Morning Quack Fix: Getting to know Chip, Grasu commits, and baseball players in limbo
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 7:31 AM PDT
in Morning Quack Fix
74 comments
Good morning everyone. It was a fairly quiet weekend before a flurry of recruiting info hit last night, so let's get to it.
- Rob Moseley has a very long profile on Chip Kelly that was in Sunday's Register Guard. Moseley had the challenge of doing the piece without any input from Kelly, who is not keen on talking about his personal life. However, Moseley talked to his old mentors and co-workers, and the piece is a great profile of Kelly's background and how he came to be at Oregon. Moseley also included a sidebar on the talent that has come out of Kelly's hometown of Manchester, NH.
- Center/DE recruit Hroniss Grasu committed to Oregon over the weekend. Encino Crespi high school has been a fertile ground for the Ducks lately, as QB commit Bryan Bennett and baseball commit Ryon Healy also attend the school. Grasu is a great pickup for the Ducks, and it's rumored that he will play center as a Duck, filling very important hole created by Hamani Stevens' absence. Grasu is athletic, and Kelly and Greatwood are very excited about his commitment to the Ducks, and he figures to fit in well in Oregon's system. Also Grasu will not be making any official visits this fall, so it seems like his commitment is a done deal. In other recruiting news, football and track star Tyler Stephenson, who had been highly interested in Oregon, committed to Baylor over the weekend after attending a camp there.
- In baseball recruiting, top Oregon commits pitcher Tyler Matzek and outfielder Jake Marisnick, drafted in the first and third rounds, respectively, have still not signed with their teams. They have until August 17th to sign any contracts or they will be college bound. While there is still plenty of time, Duck fans have been given a bit of possibly false hope from this tweet by Marisnick.
- The Register Guard has another video introduction with new Oregon players Daryle Hawkins and Nick Cole, so make sure to check that out.
- The ODE writes on the summer conditioning in which the football team is voluntarily participating. Oregon is working four out of five days a week. Contrast that with Purdue's once a week workouts or Washington's two. This article also gives a very good look into the new coaching style of Chip Kelly, who is definitely much more hard-nosed than Bellotti was. Kelly is less the talker that Bellotti was, and punishments are doled out immediately, ususally in the form of being "run ragged." However, for now at least, this is getting the team ready. LB Spencer Paysinger has high hopes for the defense, and says that "its going to be the best it has been in five or six years," and isn't worried at all about the D-line. And, the team has revenge on the mind. Motivation will be at an all time high when Oregon steps onto the blue turf in September.
Got any opinions on the latest news? Comment away! GO DUCKS!
0 recs |
74 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Greg Biggins has some more notes as Grasu…
Grasu has the frame to grow in to a very talented center at the next level. He’s very athletic and has been well coached at Crespi, benefiting from playing under former Freno State offensive lineman Jeremiah Ross.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 9:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Best Defense in 5 or 6 years...
plus there are freshman on the line that will be able to compete. Sounds good to me.
by BisonDucks on Jul 20, 2009 9:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I hate statements like “best defense in X years” because after last year’s secondary, I’m just not ready to get burned again…pardon the pun. It may come true but I’m definitely not willing to jump into the pool right away again
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
by dvieira on Jul 20, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But… but… it wasn’t that bad last year!
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Jul 20, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Our defense looked bad because we were often playing from ahead, so they passed a lot.
And how many games did our first-string not even play the fourth quarter?
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
by skywaker9 on Jul 20, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus, we never try to control the clock.
If you give the others the ball as much as we do (Only for us, it’s from points, not turnovers), they’ll rack up a lot more yards than other teams.
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Jul 20, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel you, Dom. I think the defensive backs will continue to be what they’ve been under Aliotti…cornerbacks on an island, safeties with one eye in the backfield. I AM allowing myself to get very pumped up about our talent at linebacker. That is the one area where I have been highly critical – of the collective unit, not necessarily some individual players – for years.
I think we gave up about 28 a game last year, right? And that wasn’t really too bad when you consider the time of possession of Oregon’s offensive and how many plays the defense faced. I just want to see us move that number to about 24 and be a little tighter in pass defense on third-and-long. If Kelly/Aliotti can achieve that in a year where our OOC is Boise State, Purdue and Utah, we should be looking at double-digit wins.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our 3rd down defense sucks
We have worked on a “Give up FGs, not TDs” defense for a long time, which is often frustrating because we had so many bad plays on third down D last year.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
by skywaker9 on Jul 20, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think your memory is highlighted by the fact that we forced offenses more 3rd down attempts per game than anyone else.
