Why Auburn's so called speed is a fraud fabricated by ESPN.
by Quack Addict on Jan 6, 2011 7:54 PM PST
Email
PrintAuburn's speed is a fraud. There it is, I said it. Do you have a problem with it? If so, I implore you to explain to me, with facts not opinion, why Auburn has an advantage over teams like ASU, USC or Arizona because of their "speed".
I can already tell you, you won't come up with much.
via www.pe.com
The national media has bolstered the perception of Auburn's offensive speed to a point of ridiculousness. The idea is; the greater the lie, the more believable it is. ESPN pushes this idea that Auburn is better prepared to face Oregon's offense than any other team because of their offensive tempo. ESPN will tell you that Auburn runs an upbeat offense that averages a snap about every 24 seconds. ESPN will tell you that this pace will prepare them to face an Oregon offense that snaps the ball every 21 seconds. I will tell you that it wont and, I'll tell you why.
ESPN likes to throw out a number like 24seconds/play and point at it, lift it up on a pedestal and tell us all to worship it for all of it's grandeur. At least that's the picture they paint. What they don't like to do is show you were that pedestal sits in relations to everyone else in the nation. ESPN says worship, and the nation obeys, like taking candy from a baby ESPN sensationalizes a single stat and ignores all others because after all, if they let you see the whole tapestry then your focus might drift away from their blot of ink. Their product gets watered down and simply becomes part of a wonderful mosaic created by many different hands. Their detail stroke gets lost when you're not looking right at it so they demand you, LOOK!
The consequence we suffer is that we only see one strap of the football lace and miss out on the rest of the picture.
ESPN will say, "after all, what is a measly 3 second difference worth anyway?".
Go for it, count to 3 out loud, I'll wait. You counted to three pretty fast! It's really not that much at all. I hear your cry, "Come on, You said their speed was a fraud! How can you say that Auburn's speed is a fraud then so clearly demonstrate that they are remarkably close to Oregon's speed?" I hear you questioning, "does this mean that Oregon's speed is a fraud?" No, not even close.
via tigersx.com
Here's the stats that ESPN doesn't want you to know. Oregon played two teams this year that run their offense just as fast as Auburn. Can you name them? Here's a hint, one is sanctioned and the other is run by a certain hopping brother. Here's another, both teams played Oregon coming off a BYE.
USC this year ran a play every 24.6 seconds. Arizona ran a play every 24.9 seconds. Auburn remember, ran a play every 24.2 seconds If you thought 3 seconds wasn't much of a difference how about 0.4 seconds. You can start to say, "One" in 0.4 seconds.
By a show of hands, how many people believed that Arizona and USC had an advantage because of their pace compared to other teams Oregon played. We knew going into those games that both teams boasted good offenses that put up a lot of really good looking numbers. People said that coming off a BYE week the teams had an advantage to prepare for the ducks speed. I never heard so much as a peep from the talking heads about the offensive tempo that USC or Arizona ran, even though it rivals the speed of Auburn.
via a.abcnews.com
If you want to look at a team that should have been prepared to play The Ducks, stay right where you are, or where you wish you were, in Arizona. Would you call ASU's offense an up tempo offense? I would. In fact ASU's tempo rivals that of Oregon's. In a futile, but very scary, attempt to beat Oregon at it's own game, ASU ran a play every 21 seconds for 4 quarters of football. Oregon was only able to snap the ball every 22 seconds and for much of the game the offense was remarkably below average in efficiency. 11 drives ended in 3 plays or less, ATQ was chanting "Rob Beard for MVP", and ASU ran 99 plays to Oregon's 69.
If you can believe it ASU ran 99 plays on our defense and at the end of the game, did our team look beat? Did they give up and mail it in ala USC in the 4th quarter? I'll tell you what I saw, I saw a defense that flew to the ball, DB's that jumped passing lanes and a line that got constant pressure on a QB right to the end.
This season ASU averaged a snap every 22.5 seconds. So they should have been ready to face the tempo right?
