|
Post by baseba1111 on Sept 18, 2017 10:26:43 GMT -8
This horse has been beaten to death, shipped to the dog food factory and been pooped out of a gaggle of angry chihuahuas.. Its time to end the 3M nonsense and move on already! It's just another message board discussion item... like MR, recruiting/lack of/misses/those who left, strength and conditioning, play calling, player development, contracts/extensions/firings, schemes/lack thereof, play calling, play calling, player development, player development... did I mention player development and play calling?
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 18, 2017 10:28:06 GMT -8
I hate to beat a dead horse here, so I'm going to do just that. Those of you who think 3M wouldn't make a difference, or there would be no difference between he and Luton, aren't getting that they are using a completely different offensive scheme, one which is killing our running game. If 3M was starting you would not be seeing the large volume of incomplete passes thrown down field. You would not be seeing defenses completely ignoring the read/option, you would not be seeing the slow developing run play. You would not be seeing a QB trying to complete 50% of his passes after getting chased from the pocket. It's not Luton, it's the system. That is the biggest difference between the end of last year under 3M and the start of this year under Luton. That and 3M is way better at moving the chains than Luton. In just 4 games OSU Luton has attempted 35 or more passes twice. 3M did that once his two years at OSU. But here is the biggest difference comparing last year to this year. OSU has averaged 30 rushing plays per game in 2017. During 3M's starts in 2016, OSU averaged 43 rushing plays per game, and 50 the last two of the season. OSU had a system that worked at the end of last year, with a QB that knew how to manage the offense and minimize mistakes, and emphasized the run game using power AND misdirection. They are doing none of that this year and everything that was a weapon last year has been extracted from the offense. OSU is at minimum 3-1 with 3M starting this year and a continuation of what OSU was doing at the end of last year. Honestly I believe that. Now, if they used this system with 3M at QB? OSU is 1-3. 3-1 with 3M and last year's system?....No way, not with the defense that we have. We'd still be 1-3, just maybe closer losses with more ball control and time of possession. A good chunk, not all, of our defensive issues the last three games have been due to not being able to sustain offensive drives. I think we had 9 straight 3 and outs against Minnesota, that puts a load on the defense. lvbeaver's point was SYSTEM. We had a system that was starting to click last year with 3M at the helm. Unfortunately it is one not suited for Luton's strengths. Also unfortunately the last offensive system is better for keeping our defense off the field. Score 2 more TDs, stop 2-3 TDs from happening and all of the sudden blowout losses ARE wins.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 18, 2017 10:28:27 GMT -8
But really the key to all of it is 3M kept the defense off the field. Something Luton has really struggled with.
What kept the defense off of the field was the running game. Good lord - the last two drives against Oregon were all running plays. Stop trying to make that success about 3M - its was about Nall, AP, and the offensive line. You are right. 3M's 11 carries for 81 yards in the Civil War do not count. It was only 7.36 yards per carry. totally insignificant. The point being made was the offense played to our strengths with 3M at QB. CGA tore all that up, brought in Luton and decided to be a vertically passing offense, despite building up a power running option offense... That is our point. By all measures, Luton COULD be a pretty good QB. in the right place. Here, with what we have at OSU, with what we were doing and where we were going and where we found success it was a decision that completely defied logic or reason.
|
|
|
Post by alwaysorange on Sept 18, 2017 10:43:08 GMT -8
We can all agree that pretty much every facet of the Beavs sucks this year. But come on some of you are using stats against a duck d that was the worst by any measure.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 18, 2017 10:57:49 GMT -8
We can all agree that pretty much every facet of the Beavs sucks this year. But come on some of you are using stats against a duck d that was the worst by any measure. Again - how good are the defenses we've faced this year???
|
|
|
Post by sctsbeaver on Sept 18, 2017 11:09:36 GMT -8
The fact reminds Anderpants ran a serviceable QB and a great kids out of our Program. I for one will never forget or forgive him for that. Some things one has to suffer the consequences of their decisions. When GA finally gets fired at least half of us will look back and say this was the beginning of the end
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Sept 18, 2017 11:36:37 GMT -8
But really the key to all of it is 3M kept the defense off the field. Something Luton has really struggled with.
What kept the defense off of the field was the running game. Good lord - the last two drives against Oregon were all running plays. Stop trying to make that success about 3M - its was about Nall, AP, and the offensive line. Exactly. Again, it's not luton, it is the system they are trying to run with Luton.