We were better than we were worse when you compare third down conversions, ranked 64th nationally.
Our offense actually put up similar conversion rate as our defense allowed, and that was also “middle of the pack” (59th nationally), but I don’t hear many people say we our offense sucked on 3rd downs.
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Jul 20, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
How many third downs, comparatively, was our offense forced into, though?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Shu, for applying some numbers to the discussion.
My brain definitely remembers the disappointment of many third-and-long situations being converted. At the same time, I was pretty sure I was only recalling the handful of worst moments. These numbers support that.
I’ll stand by my want of just a little improvement in that area, which I think is realistic with a more experienced linebacker crew.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Burned by the 2008 defense?
While the early season talk was definitely a bit much for the secondary, if you look at Close (2-3 possessions) situation S&P+ (which is really one of the best ways to straight up evaluate two defenses, the Oregon 2008 defense was a tiny bit better than the 2007 defense.
Was the 2007 defense just lucky? They had INSANE Red Zone numbers, that really were in no way sustainable, over performing significantly in that area. Also, there was a significant drop in 3rd down numbers due mostly to the changes made after the USC game….
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I never said burned by the defense, I was talking specifically about the secondary. The preseason hype for last year’s secondary was off the charts….best in the nation type of comments. I, much to my chagrin, bought into the hype and they were no where near what expectations were. I fully take that one on the chin but I’m not ready to go down that path with this new group yet.
I understand the comments about playing more downs, time of possession, yadda yadda but the “D-Boys” were made out to be world killers and they very much were not. That’s all I’m saying.
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
by dvieira on Jul 20, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
JT, can you explain a little more about the changes made after the USC game? Were there similar adjustments made after we got fairly lit up by Kellen Moore?
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
NEVERMIND…I see below. Sorry.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Losing Chung will hurt
Because he always had a knack for getting a big turnover when we needed one.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
by skywaker9 on Jul 20, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm also going to miss his
Billy Bob-esque blocking.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope Chip's style works
And avoids the sort of crap we had with some players doing stupid sh-t. Although we have a long way to reach OSEwe’s level of sh-t from the Erickson era.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
by skywaker9 on Jul 20, 2009 10:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I be thinking (dangerous?)
A ‘presentable’ defensive concept might be, “The defense has got to be responsible for getting themselves off the field.” This sounds really ‘simple-ton’ but the total team package seems to have been ‘big play’ rather than ’don’t let ‘em move the chains.’ Or am I way off base here?
by DONALDUCK on Jul 20, 2009 10:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
We switched defensive philosophies halfway through the season after the BSU and USC debacles, so that big plays would not be given up. We became much less aggressive, especially in pass defense. CBs and safeties stayed back much more and were not as aggressive. That did lead to some disadvantages, but in the end probably saved a whole lot of points being scored.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it worked.
The game plans in the Civil War and Holiday Bowl were absolutely magnificent. Credit to Alliotti for knowing what was was wrong, and (for the most part) fixing it.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And yet one week before the Civil War our defense struggled to get off the field in the second half versus Arizona. No question our offensive scheme had a big impact, and Arizona was executing very well. Still, it seems to me the defense was always kind of struggling to close out wins. Stanford, UCLA and Arizona – all post-USC games – all stick out to me as games where the defense was far from great, but in the end they got enough stops to get the W.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
true...
the conditioning this summer and a philosophy change will hopefully curb the chances of repeat in the Zona game.
by BisonDucks on Jul 20, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It had nothing to do with conditioning. Oregon, due to offensive ineptitude in the second half as well as turnovers on kickoff returns, played roughly 22 minutes on defense in the second half alone. They never had a rest longer than 2 minutes, and the offense couldn’t manage a single first down after the first drive of the second half.
