The CardBoard
Oregon game thread - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Oregon game thread (/thread-7761.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Re: Oregon game thread - BostonCard - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 08:35 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:The assistants and coordinators right now seem inadequate.  Bloomgren seems to be neither competent or able at handling the OL coaching duties.  If he's still an OC, he needs to quit that too.

I watched the game with a former Stanford offensive tackle from just before my time--he and I are in agreement that Stanford lacks the edge or mentality that Harbaugh recruited for, and that's one of the issues with watching these players play.  The other more pressing issue is that what talent we have isn't translating into production, and we both think that's squarely on the coaches.  Hogan also hasn't really developed as a QB, and we suspect Harbaugh wouldn't have left that unaddressed while Shaw seems to have decided to work with what he had.

Also, arm tackles and missing open field tackles are signs of BS.  Leaving Mariota uncovered and allowing RBs to waltz through the line into open grass is BS.  Do we miss Mason?  Who's responsible for the drop off in defensive play?  Or rather, how is everyone so out of position that arm tackles are all they can attempt?  Bad scheme?

Given that Mike Bloomgren has coached the offensive line since 2011, it seems a bit of a stretch to say that he is "not competent or able at [sic] handling the OL coaching duties."  Now, maybe he is not able to do so while also serving as the Andrew Luck director of the offense, but surely no one complained of the offensive line in 2011, 2012, or 2013.  Given that last year he was named the offensive line coordinator of the year by football scoop, I am surprised at how quickly his offensive line coaching talents have been indicted.  Our offensive line is problematic right now, but I don't think that Bloombgren's competence is the reason.  Maybe he's overstretched.  Maybe our highly recruited offensive line is overrated.  Maybe it's just a matter of time, and they are developing a bit more slowly than is typical.


BC

Re: Oregon game thread - needle - 11-01-2014

Quote:  Leaving Mariota uncovered and allowing RBs to waltz through the line into open grass is BS. 

Last year the starting LBS included a guy now starting in the NFL (Murphy) and a fifth-year senior (Skov) all-conference guy (I think Murphy made that team as well).

It's a talent/experience drop-off to go to Lueders/Martinez, who are good players just not all-conference types.

It was disappointing to not see great things tonight from the front seven guys who have demonstrated the most play-making ability this season, so maybe that can be attributed to a scheme problem.

On the other hand, I never really believed the front seven this year is as talented as last year's group, even with the emergence of Kalambayi. So maybe the defense overperformed this season heading into tonight's game in part because of some good coaching.

Re: Oregon game thread - stupac2 - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 08:45 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Enh, I was disturbed by the mismatch on both lines, I wouldn't leave it at the QB position at all.

Our pass protection looked good, and we didn't do all that badly running either (3.4 ypc isn't great but it's not horrible). DL sure, we had no pressure, but we had reason to believe that would happen coming in.

So I dunno, I don't think we were really all that badly mismatched except our DL on their OL. And of course they have a #1 overall draft pick at QB which hurts us quite a bit. I'm not saying that Mariota is worth 29 points, but he was definitely worth a couple of their early conversions, and since that game spiraled out of a control I think it's fair to say he was most of our problem.

Re: Oregon game thread - Mick - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 08:06 PM)BurgXXIII link Wrote:For a few seasons, George Seifert was the best coach in the history of the NFL. I'm not sure many still believe that.

A few seasons?  Try his first eight seasons.  He won the Super Bowl in his first and sixth seasons.  He has a better overall winning percentage (despite coaching Carolina's crappy team for three years) than Walsh, Shottenheimer, Lambeau, Grant, Gibbs, Landry, Holmgren, Reid, Coryell, Stram, Parcells, Levy, Ditka, Knox, Shanahan, Fairbanks, Mora, Reeves, Pardee, Flores, Vermeil, Ralston, Ryan, Gruden, Fairbanks, Switzer, Martz and Cowher.

In fact, if you take out his Carolina Panthers gig, he would have the second best coaching record by percentage in history behind some guy named Chamberlin who coached in the 1920s.  For the Niners, he won 14 games three times and never less than ten.  In his eight years coaching the Niners, he finished first in offensive yardage five of eight times.  He finished first in the league in points in five of his eight years, something Walsh never did.

