AMP Weekley Whispers: Owa

[wheaton4prez]

NA...some hate him. Some think he is a "ok" DC. But I have never heard anyone say he is fantastic or a guru. I want someone on that level. Here is the issue with that...we dump NA and find some up and comer he blows the PAC-10 away for a couple years. Guess what happens? He leaves to be the HC some where and we are stuck looking again. I'm not saying keep or dump NA, but it is an issue when, by all accounts, he likes it here and wants to be around a while

Is it that he wants to be around for a while or is it that he wouldn't have the option to work anywhere better?

I do think that NA is treated unfairly by fans on average and is a decent coach. Though, he schemes very aggressively which seems to give an opponent a chance to catch us with an achilles heel once or twice per season.

It's a valid problem in my view that he doesn't really have a name for himself as a coach. We're landing good recruits for Oregon's name and success rather than NA. But, Oregon seems to be on a level now that they should be able attract a known D coordinator. I like NA and don't want to pile on. But, he's a B-list DC and Oregon could have an A-list DC.

[pezsez1]

It's a valid problem in my view that he doesn't really have a name for himself as a coach. We're landing good recruits for Oregon's name and success rather than NA. But, Oregon seems to be on a level now that they should be able attract a known D coordinator. I like NA and don't want to pile on. But, he's a B-list DC and Oregon could have an A-list DC.

As much as I like NA, this is a valid point... I just can't bring myself to condemn a guy who really doesn't deserve to get axed. But I will agree that not only is he not a big-name DC (apologies for the double negative), but he also has a bad reputation (even if he doesn't deserve it).

[Duck07]

NA at best is average. Seriously, using a talented DC wanting to rise to be the HC at another school as a reason to keep him is quite frankly, idiotic. You want other schools to be looking at your coaches, it means they're doing their job right.

Besides, wouldn't Oregon be Wilcox's "dream job?"

The excuses I hear on this board justifying NA is so ludicrous. We have the O in Oregon, we will never put the D in Ducks with allowalotti as our DC. If he was a quality coach, he would have shown it by now.

And for the tard who thinks we wouldn't have made the RB without him, thats laughable at best.

[duckgrad99]

It's a valid problem in my view that he doesn't really have a name for himself as a coach. We're landing good recruits for Oregon's name and success rather than NA. But, Oregon seems to be on a level now that they should be able attract a known D coordinator. I like NA and don't want to pile on. But, he's a B-list DC and Oregon could have an A-list DC.

As much as I like NA, this is a valid point... I just can't bring myself to condemn a guy who really doesn't deserve to get axed. But I will agree that not only is he not a big-name DC (apologies for the double negative), but he also has a bad reputation (even if he doesn't deserve it).

I assume you want the ducks to win a national championship, correct? That means the defense has to be better. Not just for 1 or 2 games, all season. That won't happen until Oregon consistently lands more of these top rated defensive players and doesn't settle for "an average" defensive coordinator. There is always room for improvement.

[Duck07]

pop quiz, when did Oregon's defense last pitch a shutout? How many times has NA done it at Oregon?

On the other side, how many times in the last 3 years has Oregon scored 40+? 50+?

[pezsez1]

The Oregon's defense would have pitched a shutout against Cal had WTIII not fumbled in easy field goal range on the opening kickoff.

The defense actually moved the Cal offense backward from the spot of the fumble, if I remember correctly.

42-3, right?

That counts in my book... those 3 were on special teams, not the D.

Oh, don't forget WSU either. The Cougars' only points came when our kick returner fumbled next to the goal line. It still took the Cougs three tries to move one yard.

[Duck07]

The Oregon's defense would have pitched a shutout against Cal had WTIII not fumbled in easy field goal range on the opening kickoff.

The defense actually moved the Cal offense backward from the spot of the fumble, if I remember correctly.

42-3, right?

That counts in my book... those 3 were on special teams, not the D.