Oregon has played in pressure packed games, the defense has been stretched but I would argue they haven't even been close to their limit yet. You see, Oregon has been tested by tempo offenses, ASU ran nearly a hundred plays, USC ran 85 plays, one every 23 seconds. Arizona ran 81 plays, one every 22 seconds. Oregon doesn't have to prepare for speed, Auburn still does.
via media.al.com
So what kind of pressure has Auburn seen this year? How about the University of Kentucky Wildcats. The wildcats play at a frightening pace of 26 seconds/snap and put up a dizzying 33 points/game. Oh shoot, I think I forgot the sarchasum font there.
Here's a bit that's sarcasm free though. KU, a 6-6 team was tied with Auburn till the end of the game when Auburn kicked a winning FG as time expired to win. In that game Auburn ran a play every 25 seconds, wich was just under their average.
Wait a minute!
Koudos to those of you who caught it, there in that last sentence. 25 seconds is not less than 24 seconds/play.
It's not a mistake though. I decided that we deserved some more concrete stats, rather than the numbers ESPN wants to feed us. So I broke down the games and then I threw a few out. I didn't care what Auburn did to Louisiana Monroe, Chattanooga or Arkansas State. Similarly I didn't care what Oregon did to Portland State or UNM, so I threw them right out the window with the day's trash.
What I saw was rather surprising. All the stats from now on are only stats that were accumulated against AQ conference teams, mainly the SEC and Pac-10.
A post this long would not be welcome without some pictures of Oregon Cheerleaders, would it? Nah.
Against AQ teams Auburn's offense slowed down considerably. Auburn only snapped the ball once every 27 seconds, a difference of 3 seconds/snap. The difference between Oregon's pace after dropping the stats from PSU and UNM, 0.54 seconds. Oregon's average dropped from 21.16 seconds/snap to 21.70 seconds/snap. The difference in real time is indistinguishable.
Suddenly 3 seconds morphs into 6 seconds, and Auburn surprisingly looks a lot more like Kentucky (26 seconds/snap) than Oregon. But this is what ESPN doesn't want you to know.
Before you go make that rage post and tell me that, "Auburn runs their Offense slower in the second half to protect their lead and run out the clock!", I'll make my counter argument. Oregon does the same thing.
Now I could leave it there and be ESPN lite. I could ostentatiously throw that, "Fact" out there and tell you to devour it without question. However, I am not ESPN, I do not have a agenda or an image to protect. I am Anonymous, I have nothing to lose.
I always hear the offense is slowing down in the second half, or that the offense is fastest in the 3rd quarter when our team really wants to push the lead. So I want to take a look at the validity of those statements. As one would suspect, both offenses do slow down in the second half of games, by how much is startling. At least when you look at Oregon.
Auburn ran a play every 25 seconds in the first half of their games against AQ opponents. In the second half they slowed down to an easy 28.5 seconds/play. When Auburn wanted to run the clock a little more they did just that, ran it a LITTLE more, 3 seconds/play slower.
Oregon on the other hand surprised me. In the first half Oregon runs a play every 18 seconds. In the second half they slow down 7 seconds/play to 25 seconds per snap. When Oregon is running their offense at what The Ducks consider a slow pace, it's still as fast as Auburn generally runs in the first half.
I still feel like we should dig deeper into this myth, and as I do I find a glimmer of hope for Auburn. When Auburn played OLE MISS, in the second quarter of that game, Auburn ran a play every 17.9 seconds. Suddenly, Auburn actually does have the ability to run with Oregon's offense. ESPN isn't so evil after all, you read all of this only to find out that none of it was true!
Hold up for a minute there, don't get ahead of yourself. The third and fourth quarter of that game were the two slowest quarters Auburn had all year, snapping the ball every 33 and 37 seconds. For the game they averaged a play every 28 seconds.
If we glance around the stats a little more we see that against Arkansas, Auburn ran a play every 18.1 seconds in the second quarter and against Bama there was a play every 19.9 seconds. Beyond that, Auburn didn't post another quarter all year in which they snapped the ball in under 20 seconds for a full quarter.
via socialmedialawstudent.com
Oregon can't be all that much more impressive can it?
By Oregon's definition of taking it slow, The Ducks second half pace of 25 seconds/snap matched the first half pace or Auburn. To draw a parallel we realize that Auburn's "Fast" is Oregon's "Slow".
