As stated by the AZ media, there were 5 dropped passes with 4 key ones which would have significantly helped move chains/score. Foles attempted 57 passes. Those 4 passes make up 7% of all passes attempted. You mentioned 40% (open) and make it sound like their WR were just standing around in the open field. That's false. Even Kelly commented on the talent of QB and WR and said you have to chalk it up to a QB dropping the ball right where it needs to be. But, it is possible you know more about the coverage than Kelly...
Getting more specific, I thought Pleasant had a nice game. He had several solo tackles and broke up a few passes. One should have been picked - but, as we know, stuff gets dropped. John Boyett was a ball hawk, had some big hits, deflections and almost had two picks. Dropped balls work both ways...
I didn't mention 40%. That was BP. Listen, I'm not the only person who noticed that the pass defense was sub-par on Saturday night, so I'm not crazy.
sorry if you feel you are being attacked. Thats not my intent at all. I personally wasnt saying that you said it was 40% (I know you were mentioning that to Targus not me) I am just pointing out that if you give a top level QB 60 Attempts with the top corps of WR's and a pretty young CB's... (I know Cliff Harris, and Gildon are experienced but I'm referring to the likes of Mitchell, Ifre, Mathis etc, players who would be in during nickel and dime packages) ... Yards are going to be given up. You mentioned in the OP that you were concerned which is fine. I personally am just pointing out why I'm not concerned.
Nope. Wrong again. By my calculations, you're 84.5% crazy. Bad news is Stoops is only 84.7% crazy so you're in with some pretty rough company!! Just kidding!! We disagree. Good. Doesn't mean we can be respectfully so. I think our secondary, like every position on the field, came away with areas of improvement. I'm just one that feels we did pretty well against the best passing offense in the conference - even with our 3's on the field. A conference win is just that...a win. This game was arguably over after Q1 and it was nice to see us have the opportunity to go deep on the bench for increased experience with the 2's and 3's. We've got some areas to work on...but, bring on Mr. Luck.
I watched the game and saw a lot of replays with people just running free. I'm not making it up. Look at the game yourself and tell me if I'm wrong.
I respect your opinion and have agreed to a very minimal extent. I don't think you're really open to any other opinion here. Are you telling me that with limited TV coverage, you see and are able to observe more coverage than the coaches and media that are present? 1. Tell me when Foles had a lower completion % and QB rating. This is a direct result of coverage. Woody from RG stated: The Duck defense played great football outside of a couple of drives in the second half, when they momentarily allowed the Wildcats to get back into the game. After getting only three sacks in the first three games, Oregon got five in this game: including two by defensive end Dion Jordan, one by Terrell Turner and two by linebackers Dewitt Stuckey and Josh Kaddu. Schroeder from RG stated: Combine that with a defensive performance that was adequate — Nick Foles is good, folks, and he’s got some good targets to hit — and the takeaway from Saturday was that yeah, the Ducks have found a pretty good rhythm. Another good example of Oregon’s dominance... I've already posted Kelly's comments on his secondary efforts. He was asked about the efforts of the secondary and basically said sometimes you just have to chalk it up to a great QB putting the ball right where it needs to be. When have you ever known Chip to not point out weaknesses and areas for improvement? We're in agreement, there were some blown coverages. 40% - pure crap. It's FOOTBALL and it happens - and will happen more with nearly 60 some pass plays. I've already agreed the coverage is an area to work on, but if fans are going to bellyache over a few blown coverages - to the top passing team in the conference, especially when our 2's, 3's and even 4's (!) are guarding some of the best WR's around (a luxury made possible by a large early lead) then they fail to see the effort made by Pleasant, Boyett and others in this good conference win. What was the spread on this game? 16? And we won by 25? Hhmmmm.... Hey, guess what!? Stanford and Oregon have shared one common opponent thus far - UA. Guess what, in that game, Foles completed 72% of his passes (59% vs UO) and UA had MORE yards per play vs Stanford than they did against UO. Stanford scored 37 points against that suspect UA defense...UO laid 56 in a contest where the foot was taken off the gas a bit and a lot of kids got to play.... Maybe I just don't understand football and coverage as well as you, but I'm sticking to my guns...our secondary will have some film to watch but overall, it was a great effort by the boys who had to shut down the best passing attack in the Pac for this to be a win. "The only stat that matters is a win or a loss and we won tonight," safety John Boyett said following the game.
