Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Super Bowl Recipes: A Guide To The Perfect Game Day Menu

What does Blount's reinstatement mean for the Ducks? More than you think

I had the great displeasure of visiting The Farm on Saturday, and from the opening kickoff, it was very clear that Stanford was the much more physical team. Where the Ducks have been using speed, quickness and finesse to overcome matchup issues, Stanford countered with a tough-nosed, slow-grind power style of play that exposed the Ducks' biggest weaknesses: their lack of size and power.

Of course, the poster child for Stanford's style is none other than senior running back Toby Gerhart.

Gerhart looked like the college football equivalent of Chuck Norris on Saturday:

Toby Gerhart doesn't have a chin. There is only another fist.

Toby Gerhart doesn't read books. He stares them down until he gets the information he wants.

Toby Gerhart is currently suing NBC, claiming Law and Order are trademarked names for his left and right legs.

When Toby Gerhart does a pushup, he isn’t lifting himself up, he’s pushing the Earth down.

Toby Gerhart can slam a revolving door.

And on Saturday, that revolving door was Oregon's defense. And slam it he did. Again and again and again.

But it wasn't just Oregon's defense that struggled to match Stanford's physical play. Oregon failed to convert on 3rd down seven of 13 times. And although that's still above their season average, the Ducks have been converting fewer third downs this year than last, and even fewer than in 2007.

It's clear the only weak link for an offense that has few weaknesses is a big, physical back, in the same vain as Gerhart, who can be relied on to move the chains in short yardage situations.

LeGarrette Blount is that back. And, well, he's back.

Star-divide

Yesterday, the Ducks reinstated Blount, their own version of Chuck Norris (as he showed with a vicious right cross just 10 weeks ago), and believe it or not, Blount is the missing piece for an offense that seemingly didn't miss him at all since his suspension following the infamous post-game punch of Boise State defensive end Byron Hout on Sept. 3.

And with games against Arizona State, Arizona and Oregon State left on the schedule and a Pac-10 title and Rose Bowl berth hanging in the balance, the timing for Blount's return is as good as any. Why? Because all three of Oregon's remaining opponents rank in the nation's top 15 in rushing defense (No. 6, No. 10, and No. 15, respectively). And all three are far more physical than most of the defense's we've faced this season. And all three will likely have watched the game against Stanford.

Sure, the Ducks racked up 42 points on the Cardinal. But 14 of those points came in catch-up mode. Oregon also possessed the ball for five fewer minutes than its season average (time of possession average for the season is 27 minutes per game, including the loss to Stanford), which would indicate the Ducks' defense might have been able to hold the Cardinal on a few key possessions had it not been on the field for nearly 40 minutes.

Had Oregon had a big physical back to counter Stanford's style, the outcome might have been very different.

Case in point: At the end of the third quarter with the Ducks trailing 45-28, Oregon faced a 4th-and-3 at Stanford's 39-yard-line. In what appeared to be a blown play, Masoli was tackled for a one-yard loss, and Stanford took over on their own 40. Seven plays later, Cardinal kicker Nate Whitaker kicked a 41-yard field goal that turned out to be the difference for Stanford.

Blount might have made a difference in the same scenario. In fact, considering Oregon was trying to control the clock on that drive (that 4th-and-three was the seventh straight rushing play) to give its defense a break, Blount is likely the perfect back for that scenario. The power back that Oregon's missed at certain points in the season.

With Blount back, he will likely be the go-to back on 3rd down. I don't suspect he'll get a ton of carries outside of those situations, but he's the guy the Ducks will call on for short yardage.

Many said the Ducks were up a creek without a paddle after the debacle in Boise. LaMichael James proved everyone wrong by showing how great a fit he is for Oregon's offense. But every great offense needs a change-of-pace back.

And the Ducks just got theirs back. Let's hope he doesn't back us into a corner like he did in Boise.

Comment 21 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Our running attack has always gone best

When we had both a hard nosed runner (such as J-Stew or LGB) and a speed guy (LMJ is the best we’ve had in that regard). Especially since we do go out of the shotgun even on third and short, having LGB back could help a lot.