As much as everyone wants to blame the defense, they did a more than admirable job. Despite the scores, they were 20x better than the offense that half.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your comment JT. I think last year’s team was very well conditioned. And, no, the statistics never lie. At the same time, when I’m standing there watching Arizona claw their way back from a big deficit, I’m not exactly thinking…“hey the numbers say the defense is doing 20x better than the offense, so I’m sure we’re going to hang on.” No, I was chewing my frickin’ fingernails off.
The stats are what they are, but many fans clearly form perceptions from what they experience during the games. I’ll buy what the stats are selling for the AZ game. The defense was repeatedly put in positions where no defense would excel. But I also understand why many people have a difficult time embracing the phrase “more than admirable” about the 2008 defense.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I am reading to much into...
the 11 on 11 implementation and the fact that I’ve been hearing that the coaches don’t want the guys to bulk up but to stay leaner and more conditioned for the 8 man rotation, so we can complement the offenese’s philosophy. For instance, sonny and cole took the lion’s share of the snaps but this year they’ll be more evenly dispersed amoung a 4 man rotation at DT. So, the idea is that that they don’t need quite as much bulk to sustain the snap count but to stay leaner and conditioned for versatility purposes.
by BisonDucks on Jul 20, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see it just slightly different. Oregon’s offensive approach is going to spread (bad pun). I thought the ass kicking handed out at Michigan served notice to the country that Chip is going to run his plays as fast as possible and simply gas the defense into submission. Then, I think, Oregon’s offensive got even more “hurry up” in 2008.
I think what you’re hearing and/or seeing isn’t so much about complementing the offense as it is about protecting against others like it.
Success breeds imitation. Some programs are going to try to match Oregon’s offensive warp-speed game plan. I think Chip is taking the approach that his defense is not going to be susceptible to that which his offense is so adept at handing out. Smart, proactive move.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 2:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously something happened between said games.
Alliotti discovered the Tight End, TJ Ward’s place as a safety was found, or they just found a new gear of intensity. Whatever happened, a new attitude was set in place the last two games, and I think Alliotti can be thanked for it.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the dline comment
about feshman stepping up was intriguing. I was left wondering which gusy. Also, I think the coaches are really putting together a defensive scheme to complement the offense. For intance, all the guys on the dline learn the same technique, so they can all play every position. Fresh legs will be the mantra.
Likewise, Jackson III in the safety spot is viewed by me as an attempt to shore up passing defensive deficiencies from having to many dbs that like to play in the box. Overall, I am optimistic. I don’t think we’ll be as stout against the run but we will be better against the pass imo.
by BisonDucks on Jul 20, 2009 10:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think we'll be good against the run.
We still have Casey Matthews, Spence Paysinger, and now Eddie Pleasant, who are all run-stuffer types. TJ Ward is still around. Will Tukuafu.
The only thing that may lead to – like you said – a less stout rushing D will be our questions at DT. Brandon Bair maybe a little too lanky to be a huge middle clogger like Sonny Harris or Cole Linehan. Ferras and Toeaina are going to have to prove themselves as forces for our rush D to be good as it has been. And this is entirely possible.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Go watch DSA's
“”http://rivals.yahoo.com/video/practice-football/oregon/Brandon-Bair-on-the-inside-51734" >Brandon Bair on the Inside" as he talks about the dline rotation. Sounds like expects to be on the outside as much as on the interior. I like what the coaches have up their sleeves.
by BisonDucks on Jul 20, 2009 11:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t have the film to look at, but I thought during the spring game guys were being moved around quite a bit on the D line. Often I was confused about who was playing what position, especially on the edges (though I’m easily confused in general). I just figured they were trying to determine how to best fill Nick Reed’s shoes. Maybe that wasn’t the case, it may instead be about a lot of rotation and making opposing offensive lines do a lot of pre-snap thinking.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question for ESPN insiders
Anybody read Bruce Feldmen’s list of top Ten spread QB’s? I am just curious where our boy landed. Here is the link if you are interested.
Sleeping under an avalanche with Cartman, wake me Sept 3.
by trumpetduck on Jul 20, 2009 2:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Came in 7th, behind MrCoy(1), Tebow (2), Colin Kaepernick (3), Robert Griffin (4), Juice Williams (5), and Zac Robinson (6).
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
7th? Bah.
I think Zac Robinson may have had his desire to take off and run knocked out of him.
Some things never get old.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
man i was going to post that vid
yeah Bruce and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Colin Kaepernick, come on.
