Controlling the Husky Offense
As Oregon prepares to take on the Huskies this weekend in Seattle, one of the biggest questions is how the Ducks will fare against Jake Locker, the most dangerous QB in the Pac-10.
I'm still unprepared to call him the best, simply because while his stats are improved, Locker's passer rating is merely average in the Pac-10 and nationally. In fact, despite two woeful starts by Jeremiah Masoli, he is essentially tied with Locker in pass rating at 6th in the conference. While there are arguments to be made for throwing for a lot of yards, I put more value on the efficient distribution of the football.
That said, Jake Locker's abilities cannot be denied. His progression this season has been the reason for the Husky resurgence. I had doubted Locker before the season, and I must say, he proved me wrong from the get-go. His accuracy is much improved, most importantly in the intermediate passing game, and especially over the middle. He still lacks top-level consistency down the field (then again, what QB has such consistency) and on outside routes, but he can still hit those passes regularly.
Jake Locker is a dangerous player. However, his effectiveness can be limited. Here is how I expect Oregon to do that.
First, the Ducks will need to stop Chris Polk. This may sound like an obvious statement, but stopping Polk takes on added importance as Polk is the only other consistent offensive threat on the Huskies. Polk has had two poor games in a row (outside of a very good TD run against ASU), and the pressure was on Locker.
I think the Duck defense is set up very well to stop Polk, who like most backs not named Jacquizz or LaMichael, has serious problems with quick backfield penetration. If Oregon can break through the line early, Polk will have a tough time getting his game going. However, Polk has been very good when he's got a bit of space and a head of steam, and has proven very difficult to bring down.
Next, the Ducks must collapse the pocket. Again, this seems obvious, but in watching Locker play, he has done an excellent job on his initial reads or when he's had a bit of time. Even if Locker faced sporadic pressure, he has the speed to avoid a single rusher (though we'll see how he deals with Tukuafu or Rowe). Yet, when faced with a collapsing pocket with no hope of escape, Locker has showed very poor decision making. His passes have been inaccurate, and are often based on poor decisions anyway.
To achieve both of these goals, I expect the Oregon front 7 to mix up their schemes and coverage throughout the game. One of the greatest advantage that the versatile Oregon defense has is that it can vary its attack from play to play with ease. They can drop 7 or 8 into coverage or blitz 7 with the same personal and formation.
I don't doubt that Locker will make plays, and a lot of them. He will complete a good number of passes. He will get running yards on a number of designed runs and some scrambles. But, this Duck defense has the ability to force Locker into poor decisions.
One last key for the Oregon defense is field position. The Husky offense is dangerous, but also inconsistent. In some ways, they remind me of Cal. If the Ducks can control field position, and force them to drive the length of the field for their scores, the Huskies will have a hard time putting many points on the board.
It's another week, and another test for the Oregon defense. Though based on the dominance we've seen over the past 4 games, I expect them to keep the Huskies frustrated all day long.
0 recs |
57 comments
|
Comments
I think bringing blitzers with speed (Pleasant, Javes) is gonna be more important than just numbers because of Locker’s escapability. And I see Kenny Rowe causing all kinds of problems. Again. As usual.
It's spelled "T-A-K-O-T-U-E-S-D-A-Y-S-!-!-!."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by Takimoto on Oct 21, 2009 3:08 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that the speed will definitely be important (though Locker does have the speed to keep away from most of our defense if on a straight run). But if we get in there, we need to either cut off his escape routes, or get him down the first time. I think both are incredibly possible.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 21, 2009 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Making sure the first tackle gets made is more important than ever Saturday.
It's spelled "T-A-K-O-T-U-E-S-D-A-Y-S-!-!-!."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by Takimoto on Oct 21, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where’s MattDaddy? We know that speed kills Freshman quarterbacks, but what about Juniors?
HUCK THE fUSKIES.
by MarineCorpsDuck on Oct 21, 2009 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Best way to control the Husky offense is not give them the ball. I think turnovers play a huge factor in this game. USC shot themselves in the foot several times, so did ASU. The Husky offense can move the ball. We need to make sure they don’t get more opportunities than they should
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
by dvieira on Oct 21, 2009 3:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
For sure. Also, I only mentioned it in passing, because it’s true for every team, but field position will be key. UW is just too inconsistent to have a lot of 80 yard drives.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 21, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. Turnovers, especially on the road, are HUGE momentum changers, as well as being devastating in the field position battle. NO FUMBLES.
