Turning points in the Stanford game
First of all, my hat’s off to Stanford. I couldn’t have written this Saturday night or even yesterday because I was so mad. But the truth is, as good as Oregon looked against SC, Stanford looked as good, if not better, against us. Gerhart was a beast. Luck couldn’t have mis-thrown a deep ball if he’d tried. Owusu was great on returns. Their defense was just good enough to keep us from moving the ball at will. And Harbaugh coached the game of his life. Despite all that, this was a one-score game until that last second field goal. I identified a few moments that I think were turning points and, had they gone differently, might have swung things in the Ducks’ favor.
1. (WARNING: May contain whining about officials) The pass interference call on Stanford’s third series against Javes Lewis. That was a terrible call. Not only was there virtually no contact (and certainly no contact that affected the play), but the ball looked uncatchable anyway. It came on third down and would have given the Ducks a stop. As you may recall, the Ducks didn’t get one of those until there were 56 seconds left in the half. I’m not a huge believer in momentum in most sports. Not to say that it doesn’t exist, but more that it doesn’t have as large an affect as some people believe. However, in a football game like this, where one team is executing perfectly and steamrolling the other team, momentum can play a more significant roll.
This play had the potential to be a momentum changer. Stanford had come out hard, was playing flawlessly on offense, and the Oregon D seemed on its heels. All of a sudden, the defense gets a stop, they give the ball back to the offense and Stanford doesn’t seem so invincible. Now maybe the defense can gain some confidence, and take a little wind out of Luck’s sails. That drive also wound up as a score which would have come off the books. At the time, this just seemed like one more thing that was going wrong for the Ducks. In retrospect, getting a stop there might have completely changed the complexion of the game.
2. Not scoring on one of the two drives before the half. Oregon got the ball with 6 minutes left. I remember thinking to myself, “If we can get a score here, we get the ball back to start the second half, once Chip Kelly has had the chance to make adjustments – we could wind up being down by only 3 points at the beginning of the third quarter. That’s not so bad.” Didn’t happen. I got some flak in the postgame thread for criticizing Masoli. To be fair, Masoli was very good most of the game. 330 yards and 3 TD’s are nothing to sneeze at. But maybe it was these two drives before half that stood out in my mind.
A terrible throw to Maehl on first down. A completion to Tuinei. A couple rushes, and then two devastating sacks, the first of which could have been avoided if Masoli had just tossed the ball out of bounds. I blame the offensive line and the play call more on the second sack, where I think a bubble screen or a quick hit to a WR would have been perfect. But because Masoli had lost yards on second down, Kelly called for something downfield, the O-Line collapsed, and Masoli went down. But then the Ducks finally got a stop, and got the ball back with 56 seconds left and at least a couple timeouts. “Okay,” I thought, “This is a quick-strike offense. We can get some points here.” But Masoli tried to force passes that didn’t get to their targets and the drive never really got started. Instead of going into the half with a little bit of energy and the chance to make it a three point game early in the third quarter, we were stuck with a 17 point deficit and a really deflated feeling.
3. The failed read option on 4th and 3 at the end of the third quarter. The Oregon offense was clicking pretty well at this point. 3 yards for this offense was trivial. Chip Kelly knew it, which is why he decided not to go for all 6 yards on third down, understanding that he was going for it on 4th regardless. Then, Masoli made the wrong read, Stanford had the perfect defensive play call, and that was that. I really think the game was virtually over at this point. The defense still hadn’t been able to slow down the Stanford O (which went down and kicked a field goal to make it a 20 point game with 10 minutes left), and now the offense couldn’t pick up a mere 3 yards with the game on the line.
This was the play where I flung my hat across the room. Just to clarify, I think Masoli was fine on the read option most of the game. I think there was this one and one other where he made a bad read, but I don’t want to seem like I’m coming down on him too harshly. It just so happened that this bad read came on maybe the most important offensive down for the Ducks. Those things happen.