Sleeping under an avalanche with Cartman, wake me Sept 3.
by trumpetduck on Jul 20, 2009 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, Masoli’s entire body of work in 2008 had some rough spots. I don’t condone the booing that took place versus Stanford, but I wasn’t too excited about him throwing 5-yard passes to 12-yard routes. If Jeremiah plays a full 2009 at the level he finished 2008, there will be plenty of well-deserved publicity.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
great point
Easy to forget about those days after the back half of the season.
Sleeping under an avalanche with Cartman, wake me Sept 3.
by trumpetduck on Jul 20, 2009 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
while there's no doubt the first part of his season was not world beating
and the year’s stats don’t scream top 10 qb in any shape or form, i liked his skill set right from the start. i could not freaking believe we booed him. unbelievable. ashamed, truly. particularly shameful when it now looks like poor judgment.
your point is dead on, all of the media accolades are based on the 4 game finish to the season, plus a few other moments earlier (ASU game, end of Stanford game, etc.). we don’t know yet if that holds up, there is no statistical argument other than the good trended to recent history, the bad to the past.
but the guy had 10 minutes to get ready for d-1 football and a crazy offense, got clocked out of his first start (where he started quite well), and had receivers dropping balls all year (but he throws too hard, sniff sniff). i’m not saying he didn’t make his own mistakes, but my money is on jmas holding his salt moving forward.
sidenote: i live in austin, texas, and listen to big 12 fans call the pac-10 body of work “high school football” all day, every day (or close). for the holiday bowl, i was most definitely the only Oregon fan in the bar. i enjoyed the shift from “that qb is short and fat” to “that guy is a beast”. i enjoyed that very much.
my thoughts are 100% anecdotal… but i just hope more people doubt this little focker and he destroys them.
by Bill Musgrave on Jul 20, 2009 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sums up my feelings on Masoli perfectly. And rec’d for being a Duck fan in a hotbed of Big 12 delusion.
by fowlball on Jul 21, 2009 5:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
good stuff
you’ve probably seen this and, to validate your assessment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FzOcp846w8
and Jiucey Juu Willliams does suck!
by DONALDUCK on Jul 21, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Juice Williams sucks.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec’d for truth and succinctness.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 8:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just Wondering, D Line Help and others
1. What about this guy, Roszell Gayden, College of the Sequoias in Visalia, Ca JC? 6’7" 323 lean. Could we sneak in and get him like we did Masoli after his frosh year now that we’ve got a scholarship open?
2. I like JM being ‘under the radar’ a bit ala Dixon. He’s going to get enuf pot shots as it is. Colin K (Nevada) did pretty good vs BS U last year http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BCJeBchzPA & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tfuDwuREdE&feature=related. His first start. Small body of work and a BIG body. Certainly worth a mention and I’d rather have him be the ‘target’ than JM.
3. Any of you guys know anything about the phones that are used during the games? Are there ways of checking to see if somebody’s listening in? I trust BS U about as far as I can kick bronco stadium. I think it’d be better to use scrambled cellphones rather than to trust them with any equipment. Any thots?
4. I think we oughta take our own water too.
5. Anybody that’s going to the BS U game in Boise need reservations for Hotel 7 blocks from stadium? I got 2 rooms but didn’t make the cut for tickets. Better yet, anybody got tickies?
by DONALDUCK on Jul 20, 2009 3:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Funny stuff, DD. Though I’m not sure how you sleep at night in fear you might wake up to a Bronco head next to you in bed.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 20, 2009 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
As far as Gayden goes, I don’t believe he was a full academic qualifyer out of high school, so if that’s the case, he must stay one more year at his junior college. Both Masoli and Lavasier Tuinei were full academic qualifiers out of high school, and could thus transfer into Oregon before their sophomore year of eligibility. Mose likely Gayden will be required to play one more year in junior college before transferring.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
First, please use the reply button. It’s pretty great.
Next, I’m am fairly certain that all electronic equipment is set up by the home team. However, all headsets have to have the same functionality. But there is no way Boise State is stupid enough to tamper with that. To even insinuate that is ridiculous.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 5:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I learned about the reply button today. Ain't the world great? I 'prishiate it, thank you.
