Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

jimmy12 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

dphi wrote:

jimmy12 wrote: I am also concerned about Willie's offense. We are used to scoring at will. Chip exposed weaknesses almost immediately. WT is showing an inability to coach to strengths of the assets we currently have weaknesses of the defense.

Just to confirm, you're talking about the offense that, even after the last two games with a struggling freshman QB and no WRs, is tied for 22nd in scoring?

If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

Agreed 100%

Remember though, the key phrase is reasonable.

ifuwant2 wrote:

jimmy12 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

dphi wrote:

jimmy12 wrote: I am also concerned about Willie's offense. We are used to scoring at will. Chip exposed weaknesses almost immediately. WT is showing an inability to coach to strengths of the assets we currently have weaknesses of the defense.

Just to confirm, you're talking about the offense that, even after the last two games with a struggling freshman QB and no WRs, is tied for 22nd in scoring?

If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

Agreed 100%

Remember though, the key phrase is reasonable.

Surely some of that can be chalked up to youth and a brand new coaching staff with a new system though.

karlhungis wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

jimmy12 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

dphi wrote:

jimmy12 wrote: I am also concerned about Willie's offense. We are used to scoring at will. Chip exposed weaknesses almost immediately. WT is showing an inability to coach to strengths of the assets we currently have weaknesses of the defense.

Just to confirm, you're talking about the offense that, even after the last two games with a struggling freshman QB and no WRs, is tied for 22nd in scoring?

If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

Agreed 100%

Remember though, the key phrase is reasonable.

Surely some of that can be chalked up to youth and a brand new coaching staff with a new system though.

Let’s hope.

ifuwant2 wrote:The offense ran for 275 yards against Stanford and averaged 6.4ypc. That was a better average than Stanford. The OL didn't play well against WSU or ASU. They have played pretty well in 5 out of 7 games. The penalties are a problem for them though.

Agreed. Outside of penalties, our OL has been playing pretty well. They are not a position of concern for me.

karlhungis wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

jimmy12 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

dphi wrote:

jimmy12 wrote: I am also concerned about Willie's offense. We are used to scoring at will. Chip exposed weaknesses almost immediately. WT is showing an inability to coach to strengths of the assets we currently have weaknesses of the defense.

Just to confirm, you're talking about the offense that, even after the last two games with a struggling freshman QB and no WRs, is tied for 22nd in scoring?

If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

Agreed 100%

Remember though, the key phrase is reasonable.

Surely some of that can be chalked up to youth and a brand new coaching staff with a new system though.

That's my view, and don't forget depleted depth after years of poor recruiting. I'm being optimistic - whether that's reasonable or not depends on your outlook on life I suppose.

ifuwant2 wrote:If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is always a way to put a more positive spin on things as well. For example, people would point to the Arizona State game as an example of the offense having "issues" even with Herbert at QB. The Ducks did manage to score 35 points in that game, which doesn't look so bad after that same Arizona State defense just held Washington to 7 points. The Oregon offense was shredding the Cal defense with Herbert at QB. This same Cal defense just held Washington State to 3 points.

At some point fans are going to have to come to grips with that fact that not only is Chip gone but his offense is as well. There are no quality teams running tempo right now. That offense is a thing of the past. Time to move on.

Taggart should probably hire a Helrich type to game plan and call plays but we had one of the best scoring offenses in the country before Herbert went down. And that's with major weaknesses at both the WR & TE position. We just have to give the staff some time before we start making indictments. All these players are coming off of 1-5 years of Helrich and Co. It's going to take some time for Taggart and his staff to establish an identity on offense.

Give the Oline a year or two to really get gel. Remember with Taggart coming in they switched the style of play from a zone to more of a power scheme.

gogreen55 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is always a way to put a more positive spin on things as well. For example, people would point to the Arizona State game as an example of the offense having "issues" even with Herbert at QB. The Ducks did manage to score 35 points in that game, which doesn't look so bad after that same Arizona State defense just held Washington to 7 points. The Oregon offense was shredding the Cal defense with Herbert at QB. This same Cal defense just held Washington State to 3 points.

I hear you, but looking for favorable comparisons in a shoulda, coulda, woulda scenario doesn't mean much to me because it's easy to find examples that make you look good (I do the same thing, so I get your point). Against ASU, we were 1-13 on 3rd and 4th down. We couldn't do much in the 4th quarter when the game was on the line. We made no offensive adjustments to account for their stunting defense. One of our touchdowns was a gimme off a fumble near the goal line. We didn't have a ton of yards, and ASU had a 16 minute gap in time of possession. They beat us in first downs. Passing yardage and rushing yardage. We lost every single offensive statistic to ASU. The offense accounted for 28 points on 4 nice, long drives. Not bad. We were in it. But not when it counted. And the coaches couldn't find an answer. So we didn't fare particularly well.