That's grand and all but we're still looking at the all encompassing 'average'. In this case lets talk specifics. Oregon's fastest quarter came when The Ducks were playing Stanford. In the second quarter of that game Oregon ran a play at the leisurely pace of a snap every 13.65 seconds, for an entire quarter. In that quarter Oregon ran 23 plays which was more than the season average for number of plays run in the 2nd quarter.
Let's talk about 20 again. Earlier we found a stat that ESPN would rather we didn't know. Auburn has only snapped the ball at "Oregon Speed" in three quarters this season. Oregon Speed is defined as a snap every 20 seconds or less for a full quarter. Why is it called Oregon Speed? Because Oregon has done it 17 times this year. Six other times Oregon's pace was less than a second more per play than 20 seconds/play, and because I said so.
via t1.gstatic.com
Now that we're digging we're finding out what REAL speed is. Real speed is when an offense is snapping a ball every 15 seconds or faster, and Oregon likes to find 'Real Speed' just about as often as Auburn likes to find 'Oregon Speed'. Oregon's run a play every 15 seconds or less in 5 quarters this year twice in one game. Oregon's offense operates at a speed that Auburn can't even sniff at.
Oregon's so fast in fact that they're in their own league, even ESPN admits this. However for some reason ESPN want's to pump up Auburn's speed and make things seem closer than they really are. They do this for ratings, if they said the game would be a blowout fewer people would watch. It irks me though that we, the educated public, the people with knowledge of our team are so slighted by lies of omission. After all, if you don't use all the data available to you it's not actually a lie, is it?
via coedmagazine.files.wordpress.com
Your attention down here please. Can we continue or would you like another moment with the picture above? It's ok, I understand.
Auburn's so called 'speed' really is a fraud. I'm not going to sit Idly by and eat the meatloaf of lies coming out of ESPN's Kitchen anymore. Instead I excrete that shite and put myself through a cleanse of sorts to get their taint out of my system. I still feel though that there might be something missing from this formula. Something else to all these stats is floating out there and I think I know exactly what I'm looking for.
What's the use of doing something incredibly fast if you're incredibly bad at what you're doing. I bet I could get 11 random people from this blog together and we could go out after a week or two and run an offense like Oregon at the same pace of Oregon at least for a few minutes. I'd also be willing to bet that we wouldn't gain more than a yard or two against the lowest rated defense in College football.
Just because you can do something really fast doesn't mean you're any good at it. Oregon is really fast, and really good when their fast. Auburn... well, not so much.
I measured Efficiency by taking the number of plays and dividing it by the number of points the team scores. I did it by quarter and found that when Oregon runs it's offense at it's fastest, The Ducks scores in the fewest number of plays. Over all Oregon scored 408 offensive points this year against AQ teams in 783 plays. That's about a 0.521 efficiency rating by my formula. In the second quarter, when Oregon is averaging it's fastest, that efficiency rating jumps to .582. A difference of .05 doesn't seem like much but I'm going to ask you to let me use the ESPN model here for a second and just accept that it's significant.
via i.cdn.turner.com
You think these girls are all smiling at you. You think they're all happy and jovial because they can be. Really they're laughing at you. They're mocking you and it's all because you bought it. You let me do it and you didn't even question it for more than a second.
Don't ever let me shove a stat down your thought like ESPN and just take it. Question it, push it, research it yourself and find the hidden meanings.
0.5 is actually a very small number. Almost insignificant but what it does say is that Oregon is better when they are moving the ball the fastest than they are on the average. How much is it really? Well it's about the difference in Auburn's game when Auburn runs their offense the fastest. Well, kinda anyway.
Auburn also runs their offense the fastest in the second quarter. Over all Auburn's average efficiency is a 0.506. Less than Oregon's 0.521 but relatively similar. That's where the similarities end though, unfortunately for Auburn the faster they run their offense the less they score. When Auburn's running their offense the fastest their efficiency drops to a below average .455 or a drop of .05. Same change as Oregon but in the wrong direction.
So, even when Auburn is running at 'Oregon Speed' they're just making more mistakes faster.
"We're going to prepare for Oregon's speed by using our own speed!"
That's a noble thought but how do you prepare for a faster team when you start making mistakes when you move faster.
