A Possible Explanation for Recent Offensive Problems in Bowl Games
Chip Kelly can't win the bowl game. He should have at least beaten Ohio State on a day when their quarterback had the best game of his life and they sure as hell should have beaten an Auburn team that was led by the Heisman winner and a future NFL rookie record breaker. Yeah, Chip Kelly sure as hell should've won both of those games.
For a moment let's take all context away from the two bowl games. Let's forget that they were BCS bowl games in consecutive years. Let's forget one was the national championship game. Lastly let's ignore the fact that the national championship game ended on a field goal as time expired and the Rose Bowl was close all the way through and the turning point was a LeGarrette Blount fumble through the end zone near the end of the third.
If you had told me before the each bowl game that we were going to hold Ohio State to 26 and Auburn to 22, I would have guessed we would win both games by at least two touchdowns. No Duck fan can complain about how the defenses performed in our two previous bowl games.
One of the points that national writers hammer home is that teams who have a lot of time to prepare for the Oregon offense tend to win. However, I would argue that the point of extra time to prepare is a confounding variable. Oregon-Auburn was played so close throughout and featured multiple goal line stands that sometimes games come down to who has the ball last. In Oregon-Ohio State the Ducks gave up a turnover on Blount's fumble in to the end zone that basically took 7 points off the board. Oregon-Boise State just was blown from the get go, but Boise State has a habit of doing that to teams. Oregon-USC this year was a mismatch at the defensive back and wide receiver position and Matt Barkley found Marqise Lee at will. The first time Oregon played Stanford under Chip Kelly the Ducks defense couldn't get a stop, but the offense scored just as much as Stanford's (well, slightly less, hence the loss). Against LSU, Oregon did better offensively than any other team and had their not been such a nasty string of turnovers LSU wouldn't have been able to play with such a large lead and gas our defense by running so many power plays.
I don't think any of these teams solved the Oregon offense. There wasn't a strategy that universally works or every other team would run it. What had the biggest impact in those games was that Oregon didn't win the turnover battle, which is a pretty basic part of winning a game. But let's look back again at the bowl games. Better yet, let's look at the offensive adjustments Oregon made for each bowl game since Chip Kelly has been a head coach.
Against South Florida in the 2007 Sun bowl the Ducks won convincingly with Justin Roper throwing for four touchdowns and Oregon outgaining the Bulls by 309 yards. Oregon didn't do anything crazy different from that season. To compensate for Roper's lack of speed Oregon always had a pitch option for him in case he pulled the ball from the running back and to slow down the defense's pursuit there was a lot of pre-snap motion which Oregon hadn't done a lot of that season. Nothing radically different from the season took place, just a few wrinkles that gave different looks.
In the 2008 Holiday Bowl against Dez Bryant and the Oklahoma State Cowboys Oregon won 42-31. On offense the Ducks sprinkled in some regular speed options, rolled out more than normal, and read play side defenders (rather than the backside defensive end as usual) that open up some big holes for Masoli to run through the middle of the offensive line. Again, these are just smaller wrinkles, and the majority of what fans saw was what Oregon ran during the season.
Where we started seeing big changes was in the bowl games when Chip Kelly took over as head coach. Against Ohio State in the Rose Bowl Oregon tried to avoid a strength of the Buckeye defense by attacking the perimeter. Oregon ran jet sweeps from under center and often motioned LaMichael James out of the backfield and in to bunch formations on the perimeter. In the national championship game Oregon ran a lot of triple options with H-backs. There were also the formations with jet sweeps and H-backs where Oregon didn't have anybody next to Darron Thomas. Often times running these plays, in both the Rose Bowl and National Title game, was that the offense didn't seem 100% sure of where it was going. Kenjon Barner kept trying to jam through the line rather than hit the corner of the end zone. Receivers didn't seem on the same page with Darron Thomas on when to turn when dealing with sight adjustments for blitzes. It didn't look like an Oregon squad that had taken four weeks off, it looked like things teams would struggle with the first time they were running plays in a game.
The new formations and plays were the majority of the offense in the Rose Bowl and the majority of the first half in the BCS game (Apparently if you just read Nick Fairley he'll run at the quarterback and running back to tackle both of them simultaneously). These adjustments may have been made to account for people having extra time to prepare. The formations may have been used to create looks that the defense didn't know how to react to.