PS. Just to be clear, I'm in the new system, young players, Willie gets a pass this season group, but I can easily see why people are questioning the offensive coaching. We've run about 12 different plays this year. It's the simplest offensive playbook I've seen from a team I follow. While watching at home, I'm calling plays out before the snap way too often. We have moved to a new OL scheme and playbook that demands we are bigger, stronger, faster than the defense. Lethal simplicity only works if you have a physical talent advantage that allows you to do what you want even if the defense knows it's coming. We aren't there yet. Until then, I'd like to see some wrinkles. And I mean when Herbert comes back. With our back-up quarterback issue, we're basically screwed, so anything the coaches can do to help god bless them.

ifuwant2 wrote:

gogreen55 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is always a way to put a more positive spin on things as well. For example, people would point to the Arizona State game as an example of the offense having "issues" even with Herbert at QB. The Ducks did manage to score 35 points in that game, which doesn't look so bad after that same Arizona State defense just held Washington to 7 points. The Oregon offense was shredding the Cal defense with Herbert at QB. This same Cal defense just held Washington State to 3 points.

I hear you, but looking for favorable comparisons in a shoulda, coulda, woulda scenario doesn't mean much to me because it's easy to find examples that make you look good (I do the same thing, so I get your point). Against ASU, we were 1-13 on 3rd and 4th down. We couldn't do much in the 4th quarter when the game was on the line. We made no offensive adjustments to account for their stunting defense. One of our touchdowns was a gimme off a fumble near the goal line. We didn't have a ton of yards, and ASU had a 16 minute gap in time of possession. They beat us in first downs. Passing yardage and rushing yardage. We lost every single offensive statistic to ASU. The offense accounted for 28 points on 4 nice, long drives. Not bad. We were in it. But not when it counted. And the coaches couldn't find an answer. So we didn't fare particularly well.

PS. Just to be clear, I'm in the new system, young players, Willie gets a pass this season group, but I can easily see why people are questioning the offensive coaching. We've run about 12 different plays this year. It's the simplest offensive playbook I've seen from a team I follow. While watching at home, I'm calling plays out before the snap way too often. We have moved to a new OL scheme and playbook that demands we are bigger, stronger, faster than the defense. Lethal simplicity only works if you have a physical talent advantage that allows you to do what you want even if the defense knows it's coming. We aren't there yet. Until then, I'd like to see some wrinkles. And I mean when Herbert comes back. With our back-up quarterback issue, we're basically screwed, so anything the coaches can do to help god bless them.

The tough thing with that ASU game is that we did convert several 3rd downs (from what I remember) - they just got called back on penalties. Add in the horrible drops and you can you see how execution seems to be a more valid criticism than playcalling.

What frustrates me is how little misdirection is used in this offense. In college, misdirection is an unbelievable asset. This offense is essentially a power offense disguised as a spread.

dthomas=ddixon wrote:At some point fans are going to have to come to grips with that fact that not only is Chip gone but his offense is as well. There are no quality teams running tempo right now. That offense is a thing of the past. Time to move on.

Taggart should probably hire a Helrich type to game plan and call plays but we had one of the best scoring offenses in the country before Herbert went down. And that's with major weaknesses at both the WR & TE position. We just have to give the staff some time before we start making indictments. All these players are coming off of 1-5 years of Helrich and Co. It's going to take some time for Taggart and his staff to establish an identity on offense.

A voice of reason. Thank you!

Go Ducks!

EncinitasDuck wrote:

dthomas=ddixon wrote:At some point fans are going to have to come to grips with that fact that not only is Chip gone but his offense is as well. There are no quality teams running tempo right now. That offense is a thing of the past. Time to move on.

Taggart should probably hire a Helrich type to game plan and call plays but we had one of the best scoring offenses in the country before Herbert went down. And that's with major weaknesses at both the WR & TE position. We just have to give the staff some time before we start making indictments. All these players are coming off of 1-5 years of Helrich and Co. It's going to take some time for Taggart and his staff to establish an identity on offense.

A voice of reason. Thank you!

