Oregon State’s offensive no-show against Washington was a collective effort, says Jonathan Smith

DerekJohnson

https://oregonlive.com/beavers/2019/11/oregon-states-offensive-no-show-against-washington-was-a-collective-effort-says-coach-jonathan-smith.html

BennyBeaver

DerekJohnson said:

https://oregonlive.com/beavers/2019/11/oregon-states-offensive-no-show-against-washington-was-a-collective-effort-says-coach-jonathan-smith.html

Thanks Taft!

@CFetters_Nacho_Lover

greenblood

Bullshit...you can lose at the line of scrimmage most times and still find a way to work around it. However, you can’t get plungered play after play at the line of scrimmage. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen an Oline get manhandled like that. UW probably could have had 15 sacks had UW not dominated time of possession.

People wonder why Luton didn’t try and go deep. No five reasons here, just one needed.

It’s always difficult to throw a deep pattern when you only have 2 seconds to throw the ball.

rodmansrage

our? offensive no-show against Washington was a collective effort, says chip peterman

also would have worked as a story.

RoadDawg55

greenblood said:

Bullshit...you can lose at the line of scrimmage most times and still find a way to work around it. However, you can’t get plungered play after play at the line of scrimmage. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen an Oline get manhandled like that. UW probably could have had 15 sacks had UW not dominated time of possession.

People wonder why Luton didn’t try and go deep. No five reasons here, just one needed.

It’s always difficult to throw a deep pattern when you only have 2 seconds to throw the ball.

Throwing 28 passes for 88 yards is still horrible. They went in with a dink and dunk plan which plays into UW’s style of defense.

greenblood

RoadDawg55 said:

greenblood said:

Bullshit...you can lose at the line of scrimmage most times and still find a way to work around it. However, you can’t get plungered play after play at the line of scrimmage. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen an Oline get manhandled like that. UW probably could have had 15 sacks had UW not dominated time of possession.

People wonder why Luton didn’t try and go deep. No five reasons here, just one needed.

It’s always difficult to throw a deep pattern when you only have 2 seconds to throw the ball.

Throwing 28 passes for 88 yards is still horrible. They went in with a dink and dunk plan which plays into UW’s style of defense.

They had to do that. Every time they tried to throw deep, Luton got sacked.

BennyBeaver

greenblood said:

RoadDawg55 said:

greenblood said:

Bullshit...you can lose at the line of scrimmage most times and still find a way to work around it. However, you can’t get plungered play after play at the line of scrimmage. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen an Oline get manhandled like that. UW probably could have had 15 sacks had UW not dominated time of possession.

People wonder why Luton didn’t try and go deep. No five reasons here, just one needed.

It’s always difficult to throw a deep pattern when you only have 2 seconds to throw the ball.

Throwing 28 passes for 88 yards is still horrible. They went in with a dink and dunk plan which plays into UW’s style of defense.

They had to do that. Every time they tried to throw deep, Luton got sacked.

Someone was paying attention. Roaddoog has no clue as usual.