I think above all this may throw our own offense off. The drastic changes in offense may be a result of over thinking. These new looks on offense have been exciting to me as a fan, especially since the x's and o's of football are an obsession of mine, but the results have been much better when there are simply wrinkles applied to the offense rather than whole schematic makeovers. Oregon's run a lot of plays only a couple times this year that have been under the radar enough for Oregon to run them more than usual in the Rose Bowl. This season there's been a ton of plays sprinkled here and there that could easily complement a nice set of wrinkles for the Oregon offense. Wisconsin is going to finish with a score that would lead me to believe Oregon would win, say less than 30. It's time to let the offense Oregon runs during the regular season try to score more than 30. Let's truly let Wisconsin be a faceless opponent and have the Ducks play by their strengths rather than avoid the strengths of others.
26 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think a key is this year is that we have the talent to beat another elite team with execution.
Against Ohio State and Auburn, we were trying to overcome a talent disparity. And I think part of the reason for trying to stay one step ahead was to make up for the fact that we just didn’t have the players to outbully those teams. But I absolutely agree with the idea that we didn’t look comfortable running these new formations on the big stage. But this year we match up well talent-wise with Wisconsin, and can run our bread-and butter and run it well.
Addicted to Quack, #1 Oregon blog among female Duck fans, including the ageless and ever-radiant daisyduck.
Our offensive line is probably my biggest concern going into this.
Other than the wrs it was our most inconsistent group all year. They have to be cohesive early and avoid drive killing penalties that have been an issue during the year and our last couple ooc games. Giving Wisconsin’s offense a headstart wouldnt bode well for the rest of the game.
But this year we match up well talent-wise with Wisconsin,
Yup, and I think when you remove that “confusion” the tempo piece comes into play that should be one of our strengths.
On the OL I think the same thing applies, where we’re not going to get blown up as much and get in panic/penalty mode early.
For Oregon, King Kelly, and St Quack!
I'd argue that to a man, we were as talented as Auburn
They just happened to have those two REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY talented guys while we only had a few REALLY REALLY talented guys.
"Forget it. If 21 gets behind you, you can play the fight song." --Scott Van Pelt
I agree
This is something I’ve seen again and again – this tendency to get cute, to outthink ourselves and go away from what we’ve done to doing something very different. Now, this isn’t always bad; we almost always have some new wrinkle that we throw in for a game, and often this works out great. A lot of the bubble screens we’ve done for DAT, the sweep we introduced against Washington, the triple option we’ve done more of – those were all new things.
The trick is that I think we haven’t done nothing but new things. And that’s the rub.
It’s good to not do things that we know are going to fail, but it’s good to have some things that we’ve done in the past to perfection.
Also, on BSU – I think a lot of that was on Chip Kelly. I think that they were an excellent team – but we were also not prepared in a lot of ways. Kelly wasn’t. It’s hard to think this now, but at the time Kelly had zero head coaching experience and only two years experience coaching in DI at all. He’s gonna make some mistakes.
Finally, something else to note: when given time, Aliotti is a machine. One common thread in all the bigger losses is that our defense played better than anyone expected, and this goes back to the 2001 Fiesta Bowl game. LSU, Auburn, Boise have all been massively successful defensive performances.
Let’s get the offense to the table too.
I think Kalon has a point...
… Most teams are bad when they become one dimensional. The Ducks offense – no different- stalls when it can’t get the running game going as DT just isn’t the kind of QB that can beat good teams with his arm without the threat of play action available. The stalling of the running game seems to be the most common thread in those few losses and close calls noted above.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
I think a good chunk of it is that defenses with time to prepare almost always are better than offenses with time to prepare.
We made Cam Newton look pedestrian when we had a month to study him and his reads, and Auburn screwed up our mesh point at least three times before the play got started. Both of the defenses looked good not just because they were talented or particularly great defenses. They had a month to prepare.
Knowing this, Chip Kelly decided to basically rewrite the playbook in hopes of catching Auburn off-guard. I know it sort of caught me off-guard as a fan to watch us run that Gator formation in the NCG. The truth is also that that formation in particular had a ton of potential if we could have run it better. Any one of those guys in the backfield could have been holding the ball at any time, and it seems like we never capitalized on it. It was either a slam play into the middle with the guy in motion, or a keeper where Darron Thomas awkwardly ran a little, then pitched it for no reason. His reads were off both due to the pressure of the game and probably not having run the formation before in a game and understanding the decision.