Those are the three I remember most vividly. If you have others, please post them. I know one candidate is Chip Kelly’s baffling decision to challenge the spot on 4th and 1. I don’t think that was a “turning point” since I felt that the game was pretty much over at that point anyway, but I’ll share my thoughts on it. Unless there was something he saw that no one sitting at home saw, at most this would move the ball by half a yard, but even that was a long shot. The time out turned out to be meaningless, as the onside kick failed and Stanford iced the game anyway, but at that point, there was still a glimmer of hope, and risking a timeout for a half yard when Gerhart could have gotten a half yard just by thinking about it seemed like a poor decision. I have read absolutely zero about the game, so maybe Kelly has come out with some comments about this that make sense. The only one I can think of is that he wanted to rest his defense to give them as good a shot as possible at stopping them on 4th down and he figured a challenge would give them a few more minutes of breather than a standard timeout would. Still questionable, since Stanford could let 25 more seconds off the clock, but at least understandable.
This is going to be a long week until we can see what this team is made of against ASU on Saturday. I needed to write this post as a cathartic act, to get some of the bad stuff out of my system, and to discuss the game intellectually rather than emotionally. So if you have thoughts on this, please share them below.
(Edited to remove wall-of-text paragraphs)
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or the Addicted To Quack Moderators. FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable Oregon fans.
0 recs |
31 comments
Comments
These were all huge plays. There were a lot of opportunities, and we just didn’t make them in the key points in the game…. Ugh.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 9, 2009 12:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
P.s. that pass interference call was just abominable.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 9, 2009 12:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know
Really, this post wasn’t necessary – we all saw what happened. But it helps me to get things down and I thought I would share my “analysis” with the rest of you to see if you had anything else.
These were definitely the gut-punches. Number one not so much at the time (although it was an awful call), but in retrospect I wonder how differently the game might have gone if the defense had been able to get just one stop early on.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
by Gorbachav5 on Nov 9, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, this Oregon team has been huge with momentum all year. We have taken a play here or there and run with it. We got very few of those plays against Stanford, and every time we were about to turn a corner, something happened. Not getting the read option on 4th as we didn’t against BSU really sucked.
Just a frustrating game, a lot of opportunities…
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 9, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a great point
I remember saying to my wife sometime near the end of the third quarter as I tried to stave off the impulse to drink heavily (which wound up happening later, but I digress): Our defense has not made one play this entire game.
90% of that goes to Stanford, which really executed almost perfectly. There just weren’t that many plays to make. But as Moseley pointed out, there were a couple opportunities to get interceptions – both fairly early in the game, IIRC. Certainly they would have been tough plays, but they weren’t impossible plays. And the defense just didn’t make them. There were a couple times when we hit Gerhart at the line of scrimmage. Is the guy tough to tackle? Absolutely, but if he gets wrapped up there, who knows what kind of confidence the defense gains?
The defense made zero momentum-changing plays. It absolutely killed us.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
by Gorbachav5 on Nov 9, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is just nitpicking
but I was surprised Chip didn’t go for two on the last TD. If you don’t convert, it’s 48-41, still within a TD. But if you do convert, it’s 48-43 and a Stanford FG isn’t necessarily the final nail in the coffin. I know that it’s moot because the onside kick didn’t work and we ran out of time, but I am always curious about that “magic sheet” that coaches refer to when considering a 2-pt. conversion. Also, I’ve been known to overlook the obvious because I drink a lot of beer and I suck at math, so there.
by fowlball on Nov 9, 2009 2:11 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Nah, it was the right call
When they scored that TD, one of two things needed to happen:
1. Oregon recovers the onside kick, in which case you need another TD, and you’d much rather be down by 6 than 7.
2. Oregon doesn’t recover the onside kick, stops Stanford, and hopes for a miracle. There’s no way Chip could plan for the onside kick not even going 10 yards and Stanford being in range for a field goal. That wasn’t even on his radar screen.
Going for the single point put the team in position to win. As was the story the rest of the game, poor execution on the onside kick made a comeback impossible.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
by Gorbachav5 on Nov 9, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I remember thinking to myself that the PI call was
A major turning point. Good god these have to stop!