Nevermind, this was exactly my point in my initial post. You guys simply don't get what we are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Sept 18, 2017 11:43:54 GMT -8
What kept the defense off of the field was the running game. Good lord - the last two drives against Oregon were all running plays. Stop trying to make that success about 3M - its was about Nall, AP, and the offensive line. You are right. 3M's 11 carries for 81 yards in the Civil War do not count. It was only 7.36 yards per carry. totally insignificant. The point being made was the offense played to our strengths with 3M at QB. CGA tore all that up, brought in Luton and decided to be a vertically passing offense, despite building up a power running option offense... That is our point. By all measures, Luton COULD be a pretty good QB. in the right place. Here, with what we have at OSU, with what we were doing and where we were going and where we found success it was a decision that completely defied logic or reason. Seriously, Beaver fans make me want to punch myself in the head more than Andersen.
Let me do the math another way. 3M is like having another RB on that field in that system, almost like another player, you HAD to account for everything he did. Sure he wasn't going to beat you deep, but don't think that he couldn't, and actually did several times.
Defense don't have to account for anything with Luton except stack the line and pin their ears back. Because he's not a running threat, he's not a downfield passing threat, he's horrible at passing on the run, which he's going to do with our open door policy O-line.
Our defense sucked last year. but if given enough relief by the offense, it could make a stop here and there, enough to get the job done. Go look through our offense PBPs this year, lots of punts, usually after 3 or 4 plays which almost always include 1 or 2 incomplete passes, or an untimely turnover, and a TD or two mixed in per half.
Finally, the 3M discussion is absolutely an excuse. A major one why CGA should not be coaching Division I football. he blew it.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Sept 18, 2017 11:48:23 GMT -8
3-1 with 3M and last year's system?....No way, not with the defense that we have. We'd still be 1-3, just maybe closer losses with more ball control and time of possession. A good chunk, not all, of our defensive issues the last three games have been due to not being able to sustain offensive drives. I think we had 9 straight 3 and outs against Minnesota, that puts a load on the defense. lvbeaver's point was SYSTEM. We had a system that was starting to click last year with 3M at the helm. Unfortunately it is one not suited for Luton's strengths. Also unfortunately the last offensive system is better for keeping our defense off the field. Score 2 more TDs, stop 2-3 TDs from happening and all of the sudden blowout losses ARE wins. Thank you. It's apparent some can't see the difference between last year's offense and whatever the heck they are trying to run this year. But I'm certain someone will chime in that 3M can't throw the ball more than 15 yards so it doesn't matter.
|
|
|
Post by sctsbeaver on Sept 18, 2017 11:56:18 GMT -8
3-1 with 3M and last year's system?....No way, not with the defense that we have. We'd still be 1-3, just maybe closer losses with more ball control and time of possession. A good chunk, not all, of our defensive issues the last three games have been due to not being able to sustain offensive drives. I think we had 9 straight 3 and outs against Minnesota, that puts a load on the defense. lvbeaver's point was SYSTEM. We had a system that was starting to click last year with 3M at the helm. Unfortunately it is one not suited for Luton's strengths. Also unfortunately the last offensive system is better for keeping our defense off the field. Score 2 more TDs, stop 2-3 TDs from happening and all of the sudden blowout losses ARE wins. Then throw in the psychology factor of keeping the game closer and the kids don't give up as easily. not to mention morale would be positive instead of cancerous
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 18, 2017 12:24:18 GMT -8
A good chunk, not all, of our defensive issues the last three games have been due to not being able to sustain offensive drives. I think we had 9 straight 3 and outs against Minnesota, that puts a load on the defense. lvbeaver's point was SYSTEM. We had a system that was starting to click last year with 3M at the helm. Unfortunately it is one not suited for Luton's strengths. Also unfortunately the last offensive system is better for keeping our defense off the field. Score 2 more TDs, stop 2-3 TDs from happening and all of the sudden blowout losses ARE wins. Then throw in the psychology factor of keeping the game closer and the kids don't give up as easily. not to mention morale would be positive instead of cancerous The bigger issue is this: What possible motivation does any player on this team have to knuckle down and work their ass off. to pay their dues and wait their turn and give it their all if they are just going to be tossed aside like a used napkin at the first available opportunity? Not only was the logic behind it beyond reason, the optic are even worse. What message are you sending all these young kids fighting for playing time? is it that your hard work will be rewarded? No. it is no matter what you do, and how well you perform... your existence is entirely determined on whims of whatever moronic hot idea pops into the coaches head. Reality doesn't matter. outcomes and evidence DO.NOT.MATTER All that matters is some ambiguous amorphous plan that has no concrete connections to reality.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 18, 2017 12:43:24 GMT -8