So, why wouldn’t they tamper with it? Might be worth the risk. I’ve never heard of anybody ever getting caught doing it. I’ve never even heard the question brought up before. In the Big Money college football sweepstakes, where is the Guarantee that they won’t? Who can prove what? They win, they say, just like they did last year, “Quit crying Oregon. Get over it.” Besides, the ‘evidence’ is gone. They beat Oregon, they run the table in all likelihood, BIG BUCKS. Perhaps it isn’t the intimidating smurf turf that gives them such a home winning record which is other worldly. I mean, I didn’t know how to use the reply button but I’m not naive. I get the feeling that they play ‘win at any cost,’ and I’m not sure where their cut-off point is, ya know? I kinda get the feeling that you are looking down your nose at me and I think that I’m asking a fairly intelligent and cogent question.
Harper goes to KU, Pflugrad goes to ASU, change in communication, pronto. Why? Becuz we got the Mad Scientist. Do whatever it takes to bring Kelley and his fancy pants Ducks to their knees.
Phil Steele doesn’t have Oregon in his top 40?? Maybe he knows something too. That is the onliest reason that his prediction makes any sense.
I just wanna make sure that if we lose, for our young men, that we lose fairly. I don’t believe that we can lose on the field of fair play and I don’t want some techno geek beating us becuz we forgot to cover ALL the bases. For example, Dixon get hits in ASU game and we don’t have a plan for what happened at Azerona. Or fucla.
I think we got the team to go to the Rose Bowl Jan 7, I’m already making reservations.
What’s the Guarantee with the phones? Think about it.
by DONALDUCK on Jul 20, 2009 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What do they have to gain from listening in though? All plays called have nicknames anyway they won’t be able to figure out right off the bat. Boise State can gain very very little from listening in, and the risk is massive. Really, videotaping the plays coming into the field is much more dangerous, but I don’t believe that helps the opposing team much either.
In my mind, listening in would simply psyche yourself out. You’d get it in your mind that the opposing team is running a play, which they would probably not be running, and then you have the wrong play. On top of that, Oregon (esp. with Kelly) is about execution rather than out thinking people. We run the same plays every game, and still rack up 40+ yards per game, because decisions are made on the field, not in the coaches box.
To answer your final question, there is no guarantee that any home team can’t listen to opposing teams conversations. But there just isn’t much that can be gained from it.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 20, 2009 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You could be right.
I wouldn’t understand what the nickname meant the first time. I was a cryptographer in the Army tho’ and we looked for tendencies. Every teenie bit of information was valuable. A coach listening could gain a great deal I’d imagine. Yes, JM could always audible, there are many options, and, yes, you’ld stand a better chance of winning if you knew what play or kind of play is being called. And what shifts are then used when the defense adjusts to the original call.
I disagree with you about Kelley, that he “is about execution rather than out thinking people.” Yes, we run the same plays, sometimes repeatedly but out of different sets and the defense does not know what’s coming. The out-thinking comes in the plays that start like the one we’ve run but the scientist (read thinker) has out-thunk ‘em and the play goes somewhere else. But if they’re listening, they may not know what the play is but they’ll KNOW what it is not.
Short form, why take a chance if there is no guarantee?
Note: I used the reply button again.
Thanx for being patient with me and sharing your thots. Remember I’m a only semi-knowledgeable fan in the off season.
Moreover, I got really razzed bad by the BS U fans last year. They were really rude in their winning.
G0 DUCKS!
by DONALDUCK on Jul 20, 2009 7:23 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec’d for reply button x2!
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Jul 20, 2009 7:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My gramps was a cryptographer too.
What’s it liked? I was totes fascinated by it when I was like 6.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
'08.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chicka chicka yeah
We rack up ≥40 yards per game! Rah rah!
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phones?
I am pretty sure there are NCAA rules about sideline communications. In fact, see Article 9 on pages FR-37 and FR -38
Teams have been doing this for a while and I don’t think that it will be an issue. I would suggest dropping down a few shots of NyQuil before posting…No offense. I am down to three myself! Take a deep breath, it will be alright.
May we hand you your taints on a silver platter...
by 071903 on Jul 21, 2009 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Been kickin it with Cartman I see?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 22, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ever since he uttered the phrase...
“Follow your dreams. You can reach your goals. I am living proof.”