This is what I find most incredible about Oregon's offense and the mind of Chip Kelly. Chipper has been in Eugene since being hired in 2007 as the OC. That year he started to change the culture of Oregon's practice where he could, when he was given the reigns in 2009 the culture shifted dramatically. Practice was in the morning, while players were fresh, ready to learn. Practice became conditioning and in turn was shortened but intensified. The speed of practice translated to the speed of the game on Saturdays. A year later in 2010 the system was again refined and the players in the system had another year of experience in the Chip Kelly system. Chip since 2007 has been "watering the bamboo".
With all of that Oregon does not suffer when they push the tempo. The Ducks don't make more mistakes or break down. Every player on the field knows exactly what to do every play and they know FAST.
It's taken three years for Oregon to reach the pace that they're at now. Three years to become as efficient and deadly as they are now Auburn has 30 days to do the same, how fast does bamboo grow in 30 days?
Auburn has more time to break down Oregon's offense, but Oregon has the same time to find the flaws in Auburn's armor. Advantage, no one.
I'll leave you with this. Don't believe everything you hear from ESPN. Hell, don't believe everything that's in this post, question it, research it and find the hidden meanings. I'm a Duck fan through and through and I'll never disguise that fact. ESPN will tell you what they want you to hear. Right now they'll feed you this mud pie and tell you it's a delicacy so you'd better eat it without question. It's just a nation wide scam to keep your attention on them. To feed them your attention and money. They do it because they can and they'll continue to do it long after this post dies in the annyonimity of the internet. That doesn't mean you have to take it.
Auburn's so called speed is an ESPN fraud. If you don't think so prove me wrong.
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.
71 comments
|
16 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Mmmm...football. Mmmm pretty girls.
What, huh, soooo who’s faster, Oregon or the other guys?
We are now leaving ATQ. Did you go potty and take your medication?
Some interesting data there
Though I think all of us knew that Oregon was much faster than Auburn. Good work though.
I dispense B.S. and facts. It is up to you to figure out which is which.
I wasn't trying to prove that Oregon was faster
We all knew. What this was supposed to illuminate is that Auburn has no advantage whatsoever over a team like ASU in their ability to prepare for us other than the length of time they’ve been allotted. Auburn is not a spectacularly fast team that national media would feed you to believe.
Quack Quack Bitches!
Not intentionally
I actually have no Idea what quote you’re talking about.
Quack Quack Bitches!
by Quack Addict on Jan 6, 2011 10:44 PM PST up reply actions
it's actually a paraphrase but
“The idea is; the greater the lie, the more believable it is.” is paraphrased from Mein Kampf and has more or less reached the popular vernacular
Oderint Dum Metuant
And formed the basis of much of Joseph Geobbles propaganda machine
for the Nazis. Quite the trendsetters, those boys.
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
im glad im not the only person who has some knowledge of german history
circa 1933-1945. i was afraid i was going to look like some sorta freak
Oderint Dum Metuant
We were invited. Punch was served
"I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but I am, so that's how it comes out."-Bill Hicks
by Linoleum Knife on Jan 10, 2011 9:40 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
This was really hard for me to read,
not because it was poorly written, but because there was too much hotness in the white spaces.
I think Oregon is fast, but I’m not going to care until I get out of this thread.
Taxes don't kill jobs.
heh
It appears I missed a step and an embarrassing one at that. Fixed!
Quack Quack Bitches!
by Quack Addict on Jan 6, 2011 10:43 PM PST up reply actions
This is what the Internet needs: more stat-based foaming-at-the-mouth rants!!
(And thanks for the cheerleader pics!)
Life is a sport: Watch other people play it.
I give this post 2 thumbs up.
Interesting stuff. I would’ve loved to see a bit more on the efficiency stats, individual game examples might help. First thing that came to my mind was the Alabama game. They only scored 7 pts in that 2nd quarter when they were running almost the fastest they had all year.
"No one ever rises to low expectations." - Chip Kelly Head Coach at the Univ. of Oregon.
by SouthOfTheBorderDuck on Jan 7, 2011 8:00 AM PST reply actions
To hell with the stats
Show me more Cheerleader Hotness
If you are a War Damn Eagle, you can War Damn anything.