Repent! Juju is obviously not pleased!
by CaDuck on Nov 9, 2009 3:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I thought the reffing was decent this game
TJ Ward’s roughing the passer penalty was ridiculous, although that didn’t hurt anything. Lewis’s first PI call was legitimate, as was Maehl’s offensive PI (although I’ve seen that let go, and I’m not sure he actually caught that ball anyway).
One thing I do question – was Stanford’s O-Line really that dominant? I thought I saw a couple of plays where a holding penalty could have been called, but I don’t have a discerning eye about these things. Did their O-Line really just play flawlessly?
Defending maligned chants since 2009
by Gorbachav5 on Nov 9, 2009 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep. They sure did.
I dont know who their O-line coach is, but I want him to leave the Pac-10 for good!!!
Losing Gerhart next season will decimate the way their offense works though, teams will play the pass-the clouds will part-and everyone will go back to being happy :)
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 9, 2009 4:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unless Andrew Luck is for real. Then I’m just gonna be upset.
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 Nov 9, 2009 4:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No matter what,
Next year will be much tougher for him… A running game like we saw from Stanford is a QB’s freaking soul-mate!
And, Luck is a RS Freshman. So, We may only have to play against him one more time :)
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 9, 2009 4:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doubtful. He’ll be here three more years.
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 Nov 9, 2009 5:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If he keeps this play up...
He wont stay through his senior year…Top 10 draft status will beckon him
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 9, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think so yet.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
by qrsouther on Nov 9, 2009 6:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He does have NFL size...
but I don’t know about after next year. Maaaaybe after his junior year if it’s pretty much a given he’ll be the first QB drafted. I think his draft status depends on what Matt Barkley does too.
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 Nov 10, 2009 2:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I will be the first to admit that next season was wishful thinking...
But I dont think there is any way he will play his senior season…Compared to Barkley-Luck has Better size, arm, and accuracy
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 7:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Uhhh...
Definitely disagreed. Barkley has good height and a build that merits taking hits. Luck is a little bit skinnier but is tall as well. Luck has excellent decisionmaking for a freshman quarterback, but Barkley’s accuracy is almost unheard of.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
by qrsouther on Nov 10, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Luck CLEARLY displayed better accuracy against us.
Granted, we played significantly better against USC…But at USC Barkley has all of the all-americans a QB could ever want, and still did not play up to the caliber that Luck did.
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 3:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Luck will be there all 4 years
He won’t have the stats (Harbaugh’s offense, other playmakers around him etc) to garner a lot of NFL speculation. Much the way Cutler was at Vandy all 4 years.
Barkley will have an opportunity becuase of media hype to go early, it will depend on where he projects with which NFL team whether or not he stays.
Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...
by Matt Daddy on Nov 10, 2009 3:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure the NFL scouts will take notice of Luck,
Regardless of the fact that he is not a typical ESPN posterchild.
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 3:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Mel Kiper and Todd McShay are already wetting their pants over Barkley.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 10, 2009 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh no, Already? Kiper can be very annoying!
Mainly because he looks exactly like John C. Calhoun.
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 5:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just as crazy as his lineage clearly suggests!
If it were not for Calhoun’s eyes staring deep into my soul with that picture you used, they would clearly be clones. Personally, I think this picture proves they may be clones
![]()
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 5:48 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Freaky.
It's spelled "S-H-U-G-O-T-F-E-L-T-U-P"
by JShufelt on Nov 11, 2009 8:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Against us is the keyword.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Six-hundred and ninety-four yards of total offense.
by qrsouther on Nov 10, 2009 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Luck has played better all season to be honest,
Luck = 2076 yards, 11 TD’s, and 3 picks
Barkley = 1839 yards, 10 TD’s and 7 picks
I know who I would put my money on!
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 4:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Barring injury or unforseen circumstance (or because of)
neither of these guys will play four years of college ball. They’re both solid early-round prospects.
by fowlball on Nov 10, 2009 5:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