May we hand you your taints on a silver platter...
by 071903 on Jul 22, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dr.''s orders: NO MO NyQuil. So, you get mine, and,
Take a lOOkee at FR-38. Article 10. “Coach’s phones or headsets are not subject to the rules before or during the game.”
That’s what it says and that has been my concern. The intent may have been something else but that’s what the rule states.
by DONALDUCK on Jul 22, 2009 8:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, Article 10, FR-38. You said look it up in the rules. I did. Posted. What say you 071903? see below 3 down.
by DONALDUCK on Jul 25, 2009 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I mean, up one. (Friggin reply buttons)
by DONALDUCK on Jul 25, 2009 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would have to refer you back to jtlights post.
I don’t think a team would gain anything by listening in. They have been doing this for a while now. I doubt someone has a formula for spying well without getting caught,
May we hand you your taints on a silver platter...
by 071903 on Jul 26, 2009 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If there is nothing to be gained by 'listening in,' why are the signals/communications so elaborately disguised?
I really like this blog and I think we may have come across something that, at the very least, needs to be explored. Again, "FR-38. Article 10. "Coach’s phones or headsets are not subject to the rules before or during the game."
What does that mean? At the VERY least, its ambiguous, wouldn’t you agree? I am not saying BS U would listen in but if they did, according to this rule, it would seem that there is nothing wrong with it.
My contention with you is this, it seems like if you didn’t think of it, it really ain’t worth thinking about (especially by a guy who didn’t even know how to do the reply buttons.)
I don’t think the BS U can beat us on a level playing field, no matter what color the turf. I DO NOT want to lose to them again. So, I am asking YOU (plural) to consider that there is a possibility, perhaps remote. that they might be listening. If they did, could they ‘walk?’ I’m not asking for you to evaluate what they might or might not learn.
You guys seem to have really good football minds. Further, I imagine that you’ve got connections the I couldn’t find for 6 years. Do some investigative work. If this brings recognition to your site, revel in it (crack a couple of 2004 Nyquils.)
So, there are a couple of questions here. First, could they listen and walk. Then, if they could, what could be gained.
You guys are real knowledgeable and your glib is Blount. Rock and…..
by DONALDUCK on Jul 26, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, first, I could not care less about the possibility of BSU listening. If you’re already worried about something like this….well…I don’t know what there is to say. What worries me about this is that if Oregon loses, than fans are just going to be embarrassing (like Giansante was last year) and blame the loss on something like this that has no substantial basis.
Moving on from that, let’s assume that BSU can listen in to what we say. And let’s assume that they face no repercussions if we realized that.
That still gains them nothing. Let them listen in. If they want to spend that amount of time doing that, rather than actually game plan and then execute, let them. They really have nothing to gain from this.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Jul 26, 2009 8:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The fact of the matter is this...
Let’s follow your theory and they do know what is coming. They still have to stop our execution of the play. The coaches are not allowed to have any electronic communication to players only hand signals like normal. The tempo that Oregon runs the offense should curtail any serious effect of them listening in.
The same theory can be applied to Oregon’s win vs. Chokelahoma…Bad officiating aside…they still had to stop us TWICE, but didn’t and lost. Stop the execution and you have a better chance of winning than other factors such as stealing communications and officials.
May we hand you your taints on a silver platter...
by 071903 on Jul 27, 2009 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the words of the Oregon State coaching staff…
“IT’S THE SAME DAMN PLAY!”
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Jul 27, 2009 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is THE place for that famous request:
“Can I have a standing O?”
Btw, almost every day, sometimes not even at the computer, I just crack up at
“It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P” Thanx!
by DONALDUCK on Jul 20, 2009 7:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately I cannot take credit for it. It’s simply been the funniest spelling of my name ever muttered.
"It’s spelled S-H-U-F-E-L-T-M-E-U-P"
by JShufelt on Jul 20, 2009 7:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
H/T: JConant
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Good luck in the WNBA, Kamyron!
by qrsouther on Jul 20, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha. I held on to that one for months waiting for the exactly right moment. I’m confident it will be outdone. Lots of witty characters in the Land-O-Quack.
I'm really tired of it not being football season.
by JConant on Jul 21, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Addicted To Quack
Related FanShots on Addicted To Quack
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
