Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

nogerO wrote:

FlDuckFan wrote:

Phenom wrote:TBH, my biggest concern was letting Royce be a part of the LV Bowl after he said he wasn't participating. He was a dude that had mentally checked out and I'm afraid it transferred over to the other guys.

That being said, the offense looked 100x better than in the LV Bowl. Especially the passing game. Much more diverse than Willie's screen or deep ball game.

That whole scenario was weird.

I said it then and I'll say it now. If Royce would have played in that game I honestly think we win it. I was chastised for it but I stick by it.

I respectfully disagree. If Royce played it would have made little to no difference aside from more runs up the middle for no gain. Royce had a great Freshman & Sophomore year after that he's been drastically over hyped.

The problem with the Vegas Bowl was Arroyo (who I am most concerned about on this staff) called plays as if we still had Burmeister at QB, not Herbert. Boise State defenders cheated up all game and challenged Herbert to throw, which we all know he can do, but Arroyo, who was either stubborn or just didn’t know how to adjust to BSU’s defense, called plays right into their strategy. It was honestly one of the worst called games I’ve ever seen in Oregon football history and I’ve heard the biggest reason Herbert was so visibly upset was because of the overly conservative playcalling. Once Arroyo let Herbert loose late in the 4th the offense started having success but it was too late. I don’t think the Vegas Bowl was lost because Royce gave the motivational speech or cause they were focused on recruiting or heartbroken by Slick Willie’s departure, but rather because Arroyo’s playcalling was simply terrible. At least that’s my opinion.

As for recruiting, I do love what I see from these guys, and to a certain extent, the plays don’t matter as long as you have the most talented teams and everyone on your team wins their 1 on 1 battle. So if they can recruit top classes for the next few years I think it won’t matter who is calling the plays as long as they aren’t kneels. But I have a hard time seeing Oregon recruiting that well, especially with the other teams in the PAC-12. If the playcalling continues to be like it was in the Vegas Bowl, then this team may need a nerd as Duck07 calls them, a football genius who can run an offense regardless if he can recruit or not. We’ll have to wait and see how good these coaches can recruit and how well Arroyo calls plays next season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

‘the plays don’t matter as long as you have the most talented teams and everyone on your team wins their 1 on 1 battle.’

If this were the case, USC would never lose a conference game, or title. How many games have the Ducks won over the last 20 years, with what most said was certainly not the most talented PAC-12 team? How can you even pretend to think this? Freaking ludicrous. So, Chip Kelly meant nothing to play calling? Really? Think before you type. No offense, of course...

Agreed on Arroyo the play caller in that game. BUT and there is a BUT, the offense was Taggart's. He built, ran and did the play calling. This year will be different. They have switched to the pistol and I believe it will be better suited to Arroyo's offensive plans. (I also cannot tell you how big Mastro is on this staff).

Everythingsducky wrote:‘the plays don’t matter as long as you have the most talented teams and everyone on your team wins their 1 on 1 battle.’

If this were the case, USC would never lose a conference game, or title. How many games have the Ducks won over the last 20 years, with what most said was certainly not the most talented PAC-12 team? How can you even pretend to think this? Freaking ludicrous. So, Chip Kelly meant nothing to play calling? Really? Think before you type. No offense, of course...

Why did you exclude the previous words he used to preface that statement where he said "to some extent,"?

Yes, there were seasons where USC didn't lose a conference game from sheer talent purposes, when Pete Carroll was the coach. That offense wasn't doing anything drastically different in the I form, they just had better players. When we were at our best under Chip and previously, we did have some bad ass collections of talent. In fact the 2005 roster is still the most NFL filled roster we've had and they went 10-2 with 2 losses that have since been vacated for OU and USC having players receive impermissible benefits.

Our loss to Auburn was not because we had a lesser roster but because they had the single best player on Offense and Defense in those games and they made the difference.

Also over the last 20 years I'm pretty sure we're either 1 or 2 in the P12 for total wins and while SC is going to be at the top of those recruiting rankings, it's not like we're that far behind especially relative to the rest of the conf.