Nice writeup. And while I appreciated the, ummm, “visual aids,” it could use a NSFW-lite tag.
Defending maligned chants since 2009
Yeah, cheerleader shots are one thing, but the last picture was not allowed on the site, and has been removed.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Thank you
While it may be popular with everybody else, I’m an exception. I’m a big fan of solid writing which holds up and doesn’t need frequent eye candy interruptions. Of course, I’ll admit that I’m from a generation that likes to read and have an attention span (unlike the kidz these days who grew up post MTV). Your really interesting data and the points you wanted to make were hard to actually get to by people used to reading quickly. I really appreciate the effort and insight you provided here, though. Hope you keep posting!
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
by gamedaytribe on Jan 7, 2011 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
What picture did I miss? Damnit…stupid work!
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 7, 2011 12:55 PM PST up reply actions
ESPN is like a guy trying to convince himself that the other girl is hotter because she is more popular than the real hot chick.
ESPN wants to embelish the facts to hype the game up. I think AUB will be exposes by a better team. Real speed will emerge as Oregon runs past a team that struggled to put mediocre teams away. Beating Kentucky at the last second isn’t impressive. The SEC was just average this year and ESPN has to protect the game and the SEC’s image.
ESPN and the so-called "experts"
Here’s what I think happens…they all watched the Civil War and the SEC Championship Game. Auburn looked amazing in that game, and Oregon looked good, but not amazing. Immediately after watching those games, they are on TV having to say who they think will have the advantage. Having just finished watching those games, it’s somewhat natural for them to go “wow, Auburn is really good”, so they say Auburn.
Then, instead of going back and analyzing the entire season to see what they really think with an open mind, they do all of their analysis with that initial pick in mind. You barely ever see these guys change their minds. Hell, on Gameday before the Rose Bowl this year, they were killing Herbie for changing his pick in one of the games after finding out 1/2 of one of the teams had a severe flu. They don’t want to admit that their initial pick could have been wrong, so they just do everything they can to explain why they made that pick.
Then the group think kicks in…the other “experts” who weren’t forced to make that immediate decision on-air see that EVERYONE is picking one way, so they go the safe route and just agree with that pick. Next thing you know, you have a bunch of “experts” who have all made an emotional pick and are now digging for ANYTHING they can to back it up. And then when they are wrong, they just quickly explain it away. I would love to see ESPN keep a running stat on each analyst that shows their success in picking games…my guess is a vast majority would be around .500 or worse.
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 7, 2011 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
For a while there...
Corso was a death knell if he picked your team.
"The only proven shortcut to success is hard work." - Chip Kelly
by the_Duckinator on Jan 7, 2011 1:46 PM PST up reply actions
It often seems to me
They go into their analysis with the answer already in hand, then present cherry picked statistics to support their conclusions. It drives me nuts. I think theirs and maybe politics are the only professions where this sort of thing is acceptable. Most of us (I assume) have jobs that require us to look at the data first, then draw conclusions. It’s so political, that the analysis has become meaningless as a result.
"What the hell was that?"
"Spaceball One, they've gone to plaid!"
at least Kentucky is bowling
Auburn beat more ranked teams than the number of teams Oregon played with a winning record.
jeez. My apologies. I am getting cranky having already waited 34 days for this thing to happen.
Is it Monday yet?
You have to get this right:
It is NOT ESPN. It is eSECpn.
"There’s no reason Brian Cardinal should be blocking your shot on a fast break." - Golden State of Mind
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Jan 7, 2011 1:48 PM PST reply actions
Just so I understand this correctly, the Hottie in a bikini was removed, but this is acceptable?
Huh
"What the hell was that?"
"Spaceball One, they've gone to plaid!"
I am usually not one for disparaging the obese...
but damn do you have to be consuming calories even while being photographed.
"We do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor." - president of "the" Ohio State University.
That is tab(cola) she is drinking.
On february 5th 2011 at UFC 126 Jon "Bones" Jones will show the world that their was no need for the MMA community to hype this man because this guy is a beast with many skills and i personally will feel Ryan "Darth" Bader's pain after this fight. SB Nation's public enemy #1.
by wolfmanshowlforever on Jan 7, 2011 10:14 PM PST up reply actions
It's a Capri Sun. You can see the little yellow straw.
