|
Post by jimbeav on Sept 2, 2017 19:46:01 GMT -8
I don't discount the horrible defensive performances we've seen so far, but I take exception to the idea mentioned several times now that Jake Luton isn't a significant part of this team's issues.
Having Luton at quarterback in this offensive "system" is a serious liability for our running game. I noticed it against CSU, and commented at how ineffective the read option plays are when the defense is choosing between stopping Nall, and stopping a statue. Our loaded stockpile of running backs are wasting away in this offensive system as long as Luton is behind center. Regardless of what you think of the passing capabilities of either player, both Garretson and McMaryion made our running game hum last year. You simply can't argue with the rushing totals and average ypc from last year.
To Andersen's credit, it looks like he came to this same conclusion, which is why we are seeing Garretson being worked into the offense. Quite honestly, at this point (and I can't believe I'm going to say this), if I can't have 3M then I would rather see Garretson starting, and base our offensive gameplan around an 80% ground attack, with just 10-15 throws per game. I think we have the horses to have some success with that. As it is, all we get with Luton is an average passing attack and an average rushing attack. And that will not be enough to win many games with this defense. At least if you stress the running game, it can keep our embarrassing defense on the sideline where they can't do any damage...
The only other alternative is scrap whatever system we're running and move to a Power-I where Luton isn't a liability to our ground game. But that decision should have been made months ago, when Luton was anointed as the starter before he ever stepped on campus.
And speaking of that...don't discount the idea that Luton has an effect on our defense too. We have two independent reports of some player discontent with Andersen, and as strongly as some fans feel about how Marcus got the shaft, I would actually be surprised if some players didn't feel the same way. Andersen's off-season shenanigans single handedly took the momentum that was built last year, and shot it in the head and buried it. I can easily picture some players getting gawddamn tired of starting over AGAIN. As I watched the performances in these first two games, I found myself wondering if Andersen has already lost this team. It's conceivable to me that he lost the team before the first snap of the season.
What a dumpster fire this program and this coaching staff is right now...
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Sept 2, 2017 20:48:49 GMT -8
Huh. Way back when we had this crazy offense where the qb could hand the ball off to the rb WITHOUT running the revolutionary read option! It was so weird. Then that same qb could stand in the pocket and throw the ball to the receivers. Like I said, it was crazy.
|
|
|
Post by ee1990 on Sept 2, 2017 21:24:43 GMT -8
Huh. Way back when we had this crazy offense where the qb could hand the ball off to the rb WITHOUT running the revolutionary read option! It was so weird. Then that same qb could stand in the pocket and throw the ball to the receivers. Like I said, it was crazy. It's not even a read option, it's fake and everybody knows it. Yet we blame Luton for his effect on the running game. In reality it's the coaching staff who are responsible for putting players in position to succeed and making adjustments to fit the offense to the roster.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 2, 2017 22:04:12 GMT -8
Huh. Way back when we had this crazy offense where the qb could hand the ball off to the rb WITHOUT running the revolutionary read option! It was so weird. Then that same qb could stand in the pocket and throw the ball to the receivers. Like I said, it was crazy. It's not even a read option, it's fake and everybody knows it. Yet we blame Luton for his effect on the running game. In reality it's the coaching staff who are responsible for putting players in position to succeed and making adjustments to fit the offense to the roster. I'm still confused as to what's going on. We did not run most of the offense that we are running this year. One would assume either (1) the offense was selected and the personnel were chosen to fit the new offense or (2) the personnel were chosen and the offense was installed around the personnel. However, it appears that both (1) and (2) are false. It is like personnel are chosen without regard to scheme and scheme is chosen without regard to personnel. We're going to choose the best players, regardless of whether they can run the scheme! If this were happening to Oregon, I would think that it is one of the funniest things ever. It is bush league. It is embarrassing. Even more depressing is that the offense is less of a train wreck than the defense. And the most depressing aspect is that Oregon State owes CGA $11.6 million between now and 2021.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Sept 2, 2017 22:31:36 GMT -8
It's not even a read option, it's fake and everybody knows it. Yet we blame Luton for his effect on the running game. In reality it's the coaching staff who are responsible for putting players in position to succeed and making adjustments to fit the offense to the roster. I'm still confused as to what's going on. We did not run most of the offense that we are running this year. One would assume either (1) the offense was selected and the personnel were chosen to fit the new offense or (2) the personnel were chosen and the offense was installed around the personnel. However, it appears that both (1) and (2) are false. It is like personnel are chosen without regard to scheme and scheme is chosen without regard to personnel. We're going to choose the best players, regardless of whether they can run the scheme! If this were happening to Oregon, I would think that it is one of the funniest things ever. It is bush league. It is embarrassing. Even more depressing is that the offense is less of a train wreck than the defense. And the most depressing aspect is that Oregon State owes CGA $11.6 million between now and 2021. Is there a "Morals Clause" we can "work on"? 😁
|
|
|
Post by zebraworks on Sept 2, 2017 23:14:57 GMT -8
11.6 million? Benny's house Group buy of lottery tickets??