Re: Oregon game thread - BostonCard - 11-01-2014

WIM, I think the concern about the defense is because the offensive struggles have already been priced into our expectations.  We know we have issues on the offense, and while not optimal, we understand our limitations.  To the extent that we have been hoping for a good season this year, our hope has rested on defense (and special teams), which has been one of the top defenses in the Pac-12 this year (and, in fact, the last three years).

The headline numbers on the offense weren't too bad.  428 yards (296 passing, 132 rushing).  That was actually a bit above our average of 383 yards per game, which is worse if you take out the Army and Davis games.  It's worse than what Oregon typically gives up (462), but within a standard deviation of that. We were a respectable 6/13 on third down, and averaged 5.9 yards per play (almost 9 yards per attempt passing).  Obviously, we struggled to convert those yards into points, and we had two ugly turnovers.  But part of the reason is the offense started in a hole.  Our starting position this game:

37, 20, 12, 25, 23, 29, 40, 8, 22, 25, 35

Our average starting position was at our own 25 yard line.  With our offense, that's a recipe for very few points.

I'm not arguing that this was a great offensive performanc by any stretch.  But it was an ok performance; one that an elite defense and good special teams should have made a much closer game than it was.  That's why we are all disappointed in the defense.

BC

Re: Oregon game thread - BurgXXIII - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 08:57 PM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=BurgXXIII link=topic=11041.msg104160#msg104160 date=1414897601]
For a few seasons, George Seifert was the best coach in the history of the NFL. I'm not sure many still believe that.

He finished first in the league in points in five of his eight years, something Walsh never did.
[/quote

I was under the impression that, even considering just the 49ers, that Walsh is considered more reverently than Seifert.]

Re: Oregon game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 09:06 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:WIM, I think the concern about the defense is because the offensive struggles have already been priced into our expectations.  ...  That's why we are all disappointed in the defense.

A disappointing performance, no question about it. But I think it's a poor performance, not necessarily anything that's indicative of a broader trend or broader problems with Anderson, etc. OTOH the offense is, well, you know.

Re: Oregon game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 09:08 PM)BurgXXIII link Wrote:I was under the impression that, even considering just the 49ers, that Walsh is considered more reverently than Seifert.

A classic expectations thing. Walsh retired more-or-less on top. Seifert had to deal with escalated expectations. Literally the same situation as with Shaw.

Re: Oregon game thread - Mick - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 09:10 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=BurgXXIII link=topic=11041.msg104186#msg104186 date=1414901323]
I was under the impression that, even considering just the 49ers, that Walsh is considered more reverently than Seifert.

A classic expectations thing. Walsh retired more-or-less on top. Seifert had to deal with escalated expectations. Literally the same situation as with Shaw.
[/quote]

Seifert doesn't get enough credit.  Walsh coached the Niners from 1979 to 1988.  In the five years before Seifert joined the team in 1983, Walsh's defenses were ranked (by points allowed) #18, #27, #26, #2 (Super Bowl Year) and #23.  In the six years that Seifert served as defensive coordinator, the Niner defenses were ranked #4, #1, #2, #3, #3 and #8.



Re: Oregon game thread - BostonCard - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 09:09 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=11041.msg104185#msg104185 date=1414901190]
WIM, I think the concern about the defense is because the offensive struggles have already been priced into our expectations.  ...  That's why we are all disappointed in the defense.

A disappointing performance, no question about it. But I think it's a poor performance, not necessarily anything that's indicative of a broader trend or broader problems with Anderson, etc. OTOH the offense is, well, you know.
[/quote]

Good point; we'd hardly be the first team to give up points or yards to Oregon. Still, I was hoping for a better performance.  The last thing I wanted to be going to be thinking "the defense is going to be fine; this isn't indicative of a broader trend, right?"  Because if it were indicative of a broader trend, we'll be pointing at this game as the one where the train just went off the rails.

David Shaw has never lost consecutive games, and we have two weeks to get ready for Utah (at home).  But Utah is a dangerous team, and if we can't count on our defense against them, it will be another long night.

