford outgained Oregon by 65 yards. Had 9 more first downs than Oregon. Had 71 less penalty yards against them. Did not turn the ball over. Went 14-21 on third downs and 1-1 on fourth down, while holding Oregon to 3-10 on third down and 3-4 on fourth down. Four times inside the red zone Stanford had to settle for field goals. If anything, this game could have been 45-21 Stanford very easily.

It's not like Oregon has been flawless all year. They rack up penalties. Dropped Pass made multiple appearances against UW. Mistakes are part of Oregon's MO. Most teams just don't have the talent and coaching acumen to make them pay. Stanford did.

If there was any luck involved it was that Mariota's knee was banged up coming in. As far as what happened on the field, luck favors the prepared.

no_uh

If this is for real - then we were incredibly lucky to play them close. Stanford is dramatically better than UW.

TierbsHsotBoobs

no_uh said:

If this is for real - then we were incredibly lucky to play them close. Stanford is dramatically better than UW.

Last night's game spoke volumes about Oregon. We already knew Stanford was a dwarf, we just didn't know Oregon was too.

YouKnowIt

Auburndawg said:

2. Stanford blitzed far more than we did. Especially in the second half. Mariotta is completely different when he is under pressure. Stanford chose to be aggressive on defense. We chose to be passive.
.

Its one thing to call a blitz, its another thing to have it executed...

Mosster47

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

no_uh said:

If this is for real - then we were incredibly lucky to play them close. Stanford is dramatically better than UW.

Last night's game spoke volumes about Oregon. We already knew Stanford was a dwarf, we just didn't know Oregon was too.

If you've watched Oregon closely and know football you can see the erosion from Chip to Slingblade.

Special Teams are more sloppy by the week. How many fucking times are you going to let Josh Huff catch it at the 1 and run it to the 19 before you realize he's not that kind of a weapon? You're not confident enough to send out your kicker for an 18 yard try, yet he still has a scholarship.

Chip's point to run the football regardless of how little success it has. It's made to wear the other team down. Passing the ball a ton wears out no one.

Azzinaro leaving was also bad for the defensive. You can tell they have taken a step backwards. Oregon is going to fall back to the Bellotti years. Compete for the conference every third year with a ton of El Paso and San Diego mixed in.

I don't care what anyone says, professional coaches have one driving factor. Chip Kelly had a price and Oregon could have offered it. It's hard to think the program you are a fan of will spend money on window shine and not the best personnel. Why even strive for another Chip Kelly of you won't price match? People with checkbooks go after the top coaches, that's what serious football is about.