|
|
|
Post by sagebrush on Sept 3, 2017 0:36:31 GMT -8
The slower developing read option allows the opposition DL and LB more time to penetrate the backfield and blow the play up. Run quick hitters that don't allow time for this penetration. Notice I didn't say anything about driving the DL backwards or opening holes. That does not appear to be a viable option this year. RB speed or byob (be your own blocker) is what will be this year.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Sept 3, 2017 4:00:49 GMT -8
It's not even a read option, it's fake and everybody knows it. Yet we blame Luton for his effect on the running game. In reality it's the coaching staff who are responsible for putting players in position to succeed and making adjustments to fit the offense to the roster. I'm still confused as to what's going on. We did not run most of the offense that we are running this year. One would assume either (1) the offense was selected and the personnel were chosen to fit the new offense or (2) the personnel were chosen and the offense was installed around the personnel. However, it appears that both (1) and (2) are false. It is like personnel are chosen without regard to scheme and scheme is chosen without regard to personnel. We're going to choose the best players, regardless of whether they can run the scheme! If this were happening to Oregon, I would think that it is one of the funniest things ever. It is bush league. It is embarrassing. Even more depressing is that the offense is less of a train wreck than the defense. And the most depressing aspect is that Oregon State owes CGA $11.6 million between now and 2021. I'm going to hold my breath and simply pray this stench gets better, as it did last year, hopefully we won't have to wait until game 11 to see the fruits of CGAs ever evolving offense.
Credit to Luton for directing the team on a game winning drive. That was a concern of mine whether he could keep cool and not force throws in that situation. Credit to Garretson too. At least you can add the misdirection element for a package or two this year trying to play catch-up.
He's my coach, I'll root for the Beavs to win. I'm going to bite my tongue until after the Minnesota game. If OSU wins that then maybe they can play a bit of big-boy football. Unfortunately unless the DC figures out a way to sneak and 12th and 13th player on the field, we will give up 60 ppg to the high-flying Pac 12 offenses.
|
|
|
Post by alwaysorange on Sept 3, 2017 6:31:34 GMT -8
A couple of points:
1, No reason to have a delayed read option with Luton - he is never going to run and it simply slows down Nall or whoever is the running back. Fault: Coaches Not Luton.
2. the DLine is getting pushed around - need four guys upfront especially against teams like Minnesota Fault: Coaches
3. Matador defense needs to stop - somebody on D needs to put their helmet on the runner and put him down. Fault" Entirely on the players.
|
|
|
Post by sctsbeaver on Sept 3, 2017 6:37:53 GMT -8
I don't discount the horrible defensive performances we've seen so far, but I take exception to the idea mentioned several times now that Jake Luton isn't a significant part of this team's issues.
Having Luton at quarterback in this offensive "system" is a serious liability for our running game. I noticed it against CSU, and commented at how ineffective the read option plays are when the defense is choosing between stopping Nall, and stopping a statue. Our loaded stockpile of running backs are wasting away in this offensive system as long as Luton is behind center. Regardless of what you think of the passing capabilities of either player, both Garretson and McMaryion made our running game hum last year. You simply can't argue with the rushing totals and average ypc from last year.
To Andersen's credit, it looks like he came to this same conclusion, which is why we are seeing Garretson being worked into the offense. Quite honestly, at this point (and I can't believe I'm going to say this), if I can't have 3M then I would rather see Garretson starting, and base our offensive gameplan around an 80% ground attack, with just 10-15 throws per game. I think we have the horses to have some success with that. As it is, all we get with Luton is an average passing attack and an average rushing attack. And that will not be enough to win many games with this defense. At least if you stress the running game, it can keep our embarrassing defense on the sideline where they can't do any damage...