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
by Gorbachav5 on Oct 21, 2009 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's how I would play it with our D:
First, the Ducks will need to stop Chris Polk.
The front 7 of Oregon has done a good job shutting down most rushers they have faced this year. The only time Oregon has looked suspect was when UCLA was marching it down the field with power rushing formations behind a decent sized O-line. I don’t think UW has the O-line that UCLA does to create those holes and pick up the bigger chunks of yardage like UCLA did.
Next, the Ducks must collapse the pocket.
This is the key to stopping UW and getting them off the field. Collapsing the pocket means our DB’s don’t have to play D too long or get lost on their man. ASU was able to do this to UW with only their front 4 rushing most of the game. I expect a lot of stunts by the D lineman and some serious MLB blitzes to try and get Jake outside the pocket. It will cut down the field and with our speed at OLB, and safety I don’t see Locker making too many long runs.
One last key for the Oregon defense is field position.
Special teams are more important then ever this game. UW has given up some nice field position this year due to special team miscommunications. If Oregon can consistantly start with good field position even if they don’t score, Rice should be able to pin them deep and let our D do the work from there.
This will be a good test for the Oregon D. A good QB like Locker will test them with his feet and with his arm. I just think the speed, schemes and talent will be what determines how this D does.
by Matt Daddy on Oct 21, 2009 3:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If we could stop Best...
Stopping Polk is not a massive undertaking.
Collapsing the pocket has not been too difficult either.
Field Position? Have we not proved field position meaningless? GOAL LINE STAND BABAY!
I completely agree with you Matty ol’ chap
A much needed bye week; and two whole weeks to focus the inner hatred of UW even moreso than normal.
Locker...Welcome to my profile, You will be formally introduced by Juju at a later date, 10/23 to be more specific!
by CaDuck on Oct 21, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 for the Special Teams note.
Look for some surprises this weekend on ST’s. I would say more but the I’d have to use the word ‘practice’ and I’m tired of people flicking shit at me every time I write it, and…more important I want the Fuskies to really get Hucked.
by DONALDUCK on Oct 21, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have to keep containment, though. I’ve already spent one night this year at Husky Stadium going “We collapsed the pocket…but there Locker goes up the field.” I’d rather not spend another. And LSU does have speed on D, but was not always using that speed wisely. As long as we do, we should be fine.
Time to go watch a Husky loss live for the second time this season.
I support Sonja Newcombe for Heisman.
by AllSaintsDay on Oct 21, 2009 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Frust the Huskrates?
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
by Gorbachav5 on Oct 21, 2009 5:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No, Huskrate the Frusties
There we go.
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
by Gorbachav5 on Oct 21, 2009 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
shouldn't it be hastrate the cusckies?
by Matt Daddy on Oct 21, 2009 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't hastrate what's not there
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
by Gorbachav5 on Oct 21, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't know what can be read from this, but
Sacks
Sean Canfield ORSt 17
Jake Locker Wash 14
Jeff Tuel WASt 14
M. Lobbestael WASt 13
Kevin Riley Cal 13
Kevin Prince UCLA 9
Well, one thing that can be read is Wazzu is awful.
by grimc on Oct 21, 2009 9:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Riley has been sacked 13 times????
4 came against Oregon… what I read, is that Oregon does a good job of getting to and bringing down the QB. If Prince had finished the game against Oregon, his number would be higher too.
As I think about it, 3 of those 5 teams have faced Oregon. Let’s see if we can put Locker #1 on that list by Sunday.
by Matt Daddy on Oct 21, 2009 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's another one for ya
Sacks on the year:
Oregon 18 (3.0/game)
Oregon Opponents 9 (1.5/game)
Washington 12 (1.7/game)
Washington Opponents 15 (2.1/game)
Our D is better and our O-line is better…doesn’t bode well for the Huskies
by Matt Daddy on Oct 21, 2009 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just watched a replay of LSU at Washington. Bob Davie mentioned something interesting during the broadcast – rare, I know. He said that Steve Sarkisian had convinced him that there was a lot of talent on this UW team. Then he clarified by adding, “…at the offensive skill positions.” Reading between the lines, Davie is saying this team is not talented on the O-line or on defense.
To your points, Matt Daddy, the UW stat sheets would seem to support such a notion.
BTW – LSU does appear to have great speed, but boy did they tackle terrible in that game.