Oh, don't forget WSU either. The Cougars' only points came when our kick returner fumbled next to the goal line. It still took the Cougs three tries to move one yard.

neither games were shutouts.

[pezsez1]

Either you've missed the point, or your logic is flawed.

You're implying that a lack of a shutout is NA's fault, when in fact we missed out on two shutouts this season because of special teams mistakes, neither of which were NA's fault in any way, shape or form.

In other words, the information I presented does not help your case.

[pezsez1]

Also, in response to:

pop quiz, when did Oregon's defense last pitch a shutout? How many times has NA done it at Oregon?

Here's another pop quiz:

1. How many times has our vaunted offense (which I love, don't get me wrong) fumbled in the red zone?

2. How many times has our vaunted offense thrown interceptions in the red zone?

3. How many times have our ballsy kick returners fumbled punts/kickoffs in the red zone?



And because those gaffes on offense and special teams often result in easy points, that should reflect poorly on NA because... why??

Our defense out-performed our offense in the Rose Bowl. Think about that.

[Duck07]

a shutout, by defintion, means that zero points are scored. the last time an Oregon opponent was held scoreless was October 25, 2003 against Stanford. Since that 2003 season, the defense has given up 30+ points, 24 times. 40+ points, 6 times and 50+ points 4 times. In 34 games since the 2003 season, the d has given up 30+ points.

Wake up to reality, Oregon has no defense under na. Saying things like, they would have been shutouts if not for turnovers isn't really the point. You can say we would have won the Rose Bowl if Pryor didn't have a big game, but that ignores the reality of it, Pryor did play that well. The defense had two "almost" shutouts, but they haven't shut anyone out since I lived in the dorms.

Our offense is one of the hottest in the nation. As a result, we've been in the running for a lot of highly touted offensive recruits in the nation. Conversly, top ranked defensive schools are more likely to land the premier defensive recruits in the nation.

Now, this last point has led people to say stupid things like, "NA's schemes would be fine if we had better recruits." Well, certainly you play better with better players. However, whats the point of having a coach if its all about the players? There is no point, which is why it has LESS to do with the players and MORE to do with the coaches and how they coach the player and the schemes they design.

I'm done arguing this point. NA is garbage. You can wear green glasses all you want, but there is not a single team in the nation that is afraid of our defense, with coordinators kept up at night trying to figure out how to attack it.

[fecta23]

It's a valid problem in my view that he doesn't really have a name for himself as a coach. We're landing good recruits for Oregon's name and success rather than NA. But, Oregon seems to be on a level now that they should be able attract a known D coordinator. I like NA and don't want to pile on. But, he's a B-list DC and Oregon could have an A-list DC.

As much as I like NA, this is a valid point... I just can't bring myself to condemn a guy who really doesn't deserve to get axed. But I will agree that not only is he not a big-name DC (apologies for the double negative), but he also has a bad reputation (even if he doesn't deserve it).

I assume you want the ducks to win a national championship, correct? That means the defense has to be better. Not just for 1 or 2 games, all season. That won't happen until Oregon consistently lands more of these top rated defensive players and doesn't settle for "an average" defensive coordinator. There is always room for improvement.

Nailed it.

[Duck07]

Our defense out-performed our offense in the Rose Bowl. Think about that.

well, both units sucked. my reasons for not liking NA have zero to do with any 1 game in the last decade, and everything to do with the fact that he has continually kept the bar at a low level.

frankly, i suppose it would be hard for any oregon fan to think that the defense could ever WIN a game. As in, hey, OSU has the best defense we will see all year, maybe the defense might have to win the game for us. ultimately, thats the point. During the course of a season, you cannot expect the offense to win every single game; unless you're at Oregon and the offense has to win every game.