Damn the Blazers. Damn them to hell. - 'The Sports Guy' Bill Simmons
by doublezeroduck on Jan 8, 2011 6:41 PM PST up reply actions
It was a joke. Disparaging the obese. Tab was that non calorie cola. Good luck vs Auburn and kick some sec azz.
On february 5th 2011 at UFC 126 Jon "Bones" Jones will show the world that their was no need for the MMA community to hype this man because this guy is a beast with many skills and i personally will feel Ryan "Darth" Bader's pain after this fight. SB Nation's public enemy #1.
by wolfmanshowlforever on Jan 9, 2011 3:01 AM PST up reply actions
Nice pics
but I don’t think Auburn needs to be as fast, pace wise, as Oregon to do what we need to on Defense. We only have to be prepared to line up defensively and be ready for the play to start. What our times per play on offense have been during the season are irrelevant because they aren’t lined up against our defense in the games. We have consistently run 8 second drills during practice all season long. The 8 second drill is a suicide/wind sprint type drill in full pads where the O runs a play vs the D and has to get lined up under 8 seconds and run another play. This drill was in place all season long and you can bet they have been running that one a few times in the past 34 days. In addition, our starting LB’s (prob the most important position to stopping the run game) played nearly every snap of every game last season because of injury and depth issues. They won’t be running out of gas in the second half.
I freaking hate ESPN for numerous reasons, but Auburn will be very well prepared for Oregon’s pace on the 10th. As there are numerous other factors in determining the outcome of the game, we will have to see if this is the difference. :)
Just that simple huh?
“We only have to be prepared to line up defensively and be ready for the play to start.”
And everyone does wind sprints. The Ducks don’t bother. Rather, they practice at a speed that makes game speed look lethargic.
I am humble before Juju.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Jan 8, 2011 2:57 AM PST up reply actions
Reading comprehension?
Ever heard of it? The drill is full contact, in pads, and simulates real plays in practice. Understand now?
And yes, counteracting the pace starts with getting lined up and being ready for the play to start. You obviously still have to play defense after that, but it counteracts the pace being ready. Will it help tire the defense? Yes, if the offense is regularly getting first downs and moving the chains. It is much more difficult to do that when the D is ready.
Anyway, good luck to you guys. It should be a helluva game!!!
I think to affects of playing fast
Is more than simply conditioning. We saw it against UCLA and others, defenses get confused, out of position and can’t get the signal in time to respond appropriately. They are forced to call time out, or fake injuries as a result. This is not only about conditioning it’s about keeping the other team on their heels, and not allowing substitutions, or changes in the scheme. We force the other team to run basic packages, because there simply is not enough time to get lined up, look at the offense’s formation and get the signal, make adjust… oh shit they just snapped the ball. Damnit they just got into the secondary and ripped off a 15 yarder, crap they’re lining up again, get over there look at the formation, look to the sideli…. WTF they’re snapping it again!
"What the hell was that?"
"Spaceball One, they've gone to plaid!"
Sorry...
it also keeps defenses vanilla and not making adjustments.
"We do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor." - president of "the" Ohio State University.
Like your civility – good luck to you guys too
by Gauss Distro on Jan 8, 2011 7:35 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
The whole measuring system sucks.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but these times are based on the game clock, which makes them pretty useless, or at least very noisy. Good numbers would be based on actual elapsed time between plays, or between the end of one and the start of the next. I understand why ordinary people don’t want to calculate that, but ESPN sure could.
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
After the UCLA game I charted the times based on the play clock, which ESPN conveniently showed on the field with the yellow stripe. There wasn’t a significant statistical difference between the game clock data and the data from the play clock.
I can’t speak for the SEC, but this year, the P10 refs — at least at Oregon games — were pretty damn good about getting the ball in play, and the 40 second clock started. There was very little slack between the whistle and the play clock reset.
The biggest problems we saw with clock timing were related to injuries, and “injuries”.
Oregon Ducks. Undefeated vs SEC since 1977.
Okay I guess you have this covered.
I was assuming everyone was just dividing TOS by number of plays. Which would terrible results because sometimes the game clock stops for incomplete pass etc.
