Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

Groundswell wrote:

Handsome Dan wrote:This is the sort of news that engenders a lot of confidence in the recruiting ability of the coaching staff.

I should clarify. I'm happy with a pro-style offense that borrows from the spread. I do not want a repeat of last year, when all we did was spread guys out for no real apparent reason and virtually no options or play-action.

I'm glad that you continue to mention this because I think that a lot of Oregon fans - myself included - were lying to ourselves a bit about how bad the playcalling was, and now that Taggart is gone there is no real reason to continue denying that it was quite awful and indicated that Taggart didn't properly understand how a spread offense was meant to function. I have no idea if the current offensive coaches have that sort of understanding either - the Las Vegas Bowl was not great but I don't imagine Arroyo and Cristobal were really mentally there either - but like you I know for sure that the most important thing to see next year is the sense of purpose and comprehension to the play calling that was a constant under Chip Kelly and flickered just enough under Helfrich to sustain hope despite the litany of other warning signs.

What we ran last year was very different in execution from the spread Taggart ran at USF. Obviously, the running quarterback, Flowers, had most everything to do with that, but the WR position was also used much differently. Taggart tried to do a power spread to utilize Royce Freeman. It wasn't aesthetically pleasing, but we did score points in a lot of games with Herbert. Taggart focused too much on Royce. Was too simple. Passing tree routes were one dimensional.

If Shough ends up being our starting quarterback of the future, the qb isn't going to run much. I think the option is probably going to be lost and used just as a play-action.

I wonder what happens if they get a commitment out Michael Johnson Jr. Now you have an athletic
qb who can run as well. Does this change the offense ? Taggarts offense wasnt diverse at all.
We really need some wide receivers that make plays. If you dont have the receivers then play action is a mute point.

Not going to lie - I was a big fan of the Mark Helfrich offense. Had the optionality to have the QB run as much, or as little, as was necessary. Even an unmotivated team that declined in talent STILL put up points.

StevensTechU wrote:Not going to lie - I was a big fan of the Mark Helfrich offense. Had the optionality to have the QB run as much, or as little, as was necessary. Even an unmotivated team that declined in talent STILL put up points.

Agreed. It was an incredible offense. I don't know if I would call it the Mark Helfrich offense, but that offense managed to be successful for a long period of time until the wheels fell of in 2016. I think that was a combination of four things:

* Lubick was calling the plays, and as stale as Frost seemed at times with his end zone fades, Lubick wasn't nearly as good of an OC.

* The talent was there, except for Herbz should have been starting from day one. Prukop was good against UVA, but he didn't have the accuracy and had happy feet. If we start Herbert from day one he might have been more seasoned by the time we hit the meat of the schedule. Throwing him in against 2016 Washington was necessary, but that shouldn't have been a freshman's first start.

* The defense was so awful that it wouldn't have mattered. I'm willing to die on the hill that Helfrich's biggest mistake was hiring Brady Hoke and doing a switch to a 4-3.

* The players weren't going to run through a wet paper bag for Helfrich, let alone a brick wall. The combination of the losses piling up and Helfrich's vanilla motivation was the death knell. Doesn't matter how good the offense is if everyone is going half speed.

My hope for a future offense is whatever works. We have to keep an innovative edge, that's our tradition. I trust them to craft something like that. If it involves more power, I'm all for it. As long as it works and get's us back to double digit wins I don't care what it looks like.

GoDucksTroll wrote:

StevensTechU wrote:Not going to lie - I was a big fan of the Mark Helfrich offense. Had the optionality to have the QB run as much, or as little, as was necessary. Even an unmotivated team that declined in talent STILL put up points.

Agreed. It was an incredible offense. I don't know if I would call it the Mark Helfrich offense, but that offense managed to be successful for a long period of time until the wheels fell of in 2016. I think that was a combination of four things:

* Lubick was calling the plays, and as stale as Frost seemed at times with his end zone fades, Lubick wasn't nearly as good of an OC.

* The talent was there, except for Herbz should have been starting from day one. Prukop was good against UVA, but he didn't have the accuracy and had happy feet. If we start Herbert from day one he might have been more seasoned by the time we hit the meat of the schedule. Throwing him in against 2016 Washington was necessary, but that shouldn't have been a freshman's first start.

* The defense was so awful that it wouldn't have mattered. I'm willing to die on the hill that Helfrich's biggest mistake was hiring Brady Hoke and doing a switch to a 4-3.

* The players weren't going to run through a wet paper bag for Helfrich, let alone a brick wall. The combination of the losses piling up and Helfrich's vanilla motivation was the death knell. Doesn't matter how good the offense is if everyone is going half speed.