Then throw in the psychology factor of keeping the game closer and the kids don't give up as easily. not to mention morale would be positive instead of cancerous The bigger issue is this: What possible motivation does any player on this team have to knuckle down and work their ass off. to pay their dues and wait their turn and give it their all if they are just going to be tossed aside like a used napkin at the first available opportunity? Not only was the logic behind it beyond reason, the optic are even worse. What message are you sending all these young kids fighting for playing time? is it that your hard work will be rewarded? No. it is no matter what you do, and how well you perform... your existence is entirely determined on whims of whatever moronic hot idea pops into the coaches head. Reality doesn't matter. outcomes and evidence DO.NOT.MATTER All that matters is some ambiguous amorphous plan that has no concrete connections to reality. An Ambiguous Amorphous Plan That Has No Concrete Connections To Reality. Ah yes, the AAPTHNCCTR, otherwise known as "the Process." I think that the Underpants Gnomes said it best: If CGA's Process were reduced to a business plan, it would be: 1. Hire an offensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 2. Hire a defensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 3. Run off defensive mastermind after one season, so that you can hire a buddy that you coached with four years ago.4. Identify talented players. 5. Drive off the talented players that were identified. 6. Preach strength to the weak remaining players. 7. Throw weak remaining players under the bus at every opportunity. 8. Repeat steps 4-7 for first three season, as needed. 9. Change the offensive identity at least once a year to keep the weak remaining players off-balance. 10. Throw weak remaining off-balance offensive players under the bus at every opportunity. 11. Revert to using 12-sided dice to make most offensive play-calls and determine what QB and RB play on any given down. 12. Ignore special teams entirely. 13. Run a hurry-up, pass-heavy offense, when playing into the wind, to maximize the number of snaps that the weak remaining players have to play with the wind in their face to toughen them up. 14. Accidentally develop a hard-headed strong running back. 15. Refuse to give the accidental hard-headed strong running back the ball in all but the most obvious situations. 16. Run 4th and 1 in shotgun to minimize chances of success. 17. Punt on fourth down in all situations outside of the opponents' 25 yard-line. 18. ? 19. Win several games.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 18, 2017 13:13:18 GMT -8
The bigger issue is this: What possible motivation does any player on this team have to knuckle down and work their ass off. to pay their dues and wait their turn and give it their all if they are just going to be tossed aside like a used napkin at the first available opportunity? Not only was the logic behind it beyond reason, the optic are even worse. What message are you sending all these young kids fighting for playing time? is it that your hard work will be rewarded? No. it is no matter what you do, and how well you perform... your existence is entirely determined on whims of whatever moronic hot idea pops into the coaches head. Reality doesn't matter. outcomes and evidence DO.NOT.MATTER All that matters is some ambiguous amorphous plan that has no concrete connections to reality. An Ambiguous Amorphous Plan That Has No Concrete Connections To Reality. Ah yes, the AAPTHNCCTR, otherwise known as "the Process." I think that the Underpants Gnomes said it best: If CGA's Process were reduced to a business plan, it would be: 1. Hire an offensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 2. Hire a defensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 3. Run off defensive mastermind after one season, so that you can hire a buddy that you coached with four years ago.4. Identify talented players. 5. Drive off the talented players that were identified. 6. Preach strength to the weak remaining players. 7. Throw weak remaining players under the bus at every opportunity. 8. Repeat steps 4-7 for first three season, as needed. 9. Change the offensive identity at least once a year to keep the weak remaining players off-balance. 10. Throw weak remaining off-balance offensive players under the bus at every opportunity. 11. Revert to using 12-sided dice to make most offensive play-calls and determine what QB and RB play on any given down. 12. Ignore special teams entirely. 13. Run a hurry-up, pass-heavy offense, when playing into the wind, to maximize the number of snaps that the weak remaining players have to play with the wind in their face to toughen them up. 14. Accidentally develop a hard-headed strong running back. 15. Refuse to give the accidental hard-headed strong running back the ball in all but the most obvious situations. 16. Run 4th and 1 in shotgun to minimize chances of success. 17. Punt on fourth down in all situations outside of the opponents' 25 yard-line. 18. ? 19. Win several games.That would make them the "Anderpants Gnomes"