Well, I also spoke with a couple of coworkers who were at the game. One was a college 3-time all-american linebacker (granted, it was at Eastern Washington) and he seems a bit knowledgeable about the game. He tells me it was a miracle AZ didn't score 9 TD's with those receivers running around uncovered down field. Or maybe it just seemed so. But the game is over and we did win and I am sure if there are deficiencies, they will be addressed.
Against Oregon, Foles was held to his lowest QB rating and completion % since Nov of 2010. We hear about how good Stanford's defense is...Foles completed 73% of his passes against Stanford and 59% vs Oregon and had more yards per completion vs Stanford. Additionally, there were some 'catchable' balls vs Stanford that didn't end in completions. Oregon's secondary did a nice job.
Orrrrrr his receivers just weren't on that day. It's not Foles fault if his receivers are dropping perfect passes.
The D line is to small to play against the top 3 SEC schools or the top 2 Big 12 schools and win. I'd also throw the Badgers and Nebraska into that mix. If The O wants to get to that next level and win a national championship the #1 need is size on both sides of the line! LSU showed that a very average offense that they had with two huge lines took our Ducks right out of the game. Bama and the Sooners are of that same mold.
Could not disagree more. IMO in our last 4 losses the only loss I can put on the Defense would probably be Stanford. Our Defense kept us in the National Title Game. Our Defense was the only reason we even somehow were within 20 points of BSU without a first down for a whole half. And the D did just fine considering how many short fields they were given vs LSU. The lack of Size (our DT's are pretty large by the way) is made up for with different blitzes, and stunts. Bigger slower D-lineman would have a hard time with that. So that would require a new scheme, and/or D-Coordinator... but that is a different discussion altogether
It's already been established that the number of dropped passes was a minimal percentage of overall passes thrown. Oregon had a similar situation with dropped passes vs LSU. It can be caused by a lot of different factors including due to a defense doing some things right - disrupting timing, rushing throws, etc. No one has even mentioned that a few of the throws were rushed and the WR was still running route and not looking for the ball. Clearly, timing and defense were doing their job. As the announcer stated, at lease four of the muffed passes were passes that Foles hits 99 out of 100 times with his WR in practice. Timing... If I understand correctly, it's been claimed 40% of passes were wide open and if it were not for dropped passes, UA would have at least kept it close. There are no factual basis for this, however, I do respect your opinion. I certainly disagree, because I not only saw something else develop on the field, I read reports from Kelly and media that would disagree with your theory. Stats and the end score show Oregon secondary performed their role. Does it make more sense to you if I say "Arizona's completion %" instead of Foles? My gosh......
LOL, it's all good either way. I respect people's opinions and enjoy attempting to communicate my madness. Sports banter/chatter is good stuff!
Hush Wheels and stop acting like you actually watch the games. We all know you don't because you never participate in the game threads, which is the only actual proof that people watch Duck games.... which means that only BP and I are allowed to have an opinion.
Take a look at LSU and Arizona this year.... Both of their offensive lines made huge holes in our defensive line for their punishing RB's to get large gains. No way around that! This pulls the DB's and corners in to back up the LB's causing the deep ball to be more easliy thrown as LSU and AZ both showed. As for the BCS championship we are missing a couple major players from that teams defense this year including our all everything LB. Oregons offense is very quick and strikes fast enough to give 10 points of cushion for most games against good teams. However against the best teams such as LSU, Bama, Oklahoma and Stanford this year that fast, light D line of Oregon's wont help them against 6'5 300 pounders that bang open huge hole for very punishing running backs! Make no mistake these teams will run as many plays as they can to keep our defense on the field for as long as possible and our offense off it. Size does matter here! The SEC has shown with 5 championships in 7 years why!