By the grace of Juju, we all are day-to-day.
by JConant on Oct 21, 2009 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
couple of points on that
1. That was the first game of the year, and UW is a lot less healthy now then they were then
2. Tackling is definitely a key to this D. One of the things that is different from the Purdue game than any other is how poorly Oregon tackled in that game. Since then, they have had great fundamentals of wrapping up and flying to the ball.
3. UW skill positions are scary (Locker, Polk, Middleton, Aguilar) they have some really decent skill players, but as Oregon knows all too well, good D fundamentals and exceptional “TEAM” talent will trump good O skill players most of the time.
As long as Oregon doesn’t shoot themselves in the foot with turnovers and poor ST play, the D should be just fine…Man it is totally a different experience thinking about an Oregon team from a D stance first and O stance second…A Prost to Aliotti and Azzinaro!!!!
by Matt Daddy on Oct 22, 2009 12:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man it is totally a different experience thinking about an Oregon team from a D stance first and O stance second
No kidding. It’s such a bizarre and wonderful feeling.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 22, 2009 5:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not since "Gang Green"
We were essentially balanced then, but we could always count on the D.
And I found that enjoyable.
by Bill Musgrave on Oct 22, 2009 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Husky offense is dangerous, but also inconsistent.
Stat to this effect from Dr. Saturday on the LSU game:
The Huskies had 5 drives of 10+ plays, three of which went for fewer than 50 yards.
Also, before you buy into the “UW outplayed LSU in almost every facet of the game”, consider:
LSU gained 5.1 yards/rush and 9.1 yards/pass attempt for an overall average of 6.7.
UW gained 4.1 yards/rush and 7.1 yards/pass attempt for an overall average of 5.8.
The Huskies severely outgained the Tigers because they ran 83 plays to LSU’s 48. I have pored over the boxscore several times and still not found enough to explain how that managed to happen.
Time to go watch a Husky loss live for the second time this season.
I support Sonja Newcombe for Heisman.
by AllSaintsDay on Oct 22, 2009 12:00 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If you are going the "average per play" route in your stat analysis,
… then you have to subtract LSU’s two very long catch and runs where the defender (the same backup safety) whiffed on tackles. Those mistakes skewed the “yds/pass” average. The massive difference in plays run, however, is a legit stat and speaks very much to the ability of a) UW to stop LSU on third downs and b) UW to convert their own third downs.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Oct 22, 2009 7:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, the defender should have made the tackles. That’s what skewed the yds/pass average.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Oct 22, 2009 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I should clarify why I say that…
From what I am reading, you are essentially saying, “You know, the offensive player did his job and avoided a tackle. That shouldn’t go against the defense statistically”.
Please, feel free to clarify. Did or did they not let LSU get two very long catch and runs?
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Oct 22, 2009 7:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well that would make Gekko’s last point invalid as well. First, UW only held LSU to 50% on 3rd down (5/10). Next, part of the reason LSU ran so many fewer plays is because when they did have the ball, and scored, they did it with big plays that UW couldn’t stop.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 22, 2009 8:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah. It’s really, really confusing.
I’m pretty sure this is face palm worthy…

It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Oct 22, 2009 8:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
typically, when looking at "average stats" it is meaningful to disregard the ends of the bell curve in order to understand what the stat implies.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Oct 22, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So what do you do? Throw out only one end of the bell curve? Give me a break.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 22, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Typically, people who know how to do statistical analysis and have seen at least one football game would never in their lives refer to the distribution of yards/play as a bell curve. If a team averages 5 yards/play, a bell curve would involve having as many plays doing worse than -15 yards as better than 25 yards.
Time to go watch a Husky loss live for the second time this season.
I support Sonja Newcombe for Heisman.
by AllSaintsDay on Oct 22, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what you have just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

by Matt Daddy on Oct 22, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
I'm still laughing
"I used to play sports. Then I realized you can buy trophies. Now I'm good at everything." - Demetri Martin
by haveasoda on Oct 22, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
KNIBB HIGH FOOTBALL RULES!
It's spelled "T-A-K-O-T-U-E-S-D-A-Y-S-!-!-!."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by Takimoto on Oct 22, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No...O'Doyle rules!

A much needed bye week; and two whole weeks to focus the inner hatred of UW even moreso than normal.
Locker...Welcome to my profile, You will be formally introduced by Juju at a later date, 10/23 to be more specific!
by CaDuck on Oct 22, 2009 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If peeing your pants is cool, consider me Miles Davis.