At least, he can be a decoy for other teams to have to cover.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 10, 2009 9:25 AM PST reply actions  

Something else that is very important in all of this, we now have a line that can block, something that Blount was unable to handle early in the season. I doubt that Blount could have been the back that LMJ is now, but Blount will bring some much needed physicality to the position.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 10, 2009 1:41 PM PST reply actions  

LMJ wouldn’t be having the season if the line still couldn’t block, either.

by grimc on Nov 10, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions  

It wouldn’t be as good, but it’d be passable. He has the ability to make something out of nothing, and if a hole exists, he can hit it very quickly before it closes. Blount had supreme trouble getting to the hole when it was created and needed sustained blocking to get through that hole.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 10, 2009 2:30 PM PST up reply actions  

I dunno. How much can be gleaned from a one game resume? Especially when that game was a big fat turd? I do think you have a point about LMJ being able to make something out of nothing, but a big part of that is his size (or lack thereof). He’s naturally able to slip through spaces that LGB can’t.

by grimc on Nov 10, 2009 2:44 PM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Exactly. I think Blount would have struggled over the next few games. If there wasn’t a decent hole there, he’d just go nowhere. I think his play last year reinforces that. He had a lot of trouble with any sort of defensive penetration.

But, when he’s facing a tired defense and gets going a bit, he’s pretty great.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 10, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions  

But, when he’s facing a tired defense and gets going a bit, he’s pretty great.

Not to take anything away from you, or Blount himself, Jared, but this simply seems like a cop-out and excuse for a back. Blount is typically only a late-game back because he’s up against shells of players with hands on hips. If you look at the circumstances in which he produces, he is not the most impressive back even in the Pac-10. We can love him for what he does for us, but given a whole season of being a featured back in the Pac-10, I think all that Heisman talk would have dropped like rock in water.

Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.

by qrsouther on Nov 10, 2009 3:05 PM PST up reply actions  

I was really like Blount coming into this season, but I agree with you.

If Blount had not punched Hout, we’d probably be having a discussion over whether Blount or Jahvid Best was the bigger disappointment. Both backs are great in specific circumstances. But Blount has proven one-dimensional, and Blount would likely have been exposed similarly.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 10, 2009 3:09 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes, but if Blount had not punched Hout, we would not have hilarious animated gifs and the Internets would be less awesome.

by grimc on Nov 10, 2009 3:31 PM PST up reply actions  

Can Blount improve the play of our defense?

If not, we dont need him.

I think at the very least, it will be good for the players to see him back in action; he could serve as another necessary motivating factor for this team

Defense, Im talking to you! You want to kill this Osweiler fella...Come on defense, FOCUS god dammit!

I respect you Juju, you and your gorgeous brilliance

by CaDuck on Nov 10, 2009 3:52 PM PST reply actions  

Directly, he won't affect it.

But indirectly, having a short yardage back could increase our TOP enough to give our defense fewer reps. And that, indirectly, will improve our defense.

Addicted To Quack. If you’re not into the whole brevity thing.

by PaulSF on Nov 10, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions  

The whole defense comment was a pathetic attempt at humor,

But converting more 3rd and 4th downs due to his size is always very welcome. Not to mention, now that we have found an amazing JJ replacement, using him is the same role as last year (4th quarter backbreaker) is sure to make Chip Kelly cackle to himself on the sidelines come the 4th quarter.

Defense, Im talking to you! You want to kill this Osweiler fella...Come on defense, FOCUS god dammit!

I respect you Juju, you and your gorgeous brilliance

by CaDuck on Nov 10, 2009 4:32 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, the best defense is offense

And it might be all we have :).

In short, clock management. We had pitiful ToP vs Stanford (only 22 mins). We’ve got to get that up. If their offense is not on the field, they can’t score.

Can’t beat that.

by gamedaytribe on Nov 10, 2009 5:05 PM PST up reply actions  

Jokes?

What jokes?! There’s nothing funny about our Rose Bowl chances slipping away, dammit! ;-)

Addicted To Quack. If you’re not into the whole brevity thing.

by PaulSF on Nov 10, 2009 5:19 PM PST up reply actions  

If USC wins it….

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 10, 2009 5:32 PM PST up reply actions  

I think the entire freaking nation will collectively weep!!!

not to mention the city of Pasadena. I remember reading that business owners are rightfully tired of USC playing in the Rose Bowl! Not even the city of Pasadena wants USC to play there

Defense, Im talking to you! You want to kill this Osweiler fella...Come on defense, FOCUS god dammit!

I respect you Juju, you and your gorgeous brilliance

by CaDuck on Nov 10, 2009 5:43 PM PST up reply actions  

If USC wins it, then I am going to throw rocks at the Juju every single week until they stop winning it.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 10, 2009 5:33 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Addicted to Quack, SBN's Oregon Ducks blog and fan community.

ATQ Twitter Feed


Managers

178_small David Piper

Pre_small ntrebon

Img_0525_small jtlight

Mostinteresting_small Takimoto

Domsicecream_small dvieira

Editors

Pettingzoo_small PaulSF

Atq-spoon-5_small Matt Daddy

Authors

Ryan__rusty_small jcgoducks

N679617597_457761_5158_small kanders4

Small nds500