I watched Cal lose to BYU..and when we played Cal I thought

[CougEd]

it may just be our passing game that gave their DB's so much trouble. Sonny Dykes fired his first defensive coordinator and based on results should can his second.

Between Cal and WSU I have never seen so many receivers run free in my life. I understand getting physically beat every once in awhile, but how many uncontested TD's did I see between the two teams.

Is it a coincidence these teams struggle so much defensively? Chip Kelly is an offensive guru, a pioneer and yet his defenses were respectable.

So far neither have had a respectable defense. Both have fired their DC's. Could it be that a DC with other offers would shy away from these two jobs?

While not a huge Curtis Conway fan from the Pac 12 network, he often says he doesn't know how it will work without a functioning running game. Maybe a DC really doesn't want to be put in the position where the QB of his team is chucking it 65 yards a game, and then is middle of the pack in scoring offense. I wonder if it may come down to a philosophy problem.

 

[Brent H.]

You know Greg Burns is their DB coach, right?

 

[chinookpirate]

Both teams put their incoming speed on offense and the team turtles go to the defense.

When you get a top Pac-12 receiver into space vs. a much slower, much more inexperienced safety, lb or cb and insert a top Pac QB who knows how to exploit it... Cal and WSU are what happen.

 

[CougEd]

Yes I do....and?

????

 

[Brent H.]

Re: Yes I do....and?

I recall you making a fuss why did we look at him for db's coach. So you pretty much just said that Cal is poorly coached, but you really wanted us to hire their db one time.

 

[spongebob11]

I posted a few weeks back about how these air raid teams seem to always have crappy defenses.

Of note concern to me is that Leach was blaming his D even though his offense pit the D in precarious positions.

A top D coordinator isn't going to look upon that favorably.

 

[CougEd]

Well I believe you would recall wrong...Also, I didn't pretty much say

anything other than it might be more problematic than saying it is a coaching problem.

I think in all the years I have been on this board I might have mentioned Burns name once in relationship to a WSU job. And he does have great credentials as a DB coach. He coached for John L at Louisville, he coached at SC for Pete Carroll, and he coached for Dennis. I don't know of a time when he was out of work that he would be a candidate for a DB position other than when Dennis got fired and saying he had a resume to look at. Other than at Cal, he still has a good resume to look at, and is very familiar with LA.

Fuss....no fuss, only a chuckle for those who pissed and moaned about level of coaching and then we hire a guy from Montana. If you can coach you can coach.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
I posted a few weeks back about how these air raid teams seem to always have crappy defenses.

Of note concern to me is that Leach was blaming his D even though his offense pit the D in precarious positions.

A top D coordinator isn't going to look upon that favorably.

Precarious positions like generating 515 yards per game and 31.8 points per game?

 

[chinookpirate]

Precarious positions like the ones CougLittle goes into detail on another thread.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by chinookpirate:
Precarious positions like the ones CougLittle goes into detail on another thread.

I was referring to things that actually happened.

 

[spongebob11]

Yards schmards.

Precarious positions like having your offense throw the ball 74 times with a frosh and turning the ball over 5 times.

We had 7 points going into the 4th quarter against UA, were almost shut out against UW, 13 against Nevada, and we can't convert 2nd and 2's.

That 31 ppg has a lot of garbage points figured in and and is thr 7th best in the conference and 44th in the nation.

This offense puts fear in no one.

This post was edited on 12/1 3:59 PM by spongebob11

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Yards schmards.

Precarious positions like having your offense throe the ball 74 times with a frosh and turning the ball over 5 times.

We had 7 points going into the 4th quarter against UA, were almost shut out against UW, 13 against Nevada, and we can't convert 2nd and 2's.

That 31 ppg has a lot of garbage points figured in and ants to 7th best in the conference.

This offense puts fear in no one.

How exactly does throwing 74 times, and WSU averages 64 but don't let the facts get in the way, put the defense in a precarious position. The offense actually fumbles at a greater rate than it gives up interceptions.

There are plenty of garbage time points in every other school's stats too.

 

[spongebob11]

We threw the ball at ASU 74 times.

If you learned the game by actually playing as opposed to a video game you would know a pass play is a lot more risky than a running play.

We fumbled more this yr than we threw ints? Interesting.

This post was edited on 12/1 4:08 PM by spongebob11

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
We threw the ball at ASU 74 times.

If you learned the game by actually playing as opposed to a video game you would know a pass play is a lot more risky than a running play.

We fumbled more this yr than we three ints? Interesting.

It's not my fault you cannot articulate whatever point you are trying to make. It's also not my fault that you're not reading what I posted.

 

[Coug95man2]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Yards schmards.

Precarious positions like having your offense throw the ball 74 times with a frosh and turning the ball over 5 times.

We had 7 points going into the 4th quarter against UA, were almost shut out against UW, 13 against Nevada, and we can't convert 2nd and 2's.

That 31 ppg has a lot of garbage points figured in and and is thr 7th best in the conference and 44th in the nation.

This offense puts fear in no one.
[/B]
This post was edited on 12/1 3:59 PM by spongebob11

You don't know jack. When we almost win (arguably won with a bad non-call) against the Number 2 (arguably #1) in the Nation, there isn't one team that looks past us, doesn't watch that game tape and say how LUCKY Oregon was for coming out of Pullman with a W. Prime example of our O doing great things.