I think we could put that same formation to great use in the future if we really work on it more. The idea was there, but not the execution. In some ways, we did overthink it, probably. The coaches knew that we couldn’t just run the same offense that Ohio State and Auburn had studied for a month and get great results, but they seemed to overcompensate for it and run a formation that looked both poorly acquainted with by the team, and not very conducive to Darron Thomas’ abilities as a quarterback. Did we pass out of that formation at all?
A third leg of it that is going to sound like an excuse but really isn’t is that in the BCS games commercial breaks are long and aplenty. We never seem to wear them down or get into a rhythm unless we’re sustaining a long drive, which we rarely do. We can’t wear them out and get them where we want them because every time we start to they have to go to commercial, or have some kind of promo. Again, it’s not an excuse, because we should overcome it, but it’s another reason why the pace of the game rarely gets controlled by us.
Things like that.
Turnovers
If you watch the analysis on fishduck.com one can easily come to the conclusion that neither defense is likely to stop the other team. Their run, and play action off of it, is beast. Our speed will kill. Thus, in my opionion, assuming neither teams offense stops itself (poor execution, dropped balls) then this game will come down to turnovers. I expect a departure from previous Rose Bowl and NCG and predict a high scoring affair, much like the Wisconsin/Michigan State games. I will be at the game and have prepared myself mentally for a lot of scoring. My belief is that if we play mistake free football our speed on offense leads to more points end of the day. GO DUCKS.
by themilman on Dec 26, 2011 1:36 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Yeah, and the more I think about it the more I think that's wrong
Again, think about the big games: Oregon’s D has been exceedingly great in all of them. When given time to prepare Oregon’s D is great, and not just great – better than they are in the regular season. While Wisconsin is quite likely the best offense in the nation right now, the notion that we won’t stop them I think is historically inaccurate.
I don’t think we’ll completely shut them down, but I do think they’ll be significantly worse than what they normally do.
Oregon's D benefits from being able to take excessive risks as a result of their prolific offense
Their sexy zone blitz schemes and lopsided line alignments are luxuries that only teams who score 40+ every week can afford. If the Wisc D provides a little more resistance than the typical milquetoast Pac 10 D, will the Ore D be faced to play more conservative in whatever they call their “base”?
Ore is less tested in close games and the cautious adjustments they have to make in a slugfest are not all that familiar to players more accustomed to taking high risks. I suspect this lack of familiarity is a factor in the last two bowl games and leads to a certain level of unpredictability to this game.
Damn, my eyeball tastes good.
@chrislandon
Yeah, but no
My point was not that Oregon’s D gets better as Oregon’s O gets a lead (which is true), but when Oregon’s D has time to prepare against big-time teams they tend to do very, very well. Auburn was held to their second-lowest score of the year. BSU was held to their second lowest score. LSU had significantly fewer yards per play than they normally do. Stanford was held significantly below their averages and points, as well as significantly below Luck’s averages. Etc, etc. the only knock here has really been USC.
The Oregon offense has come up short in big games, but the Oregon D has come up huge in big games. They’re not the unit I’m remotely questioning as long as we’re not facing NFL-caliber receivers.
Also, the Wisconsin D by virtually any measure is not that good. They’re certainly worse than Stanford, Cal or USC, and definitely worse than LSU. Oregon’s faced significantly harder defenses. The notion that Wisconsin will put up more resistance than USC or Cal or Stanford, much less LSU, is pretty silly.
If you watch the analysis on fishduck.com one can easily come to the conclusion that neither defense is likely to stop the other team.
I really disagree with this. This Oregon team is built to get stops. They’re going to give up yards and some points, and they’re going to get stops. Not 100% of the time, and Wisconsin will get some points, but Oregon will have plenty of opportunities, just like they did against Stanford, USC, etc.
Even your example of the MSU games, those had a lot of points, but also a ton of stops. Wisconsin had 6 scoring drives, and punted 5 times. That’s not exactly dominance. Let’s not forget that Wisconsin has been a significantly different team away from home (something few seem to be remembering), and this analysis just doesn’t really stack up.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Howdy friends.