It's spelled "T-A-K-O-T-U-E-S-D-A-Y-S-!-!-!."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by Takimoto on Oct 22, 2009 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not saying this because you’re a husky fan, but…
That statement is just flat out insane.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 22, 2009 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey! Missed tackles shouldn’t count against the defense! It’s not their fault the offensive player eluded them!
By this reasoning, Oregon shut out Purdue.
I feel the need, the need...for speed!
by Gorbachav5 on Oct 22, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if you subtract every positive play the offenses have had against Oregon this year, then Oregon is giving up negative yards on the other plays! Our defense is awesome!
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 22, 2009 8:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I don’t have to subtract anything. Average yards per play is supposed to sometimes go up because a team gets a few large plays and sometimes go up because they steadily get a decent number of yards every play.
By the way, a difference on 3rd downs of 58% to 50% does not explain 83 plays to 48.
Time to go watch a Husky loss live for the second time this season.
I support Sonja Newcombe for Heisman.
by AllSaintsDay on Oct 22, 2009 8:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
then you have to subtract LSU’s two very long catch and runs where the defender (the same backup safety) whiffed on tackles
By that logic, then LMcoolJ’s 49 yard run against UCLA shouldn’t count either since he spun out of two tackles … LOGIC FAIL
by echo31 on Oct 22, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really, any fast, big play backs like Jahvid Best, Reggie Bush, Brian Westbrook… They all shouldn’t count.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Oct 22, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or any plays by backs that take five opposing players to be brought down.
by ntrebon on Oct 22, 2009 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
well its actually cheating to have JStew on your team
negative yards per play for you
Much of the credit goes to a defense that hasn’t allowed a substantial touchdown drive in nearly a month
by trumpetduck on Oct 22, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not exactly "whiffing," but I think we have to get rid of this, too

Time to go watch a Husky loss live for the second time this season.
I support Sonja Newcombe for Heisman.
by AllSaintsDay on Oct 22, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the play is of course legit ...
… but if you are trying to find some meaning in the stat, you should be paying attention to the average yds/play in the typical play. It is common to disregard outliers when doing normal statistical analysis.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
by Gekko Mojo on Oct 22, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It completely depends on the content of the statistic. You disregard the outliers to show data without anomalies, and then you have to analyze the margin of error.
We aren’t taking a sample size of thousands here. We’re taking sample sizes of about 20. You can omit plays to show how a defense stepped up (Ref: Rushing Stats in Oregon @ Purdue, ’08), but it is still important to include those plays when analyzing the whole situation.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Oct 22, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, if you’re going to disregard outliers, you can’t just disregard only those “outliers” that hurt your cause.
Your argument doesn’t have any honesty to it, because you don’t throw out the outliers on the other end of the spectrum. You also ignore the fact that UW has given up huge plays over and over again this season, which really proves that the big plays by LSU were not outliers, but much more near the norm.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Oct 22, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
From this post that I just added to the home page…
…six TDs of more than 30 yards this year, including pass plays covering 67, 50, 45, 39 and 32 yards.
Of course, those are just the explosion plays that resulted in TDs.
By the grace of Juju, we all are day-to-day.
by JConant on Oct 22, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
STOP THE MATH!
my head hurts
"I used to play sports. Then I realized you can buy trophies. Now I'm good at everything." - Demetri Martin
by haveasoda on Oct 22, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would agree with you about disregarding outliers...
However, in football, outliers are generally the meaningful/significant events that have occured…I just don’t believe that you simply disregard major plays
A much needed bye week; and two whole weeks to focus the inner hatred of UW even moreso than normal.
Locker...Welcome to my profile, You will be formally introduced by Juju at a later date, 10/23 to be more specific!
by CaDuck on Oct 22, 2009 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But with such a small sample size, the outliers are a huge part of the actual statistics as a whole...
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
by qrsouther on Oct 22, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Ducks Must get Pressure on Locker but Keep him in the Pocket
Locker’s receivers are below average and continuously let him down with drops… vs Notre Dame and LSU…
Week 6 Wrap up…Tell me what you think
http://tightend.blogspot.com/2009/10/week-6.html
"Don't Be Afraid to Stand on a Pile of 'No's' for one 'Yes'"
by curiousg87 on Oct 22, 2009 8:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Love the writing G.
It's spelled "T-A-K-O-T-U-E-S-D-A-Y-S-!-!-!."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by Takimoto on Oct 22, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs





