The only other alternative is scrap whatever system we're running and move to a Power-I where Luton isn't a liability to our ground game. But that decision should have been made months ago, when Luton was anointed as the starter before he ever stepped on campus.
And speaking of that...don't discount the idea that Luton has an effect on our defense too. We have two independent reports of some player discontent with Andersen, and as strongly as some fans feel about how Marcus got the shaft, I would actually be surprised if some players didn't feel the same way. Andersen's off-season shenanigans single handedly took the momentum that was built last year, and shot it in the head and buried it. I can easily picture some players getting gawddamn tired of starting over AGAIN. As I watched the performances in these first two games, I found myself wondering if Andersen has already lost this team. It's conceivable to me that he lost the team before the first snap of the season.
What a dumpster fire this program and this coaching staff is right now...
You nailed it Jim, these young men aren't committed. You can't play without emotion. That's coaching...there might be several reasons but the 3M cluster was at least 1 major one
|
|
|
Post by beavers91 on Sept 3, 2017 8:27:32 GMT -8
How can we blame Luton, when the OL is not good right now? "Players make Plays, Players win Games", not sure if that is a good mantra for this team. First....they have to be put in a position to win and that is not what our coaching staff is doing.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Sept 3, 2017 8:57:38 GMT -8
How can we blame Luton, when the OL is not good right now? "Players make Plays, Players win Games", not sure if that is a good mantra for this team. First....they have to be put in a position to win and that is not what our coaching staff is doing. Im on record saying 3M is the better overall QB for the system I thought we were running. Luton had improved. Baby steps, but better. The staff is the issue. Their schemes are the issue. Their teaching of their schemes are the issue. The staff's public and media persona is the issue. Players are NOT the issue. I'll paraphrase our "big boy" leader... if you're not in the biz to put players in the position to win championships you're in the wrong biz! We are futher from that goal since the day GA was hired. Enough said
|
|
|
Post by jimbeav on Sept 3, 2017 9:18:11 GMT -8
I should clarify: When I say that Luton at QB is an issue, I am talking about the coaches' decision to start and play him in this system. I'm not blaming the guy himself, he is playing hard and has some tools to build on. They're just not tools that fit this system. Like others I am not placing blame on any player, it's entirely the way these players are being utilized by our inept coaches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2017 11:35:36 GMT -8
I am no longer sure I know what the identity of our offense is.
|
|
|
Post by NativeBeav on Sept 3, 2017 12:02:48 GMT -8
It's not even a read option, it's fake and everybody knows it. Yet we blame Luton for his effect on the running game. In reality it's the coaching staff who are responsible for putting players in position to succeed and making adjustments to fit the offense to the roster. I'm still confused as to what's going on. We did not run most of the offense that we are running this year. One would assume either (1) the offense was selected and the personnel were chosen to fit the new offense or (2) the personnel were chosen and the offense was installed around the personnel. However, it appears that both (1) and (2) are false. It is like personnel are chosen without regard to scheme and scheme is chosen without regard to personnel. We're going to choose the best players, regardless of whether they can run the scheme! If this were happening to Oregon, I would think that it is one of the funniest things ever. It is bush league. It is embarrassing. Even more depressing is that the offense is less of a train wreck than the defense. And the most depressing aspect is that Oregon State owes CGA $11.6 million between now and 2021.Excuse my ignorance - why after our recent contract with our former coach not to be named, did we enter into another contract that is just as one sided? Why not offer a contract that has a clause in it, kinda like some of the NFL contracts, that are for good money, but stipulates in the fine print if you are injured, if your production drops off precipitously, we are not required to pay you for the entire contract. Many of these contracts look really huge in total dollars, until you look at the fine print, and much of it is not guaranteed. Why not do the same with a coaches' contract - contract is for X per year, for say five years, but it is tied to performance, including a minimum number of wins per season. What, is this not legal? Are we so ashamed of Corvallis, the program, the university that we are convinced no one of quality will take a contract like that? Why in the hell should we have to pay over 11 million dollars to a coach, to replace him, who is thus far underperforming, if the trend holds true for the remainder of the season (God forbid). Am I missing something here?
|
|