Just joined addicted to quack, so this is my first post. To introduce myself, I’m a senior in high school, but just graduated early. I love following football, and am a diehard Houston Texans fan(I encourage you to visit Battle Red Blog, light hearted reads and nice people). I live in Houston, and have a cruise next summer to Alaska. After getting back to Seattle, plan to drive to Oregon and visit the campus and get a vibe for Oregon.
But enough about me:
1) What’s everyone’s biggest concern going into the rose bowl?
2) Does anyone want an update on Jeff Maehl? He’s recently played some special teams this year due to our various injuries, but I doubt we see him in the offense again until at least next year’s preseason. I watched him in training camp, and was impressive as he was on tv in person. I can wait to see him flying around in kubiak’s offense, and I believe he could end up as a wes welker 2.0. With Andre Johnson on one side of the field, plus Jeff Maehl in the slot, arian foster in the back field and hopefully a WR in the draft next year on the other side of the field, the texans may have found a perfect fit for the maehlman
by Slightly Obsessed on Dec 26, 2011 2:25 PM PST reply actions
My biggest concern
Is how we actually handle the Wisconsin offense. They are better than anything we’ve seen this season.
Nice to hear about Maehl; I really hope he does well in the NFL.
I don’t see this game being any different then the previous bowl games. The offense will start off slow and DT will be high strung throwing balls 10 feet over receivers heads. The O-line has been way too inconsistent this year for me to think they won’t get blown up early and often.
The defense will be healthy and come out playing fired up and inspired D. This game will be low scoring and will come down to a field goal.
I just don’t see the offense clicking and putting up many points. This has been a very inconsistent group and with the long lay off we will see plenty of mistakes.
I want to be wrong…..please somebody tell me I’m crazy and that we will win by 40+ points!
by OfficerCosta on Dec 26, 2011 2:28 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Even inconsistent
We can still put up tons of points. that’s sort of the cool thing.
I don’t think we’ll win by 40 points. I do think we should be favored in the matchup; we match up exceedingly and amazingly well against their D.
We match up very, very well with their defense. They are not dominant on the line, which has been what has really hurt us in recent years.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Where's the evidence that Wiscy can "blow up" an opponents offensive line?
This just in: Wisconsin isn’t LSU, Auburn, or even Ohio State in terms of their defensive line.
Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.
by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Dec 27, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Their game film
And looking at trends and advanced stats. They have quite a few tackles for loss and a lot of them are recorded by their front 4. Watching them they do get quite a bit of penetration. No, it’s not Nick Fairley – but they are quite good.
No more dropsies.
It’s been widely speculated that teams beat Wisconsin with a good pass attack. Oregon throws wide screens, bubble screens, slants and downfield. But we have seen way too many dropped passes this season.
The LSU game was full of dropsies. But the receivers caught enough against Stanford. How well the receivers hold onto the ball will make a difference of whether this is an easy game or a long game.
We are now leaving ATQ. Did you go potty and take your medication?
Nah
Speculation is wrong; OSU beat them with some luck and with a lot of running from their QB,and MSU beat them with outside runs and bubble screens. In both cases it was exploiting speed to the outside and lack of discipline.
They’re simply not that great of a defense. Which is fine, since their offense keeps them in games easily.
agreed
Can’t wait to see Sumler and Blackmon get on the field, hopefully by next season. Those two with a healthy Josh Huff and DAT occassionally lining up as a receiver would have the offense on a whole new level. Imagine defenses having to defend a true vertical threat. Kenjon would run wild. Of course, he will either way.
GO DUCKS!
The Sun Belt Conference: earning the SEC BCS berths since 2001.
And Kelley
¡Me gustan las tortugas!
And Cliff Harris was like, "VRRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
by DuckUntilDeath on Dec 27, 2011 9:38 AM PST up reply actions
Offensive line
I continue to think that the key for Oregon in big bowl games is getting more talented offensive line players. Our line has been great the past five years but we’ve got guys with less raw talent. Getting linemen that can go toe to toe against the top d linemen in the country is going to be huge for Oregon going forward.
by builds character on Dec 26, 2011 7:28 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
No Excuses
You are a better team than they are. You have beaten better teams than they have. Your losses were against better teams than theres. You’re the PAC12 Champions, the Rose Bowl IS OUR HOUSE. Just win the F-ing game.
FIGHT ON !
_________________________________________________________________________
"You can't sanction heart, and you can't sanction the will to win" - USC QB, Matt Barkley

by 