|
|
|
Post by biggieorange on Sept 18, 2017 13:13:31 GMT -8
The bigger issue is this: What possible motivation does any player on this team have to knuckle down and work their ass off. to pay their dues and wait their turn and give it their all if they are just going to be tossed aside like a used napkin at the first available opportunity? Not only was the logic behind it beyond reason, the optic are even worse. What message are you sending all these young kids fighting for playing time? is it that your hard work will be rewarded? No. it is no matter what you do, and how well you perform... your existence is entirely determined on whims of whatever moronic hot idea pops into the coaches head. Reality doesn't matter. outcomes and evidence DO.NOT.MATTER All that matters is some ambiguous amorphous plan that has no concrete connections to reality. An Ambiguous Amorphous Plan That Has No Concrete Connections To Reality. Ah yes, the AAPTHNCCTR, otherwise known as "the Process." I think that the Underpants Gnomes said it best: If CGA's Process were reduced to a business plan, it would be: 1. Hire an offensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 2. Hire a defensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 3. Run off defensive mastermind after one season, so that you can hire a buddy that you coached with four years ago.4. Identify talented players. 5. Drive off the talented players that were identified. 6. Preach strength to the weak remaining players. 7. Throw weak remaining players under the bus at every opportunity. 8. Repeat steps 4-7 for first three season, as needed. 9. Change the offensive identity at least once a year to keep the weak remaining players off-balance. 10. Throw weak remaining off-balance offensive players under the bus at every opportunity. 11. Revert to using 12-sided dice to make most offensive play-calls and determine what QB and RB play on any given down. 12. Ignore special teams entirely. 13. Run a hurry-up, pass-heavy offense, when playing into the wind, to maximize the number of snaps that the weak remaining players have to play with the wind in their face to toughen them up. 14. Accidentally develop a hard-headed strong running back. 15. Refuse to give the accidental hard-headed strong running back the ball in all but the most obvious situations. 16. Run 4th and 1 in shotgun to minimize chances of success. 17. Punt on fourth down in all situations outside of the opponents' 25 yard-line. 18. ? 19. Win several games.I gotta disagree with no 3, Sitake left for a HC job. I don't know how you put that on Gary.
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Sept 18, 2017 13:41:59 GMT -8
The bigger issue is this: What possible motivation does any player on this team have to knuckle down and work their ass off. to pay their dues and wait their turn and give it their all if they are just going to be tossed aside like a used napkin at the first available opportunity? Not only was the logic behind it beyond reason, the optic are even worse. What message are you sending all these young kids fighting for playing time? is it that your hard work will be rewarded? No. it is no matter what you do, and how well you perform... your existence is entirely determined on whims of whatever moronic hot idea pops into the coaches head. Reality doesn't matter. outcomes and evidence DO.NOT.MATTER All that matters is some ambiguous amorphous plan that has no concrete connections to reality. An Ambiguous Amorphous Plan That Has No Concrete Connections To Reality. Ah yes, the AAPTHNCCTR, otherwise known as "the Process." I think that the Underpants Gnomes said it best: If CGA's Process were reduced to a business plan, it would be: 1. Hire an offensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 2. Hire a defensive mastermind and then instruct him to implement an offense that he has never ran before. 3. Run off defensive mastermind after one season, so that you can hire a buddy that you coached with four years ago.4. Identify talented players. 5. Drive off the talented players that were identified. 6. Preach strength to the weak remaining players. 7. Throw weak remaining players under the bus at every opportunity. 8. Repeat steps 4-7 for first three season, as needed. 9. Change the offensive identity at least once a year to keep the weak remaining players off-balance. 10. Throw weak remaining off-balance offensive players under the bus at every opportunity. 11. Revert to using 12-sided dice to make most offensive play-calls and determine what QB and RB play on any given down. 12. Ignore special teams entirely. 13. Run a hurry-up, pass-heavy offense, when playing into the wind, to maximize the number of snaps that the weak remaining players have to play with the wind in their face to toughen them up. 14. Accidentally develop a hard-headed strong running back. 15. Refuse to give the accidental hard-headed strong running back the ball in all but the most obvious situations. 16. Run 4th and 1 in shotgun to minimize chances of success. 17. Punt on fourth down in all situations outside of the opponents' 25 yard-line. 18. ? 19. Win several games.After laughing at your imagery / post, I can't tell if... 1) You are creative genius/mastermind. 2) You have too much time on your hands. 3) Both.
|
|