Go Ducks!

excellent post. If its not a true freshman playing that Taggart recruited then its a
player that was from previous coaching staff. The telling part will be when Willie has his
own players. I think We will be much better next year.

dphi wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:

gogreen55 wrote:

ifuwant2 wrote:If you are being honest, you have to admit there were/are some issues with the offense even when we had Herbert. A lot of that scoring came in the early games because we were killing it in the turnover margin. When the turnovers have been equalled in games, or the opposition actually had an offensive unit, we haven't fared nearly as well. I think the offensive coaching is fair game, as long as people are trying to be reasonable.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but there is always a way to put a more positive spin on things as well. For example, people would point to the Arizona State game as an example of the offense having "issues" even with Herbert at QB. The Ducks did manage to score 35 points in that game, which doesn't look so bad after that same Arizona State defense just held Washington to 7 points. The Oregon offense was shredding the Cal defense with Herbert at QB. This same Cal defense just held Washington State to 3 points.

I hear you, but looking for favorable comparisons in a shoulda, coulda, woulda scenario doesn't mean much to me because it's easy to find examples that make you look good (I do the same thing, so I get your point). Against ASU, we were 1-13 on 3rd and 4th down. We couldn't do much in the 4th quarter when the game was on the line. We made no offensive adjustments to account for their stunting defense. One of our touchdowns was a gimme off a fumble near the goal line. We didn't have a ton of yards, and ASU had a 16 minute gap in time of possession. They beat us in first downs. Passing yardage and rushing yardage. We lost every single offensive statistic to ASU. The offense accounted for 28 points on 4 nice, long drives. Not bad. We were in it. But not when it counted. And the coaches couldn't find an answer. So we didn't fare particularly well.

PS. Just to be clear, I'm in the new system, young players, Willie gets a pass this season group, but I can easily see why people are questioning the offensive coaching. We've run about 12 different plays this year. It's the simplest offensive playbook I've seen from a team I follow. While watching at home, I'm calling plays out before the snap way too often. We have moved to a new OL scheme and playbook that demands we are bigger, stronger, faster than the defense. Lethal simplicity only works if you have a physical talent advantage that allows you to do what you want even if the defense knows it's coming. We aren't there yet. Until then, I'd like to see some wrinkles. And I mean when Herbert comes back. With our back-up quarterback issue, we're basically screwed, so anything the coaches can do to help god bless them.

The tough thing with that ASU game is that we did convert several 3rd downs (from what I remember) - they just got called back on penalties. Add in the horrible drops and you can you see how execution seems to be a more valid criticism than playcalling.

That's more coulda, shoulda, woulda stuff though. I could easily go through that game and point out all the "ifs" in the Oregon scoring drives and make a case for how they shouldn't have scored. I'm sure ASU fans would have had they lost. Those drops were almost every one a very difficult catch. The kind of catch that if they'd actually been made you'd have been jumping off the couch and yelling at the tv about how awesome the catch was. It's not like any of those were easy drops. And penalties and execution can apply on every play. Sooner or later, execution becomes a coaching issue. If you offensive line is continually false starting, the coaches aren't doing something right.

Again, make no mistake, I'm not one of those guys looking for reasons to call out the coaches. They get time to work all this out. If I have one criticism, it would be that I'd like to see a more varied playbook--even/especially with Herbert--and I must assume the coaches have their reasons for sticking to a handful of plays. I don't know those reasons. I don't think Herbert, the running backs, or the offensive line are holding them back. They shouldn't be. They all have plenty of starts by now. I know we scored a lot of points and had a bunch of yards early this year, but those were really crappy teams who we had a huge turnover advantage on. And we almost lost to one of them. Early this season, I thought new plays would start entering the game plan as our competition improved. That the offense would become more dynamic and get really impressive. I thought the coaches were only showing the basics as strategy. Now, I think this is pretty much it, which is still really good when Herbert is out there.

Since we’re on the topic of the offensive coaching staff, I almost wonder if part of the problem is that the coaches never needed to be creative before. Willie comes from USF and this is his first power 5 team, if you’re a good recruiter then you’ll generally be more talented than everyone else at USF and you’ll have players that can simply outplay everyone. Arroyo comes from the Big-12, where defense doesn’t exist. So you really don’t need to do much with the playcalling to be successful there. Cristobal comes from Alabam, who almost always wins the recruiting national championship. With the talent they get, you can run a power blocking scheme and know that almost 100% of the time, your OLine will dominate the line of scrimmage. Not that Oregon isn’t a big name school, we have Nike and great resources, but being in Eugene and lacking local talent, we don’t get top recruting classes often. I know Willie has a good one coming in, but even with that, the competition in the PAC-12 is high and there are some good defenses and good defensive players in this conference. I’m not saying the offensive coaching staff doesn’t have the ability to be creative, but until now, they might never have had to be creative resulting in a growing period. Just expressing a hypothesis as to why we’ve seen conservative and simple playcalling.