My hope for a future offense is whatever works. We have to keep an innovative edge, that's our tradition. I trust them to craft something like that. If it involves more power, I'm all for it. As long as it works and get's us back to double digit wins I don't care what it looks like.

good post...will be interesting.. Arroyo spent time at Okie State and they were a spread. Mc has
time at Bama and Mastro was involved in the pistol. So what ever comes out of that who knows.
Hopefully they are not so predictable. Willie would call the same plays over and over. Thankfully with
Herbert we were effective. Mc has said he wants to be explosive on offense and also play with power.

duckfan22 wrote:

GoDucksTroll wrote:

StevensTechU wrote:Not going to lie - I was a big fan of the Mark Helfrich offense. Had the optionality to have the QB run as much, or as little, as was necessary. Even an unmotivated team that declined in talent STILL put up points.

Agreed. It was an incredible offense. I don't know if I would call it the Mark Helfrich offense, but that offense managed to be successful for a long period of time until the wheels fell of in 2016. I think that was a combination of four things:

* Lubick was calling the plays, and as stale as Frost seemed at times with his end zone fades, Lubick wasn't nearly as good of an OC.

* The talent was there, except for Herbz should have been starting from day one. Prukop was good against UVA, but he didn't have the accuracy and had happy feet. If we start Herbert from day one he might have been more seasoned by the time we hit the meat of the schedule. Throwing him in against 2016 Washington was necessary, but that shouldn't have been a freshman's first start.

* The defense was so awful that it wouldn't have mattered. I'm willing to die on the hill that Helfrich's biggest mistake was hiring Brady Hoke and doing a switch to a 4-3.

* The players weren't going to run through a wet paper bag for Helfrich, let alone a brick wall. The combination of the losses piling up and Helfrich's vanilla motivation was the death knell. Doesn't matter how good the offense is if everyone is going half speed.

My hope for a future offense is whatever works. We have to keep an innovative edge, that's our tradition. I trust them to craft something like that. If it involves more power, I'm all for it. As long as it works and get's us back to double digit wins I don't care what it looks like.

good post...will be interesting.. Arroyo spent time at Okie State and they were a spread. Mc has
time at Bama and Mastro was involved in the pistol. So what ever comes out of that who knows.
Hopefully they are not so predictable. Willie would call the same plays over and over. Thankfully with
Herbert we were effective. Mc has said he wants to be explosive on offense and also play with power.

Im hoping mastro brings some pistol and we see more screen passes and passes to the slot receiver in addition to the base offense from last year

I'm not convinced on arroyo alone, but arroyo with mastro could be interesting

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I am willing to give Arroyo some room on offense. Like you say Mastro will be around.
To me it hinges on the receiving corp. Dont care what the offense is if you cant get the
ball down field then your not going to run either as they can load the box. Herbert needs a
true go to guy to emerge. Mitchell is good and showed improvement but we need more.
We need a Jeff Maehl type that makes the big catches and can count on him. Not a deep
threat but a great position receiver.

Would people be pissed to see Oregon win low scoring games. Now that Oregon. Has/should have a good D...I wonder if that’ll ever happen.

duckfan96 wrote:Would people be pissed to see Oregon win low scoring games. Now that Oregon. Has/should have a good D...I wonder if that’ll ever happen.

As long as Oregon wins.

duckfan22 wrote:

duckfan96 wrote:Would people be pissed to see Oregon win low scoring games. Now that Oregon. Has/should have a good D...I wonder if that’ll ever happen.

As long as Oregon wins.

To quote Al Davis, Just win baby!

We had a top 15 defense in 2010 so keeping other teams to lower scores isn't totally foreign......

After typing that I looked up our results and we actually were really good.
72-0
48-13
69-0
42-31
52-31
43-23
60-13
53-32
15-13(Cliff Harris punt return. Total anomaly in hindsight)
48-29
37-20
19-22

Don’t forget the crown jewel- 53-16 over the Fuskies

duckfan96 wrote:Would people be pissed to see Oregon win low scoring games. Now that Oregon. Has/should have a good D...I wonder if that’ll ever happen.

1) I would be frustrated to see them putting up 25 a game when they’re capable of 45.

2) 3 our of 4 years of the CFP Championship, the winner has scored 35+. Gotta put up points these days.

3) If our games look like old SEC style, I might get bored shitless and find a new interest, if I’m being honest.

StevensTechU wrote:

duckfan96 wrote:Would people be pissed to see Oregon win low scoring games. Now that Oregon. Has/should have a good D...I wonder if that’ll ever happen.

1) I would be frustrated to see them putting up 25 a game when they’re capable of 45.

2) 3 our of 4 years of the CFP Championship, the winner has scored 35+. Gotta put up points these days.

3) If our games look like old SEC style, I might get bored shitless and find a new interest, if I’m being honest.

This.

I think the key in everything is tempo. As long as you run with tempo, it doesn't necessarily matter what formation you line up with.

lukeyrid13 wrote:I think the key in everything is tempo. As long as you run with tempo, it doesn't necessarily matter what formation you line up with.

I agree! PRESSURE, PRESSURE, PRESSURE!