Our O has had its moments, to be sure. My 3 games of disaster: Rutgers, Nevada, UW. There's plenty of room for criticism. But our O being anemic? Please. Beyond those 3 games… All D issues, IMHO. And I might add… if we had a good D, those are the games that the D helps win, while one side of the ball is having issues...

 

[spongebob11]

I am sensing a pattern here. Every time your arguments get shut down, you resort to the you can't read what I wrote defense. You need new material.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
I am sensing a pattern here. Every time your arguments get shut down, you resort to the you can't read what I wrote defense. You need new material.

I take that to mean that you don't have a point.

 

[spongebob11]

I've already made my point. Not my fault you can't read.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
I've already made my point. Not my fault you can't read.

Throwing 74 times puts the defense in the bad spot. Why? Explain it, if you can.

 

[spongebob11]

Because if you throw the ball 74 times in a game, you are bound to make a few bad reads and a few errant throws...never mind the the opportunity to get blindsided.

Hence, 5 turnovers.

That's how football in the real world works outside of video games.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Because if you throw the ball 74 times in a game, you are bound to make a few bad reads and a few errant throws...never mind the the opportunity to get blindsided.

Hence, 5 turnovers.

That's how football in the real world works outside of video games.

And if you run the ball 74 times, you're bound to have some fumbles.

Do you have a point? Do you want to run less plays?

 

[spongebob11]

Nowhere did I say run the ball 74 times...and you know that.

I think throwing the ball more than 50 times with a frosh qb is a turnover waiting to happen.

I can't help it that you can't see that a lot more can go wrong on a pass play than a running play...but I guess that is to be expected when you learn the game of football on a video game.

 

[wulffui]

Well, we don't all have access to the "Football 101" text since you made it your bible. But you can throw the ball without it being an interception- somehow our opponents did it 289 times in our first eight PXII games, without a turnover in sight.

 

[spongebob11]

Its not a football 101 bible...just common sense that every coach on the planet except Leach adheres too.

And sure, you can throw the ball without an int.

But when you throw it 65 plus times, you increase your odds...as well as the odds of a sack and a dropped pass.

Can't believe I have to explain this to you.

 

[wulffui]

So, when you read up there that our fumble rate was higher than our INT rate- did that not compute for you?

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Nowhere did I say run the ball 74 times...and you know that.

I think throwing the ball more than 50 times with a frosh qb is a turnover waiting to happen.

I can't help it that you can't see that a lot more can go wrong on a pass play than a running play...but I guess that is to be expected when you learn the game of football on a video game.

But running the ball instead, with a RS freshman RB, is not a turnover waiting to happen?

 

[wulffui]

Originally posted by dgibbons:

Originally posted by spongebob11:
Nowhere did I say run the ball 74 times...and you know that.

I think throwing the ball more than 50 times with a frosh qb is a turnover waiting to happen.

I can't help it that you can't see that a lot more can go wrong on a pass play than a running play...but I guess that is to be expected when you learn the game of football on a video game.

But running the ball instead, with a RS freshman RB, is not a turnover waiting to happen?

We both know the play Sponge wants is NEVER wrong. The literal bevy of short yardage runs that have failed for this team? IMMATERIAL!

 

[spongebob11]

Nope...because it is bs.

 

[spongebob11]

It sure isn't. We aren't going to fumble 5 times in a game if we balance things out more.

And the argument you guys make that all we do is get stuffed at the Los is ridiculous.

Did we not have 2 runs in the 1st quarter of the apple cup for more than 7 yds?

 

[wulffui]

Both running the ball and being good at it are fine. And with Falk at QB, and another year in the program for EVERY contributing OL and RB outside of West, I'd think next year would be a year to more adequately appraise the functionality of the running game.

If the offense is mostly a "QB calls a play based on the D" offense, I think Falk will audible to a run play more frequently than Halliday did.

But for what it has done, it's been absolutely woeful at the thing you demand most- the running in run specific situations, which makes your insistence that they do it more often make no sense.

 

[spongebob11]

I agree...we don't run the ball well on 3rd and 4th down situations.

We do run pretty well when the defense is thinking pass...2nd and 2 or 3 for example.

 

[spongebob11]

You guys might want to read a certain Alex Brink article. He says exactly the same thing I am saying.

 

[dgibbons]

Originally posted by spongebob11:
You guys might want to read a certain Alex Brink article. He says exactly the same thing I am saying.

Not really.

And you've already opined that Leach won't get it done here. Brink disagrees with you on that, too.

 

[spongebob11]

Yes really. He said what I've been saying on here verbatim..including running the ball to move the lbs.

He did say Leach will get it done...with quite a few caveats...including tweaking his offense like I have been saying.

 

[dgibbons]

Didn't see any endless rants about running on 2nd and 2.

 

[spongebob11]

You're right..he didn't specifically say 2nd and 2...but I'm pretty sure he wasn't insinuating running the ball on 3rd and long.

It's more than likely that is what you interpreted though.

This post was edited on 12/2 10:03 PM by spongebob11

 

[CougPatrol]

Perhaps we'll run more when the offensive line gets squared away? We've still got a ways to go up front.

 

[spongebob11]

Well see...but not holding my breath.

I think Leach is smart enough to tweak his offense..but too stubborn to