[GoDucksIn09]

I have long advocated that the ducks get rid of AllowALotE. Just when thought maybe he was actually going to do a good job for a whole season the D forgot how to tackle after the Stanford game. If go back to before that game was giving our D a lot of kudos and was hopeful finally we would have a stout D to go with our O even if it was with our DC. Then reality set in and they went back to how it was last year and previous years.. our offense having to win games. For those who think he is such a good coordinator why has no school come after him. In the last 6 or 7 years under Allow A Lot E we have seen Pac 10 coaches come and go... how many of them have wanted him as their DC. The answer.. zero... zip.. nada nil absolutley none of them. I think that says a lot. I agree that it should not be about how good or bad the players are it is about how good your coach is. Take a look up north at Oregon State.. Mike Riley.. does not get that stellar of classes but they consistently have a good defense. They get the players to play great defense as a team.. why do we settle for our DC who blames it all on the players and says we need better players... noooooo we need a better coach. Show the guy the door.

Now back to this post thread.. I can only hope Owa stays close to home as he is the best player in Oregon and we need to keep him here.

[pezsez1]

I didn't realize how brilliant you were until I read your post piece-by-piece.

Oregon has no defense under na.

Wow, you're right, and I'm sure the folks at Utah, Cal, WSU, UW, UCLA, USC, ASU and OSU would agree with you too.

Saying things like, they would have been shutouts if not for turnovers isn't really the point.

You're right! Because NA is really the head coach (Bellotti and now CK are just public relations fronts), thus he is responsible for the shortcomings on offense and special teams too. Fire NA!

You can say we would have won the Rose Bowl if Pryor didn't have a big game, but that ignores the reality of it, Pryor did play that well.

In theory I -could- say that, even though I didn't. I'm just pointing out that our offense kept on stalling, turning the ball over, fumbling in the endzone, missing field goals, etc... but this is NA's fault too, because anything* that happens in the game is his responsibility.

The defense had two "almost" shutouts, but they haven't shut anyone out since I lived in the dorms.

Again, I see the error in my ways. NA should have never allowed those kick returners to fumble in the red zone -- especially in the golden era of football known as your post-dorm life. NA is such a loser. Fire him!

"NA's schemes would be fine if we had better recruits." Well, certainly you play better with better players. However, whats the point of having a coach if its all about the players?

That's right! I totally agree. NA's schemes are way too dependent on his players! I mean, when Glasper and WTIII went down with injuries, we had to put in Masoli and LMJ at cornerback to keep the defense solid for the rest of the season! And that's just wrong, man.

There is no point, which is why it has LESS to do with the players and MORE to do with the coaches and how they coach the player and the schemes they design.

I know! Why were we playing Masoli and LMJ at cornerback? I'll tell you why.... it's because NA was too scared to trust Cliff Harris and our other young corners! He couldn't coach them up if he tried!!!

I'm done arguing this point.

Dang, I was just starting to feel smarter.




*= bad

[duckgrad99]

I have long advocated that the ducks get rid of AllowALotE. Just when thought maybe he was actually going to do a good job for a whole season the D forgot how to tackle after the Stanford game. If go back to before that game was giving our D a lot of kudos and was hopeful finally we would have a stout D to go with our O even if it was with our DC. Then reality set in and they went back to how it was last year and previous years.. our offense having to win games. For those who think he is such a good coordinator why has no school come after him. In the last 6 or 7 years under Allow A Lot E we have seen Pac 10 coaches come and go... how many of them have wanted him as their DC. The answer.. zero... zip.. nada nil absolutley none of them. I think that says a lot. I agree that it should not be about how good or bad the players are it is about how good your coach is. Take a look up north at Oregon State.. Mike Riley.. does not get that stellar of classes but they consistently have a good defense. They get the players to play great defense as a team.. why do we settle for our DC who blames it all on the players and says we need better players... noooooo we need a better coach. Show the guy the door.

Now back to this post thread.. I can only hope Owa stays close to home as he is the best player in Oregon and we need to keep him here.

I agree, being able to close on in state talent like this is probably #1 on my wish list right now.