Disclaimer: everything I know about basketball I learned on Blazersedge.
Evere since Oregon 1st became ranked #1, they were on top in the coach’s poll.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but …didn’t they stay there through the remainder of the season?
everyone knows
that the SEC is super-fast, therefore all teams in the league must be. Enough with your “facts” and “rational analysis.” You need to start blindly accepting the story that everyone else is selling telling.
And what if the tables werer turned, and Auburn on the other side of the coin? All you’d hear was how the coach’s poll is the real one to watch, these guys know the game,
do it day in/day out , blah blah. I have yet to hear one analyist, expert, on espn, foxsports,
or any of the 4 XM sports channels, even mention that oregon has held this spot for so long. Damn coaches must not know what the hell they’re talking about.
Believe it
Auburn gets worse the faster they go, Oregon gets better, FACT. That was based on 2nd quarter stats. Both teams start off slow generally vs. better than avg. competition. And this all means……………….not that much, believe it.
Seriously, what it comes down to is that our defense is simply better and The Visor will scheme against any advantage their lines may have, thus neutralizing them. Our defense will get more stops and give up less big plays. I don’t see offensive speed being a big advantage. UA subs a lot and there will be so many breaks for commercials in this game, plus like an hour long half-time, that we will all want to shoot ourselves. The Auburn D may be more tired at the end of the game vs. our D, but it’s not like they’re going to be on IV’s and oxygen masks and being carted off the field suffering from hypoxia. Our defense will WIN THE DAY, our special teams may contribute. Remember however that in the Rose Bowl last year Oregon’s starting field position was seemingly the 40 yard line, our return game was off the charts, and then Masoli went 9-20 or something and it made no difference in the end. DEFENSE. 18.4ppg vs. 25 for UA, our D is better. 31-24 DUCKS!
Tall Duck Tales
Hmm, seems all your calculating was for nothing, in fact the total tally was Auburn 87 plays to Oregon’s 75. Seems you can’t run plays when you don’t have the ball. You gotta admit instead of seeing an outstanding Auburn Offense, Auburn’s defense turned the dial up to 11.
by Dusty WAR EAGLE on Jan 10, 2011 9:44 PM PST reply actions
I don't think many Duck fans (espec on this board) were doubting AU's defense.
The only thing any of us thought would be a weakness in AU’s D was it’s defensive backfield. Which was obviously the likely weakest link. We knew the DL front was going to be a “serial crusher” for our O-Line. And we knew we could count on Nick “Head Smasher” Fairley to disrupt us all day.
Your boys owned our running game completely. But contrarily I was also surprised how well we contained Mr. Uncontainable. A good defensive performance by both teams.
Cheers.
gOducks!
Old Guy Trojan fan defeatedly smoking a cig in the bathroom line @ the Coli during halftime:
"How DOES anybody stop you guys?!?!"
Me: Uhhhhhhh. er, well...
Go Ducks!
In Addition
I think Lou Holtz said it best, when he said: it’s easy to call and run plays quickly, in fact you can call from a Hospital Bed when it’s not a 3rd and 8, 2nd and 14, 3rd and 12. Auburn took Oregon’s “speed” away from them.
by Dusty WAR EAGLE on Jan 11, 2011 12:24 AM PST reply actions
You lost me at “Lou Holtz said it”
Addicted to Quack, home of Bill Musgrave, the best ever.
Welcome to the club, Cody Ross. You can stay at my house.
by Takimoto on Jan 11, 2011 12:28 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Sorry for the loss
I mean to say, sorry for losing you with the Lou Holtz thing, I understand maybe not the most reliable source, in fact he was predicting Oregon for the win before the game, although you have to admit he sounds a lot like Daffy Duck so I don’t understand the communication breakdown, I guess a different dialect, maybe?
I feel I must say, Oregon is a strong and scrappy bunch. They really are a great team, I knew that going into the game. I surely didn’t expect it to be the game it was. I knew the difference would be Auburn’s defense making key stops, however, just enough to keep the offense room to breathe, in what I believed would be shootout, but wow I never thought they’d have to step up due to the offense’s lack of scoring. Honestly I believe both teams were rusty coming off of the huge holiday season layoff. Auburn had so many missed opportunities and mistakes it made me ill. I’m sure you felt the same way about Oregon’s O.
Well, it’s been great typin’ too ya.
by Dusty WAR EAGLE on Jan 11, 2011 5:25 PM PST reply actions
quote: "Dusty WAR EAGLE: Sorry for the loss
I mean to say, sorry for losing you with the Lou Holtz thing, I understand maybe not the most reliable source, in fact he was predicting Oregon for the win before the game"
DAMN! then that’s why we lost. Lou Holtz was picking us. f#ck.
Old Guy Trojan fan defeatedly smoking a cig in the bathroom line @ the Coli during halftime:
"How DOES anybody stop you guys?!?!"
Me: Uhhhhhhh. er, well...
Go Ducks!
Well what do ya got to say now???
I expect a mile long post on why Oregon’s speed on offense was a fraud.
I told you guys that the pace would not be a factor and the speed of the teams was going to be at best a wash…and it was. It was a great game between two great teams but all the blathering in the world about “our speed is better than your speed” was/is/and will always be BS in the title game. That is the myth and the fraud. You don’t get to the BCS title game without generous helpings of speed on both sides of the ball.
It came down to making plays and seeing who wanted it more.
Col.Angus may be rough, Col.Angus may not smell like a bed of roses, but deep down Col.Angus is very sweet. If I overstay my welcome, just tap me on the head!!
by Col.Angus on Jan 14, 2011 6:48 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
What do we have to say?
Congratulations on your win. Great game!
Things a little slow over at TET today or something?
because fluke plays giving your team a three point win really means they wanted it more.
They once showed a clip of the Oregon offense to the French. The French decided to surrender, just to be on the safe side.
by QuackQuackAttack on Jan 14, 2011 9:23 AM PST up reply actions
Why?
I expect a mile long post on why Oregon’s speed on offense was a fraud.
Classy, very classy. My opinion of you just took a sharp nosedive.
Oregon loves you, Chip Kelly!
by gamedaytribe on Jan 14, 2011 9:58 AM PST up reply actions
It came down to making plays and seeing who wanted it more.
You come up with that all on your own or did your mom help you write this one too? Glad to know there are still plenty of asshats in the South continuing to give the fans down there a bad name. Keep up the good work Anus.
Thanks 2010 Ducks for a memorable season
Addicted to Quack
Just made back over to Addicted and will say
congrats on a good season and a well played game. I wish we had seen our strengths play a little better for both teams to get the score up a bit more.
I have seen a few people address the problems with this post and it was the same thing I said in the other speed post that was locked, the SEC is a ball control league and our numbers are skewed. People kind of blew off this fact, but when you don’t get the ball back quick, your play count is going to be lower. I am proud of my Tigers for being able to get your offense off the field as quick as they did and minus the 80+ yarder, we did a good job keeping your offense in front of us.
I will end with this, your future is still bright and could make it back next year. Next year will be rough for us and don’t be surprised to see us with 5 losses next year, we lose an entire offensive line, most of the defensive line and 2 of 3 linebackers. Good luck everyone next season.
I would be an Alabama fan too but I didn't go to Troy. Instead, I am an Auburn man because I went to Auburn.
Well, best wishes yourself.
I dot think your pace can match ours but I’ll tell you this; your defense was way faster than I thot that they’d be. I was impressed.
"What you are entrusted to do as a coach is to create an environment where your players have a chance to be successful." CHIP KELLY
Next season.
I wonder how many new hurry-up style play we’ll see from other FBS teams. I also think CK will had some new tangents and wrinkles. This year was a drastic evolution of our system. Probably much different than many of us expected. I cant wait to see what manifests with more experience, a fresh crop of new recruits, previously redshirted players being utilized, and a great preseason ranking. Not to mention the new conference structure and schedule.
LSU and then Nevada sounds tougher than this past season. I am disappointed with the MSt OOC game though. I’d rather see at least a mid-level Big-10 team in that slot. With that schedule we could silence a whole demographic of whiners.
Old Guy Trojan fan defeatedly smoking a cig in the bathroom line @ the Coli during halftime:
"How DOES anybody stop you guys?!?!"
Me: Uhhhhhhh. er, well...
Go Ducks!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