BC

Re: Oregon game thread - 82 Card - 11-01-2014

(11-01-2014, 09:10 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=BurgXXIII link=topic=11041.msg104186#msg104186 date=1414901323]
I was under the impression that, even considering just the 49ers, that Walsh is considered more reverently than Seifert.

A classic expectations thing. Walsh retired more-or-less on top. Seifert had to deal with escalated expectations. Literally the same situation as with Shaw.
[/quote]

Turn-around guys get more press than those who keep a well oiled machine running long past it's expected expiration date.

When Walsh took over the Niners, they were a sad sack team. The odds of the Niners winning the Supper Bowl were thought to be about as likely as Stanford MBB appearing in the final four. For those who weren't around back then, the common wisdom was that such a thing was preposterous. When he quickly turned that around, he was dubbed a genius.

When Seifert took over, the expectation was that things would degenerate to their natural state. They didn't, for a long time. Ho hum, another Niners parade on Market Street.

Re: Oregon game thread - BurgXXIII - 11-02-2014

It still feels a bit like pegging Lord Denethor as the hero of Lord of the Rings.

Re: Oregon game thread - CowboyIndian - 11-02-2014

(11-02-2014, 07:47 AM)BurgXXIII link Wrote:It still feels a bit like pegging Lord Denethor as the hero of Lord of the Rings.

You are taking this "Nerd Nation" thing way too much to heart.

Re: Oregon game thread - yvonne - 11-02-2014

(11-01-2014, 09:37 PM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=11041.msg104188#msg104188 date=1414901456]
[quote author=BurgXXIII link=topic=11041.msg104186#msg104186 date=1414901323]
I was under the impression that, even considering just the 49ers, that Walsh is considered more reverently than Seifert.

A classic expectations thing. Walsh retired more-or-less on top. Seifert had to deal with escalated expectations. Literally the same situation as with Shaw.
[/quote]

Seifert doesn't get enough credit.  Walsh coached the Niners from 1979 to 1988.  In the five years before Seifert joined the team in 1983, Walsh's defenses were ranked (by points allowed) #18, #27, #26, #2 (Super Bowl Year) and #23.  In the six years that Seifert served as defensive coordinator, the Niner defenses were ranked #4, #1, #2, #3, #3 and #8.
[/quote]

Funny you should say that. He's being inducted into the 49er Hall of Fame today.

Re: Oregon game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-02-2014

By the way, because I can't help but be a curmudgeon, I looked up the Niners' record and found...

...


hmm... 4-4.

Who knows how poor they'd be without the full application of Harbaugh's genius.

Re: Oregon game thread - BostonCard - 11-02-2014

Yeah, I saw that.  And the chorus calling for a new offensive coordinator in Santa Clara grows louder.  Maybe if the Niners fire Roman we can pick him up?

The game ended on a controversial call (a fumble on a  sneak) where it was literally impossible to see when Kapernick lost the football.  But the bigger issue is the Niners put up 263 yards of total offense... against the Rams.  They also lost two fumbles, including the aforementioned game-ending play.  Kapernick was sacked 8 times, and Frank Gore managed only 49 yards on 14 carries.  Clearly the SF Offensive Line has issues.

BC

Re: Oregon game thread - CompSci87 - 11-02-2014

Today the Niners started a rookie center who has had little or no previous playing time, as their regular starter is out with a broken bone. IIRC, they've started 5 different O-line lineups this year because of injuries. So O-line problems aren't a surprise.

Re: Oregon game thread - OutsiderFan - 11-02-2014

(11-02-2014, 06:54 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Maybe if the Niners fire Roman we can pick him up?

Seriously?  Roman's Niners offense and Shaw's Stanford offense are almost mirror images of each other.  Being a fan of both teams is like double jeopardy.  You see Stanford go out, move the ball up to the 30, and struggle mightily to score TDs on Saturday, and then watch almost a de ja vu experience with the Niners on Sunday.  I'm tired of both offenses and am ready for new OCs for both teams.  I wouldn't want Roman anywhere near Stanford again.

Re: Oregon game thread - stanforddad - 11-02-2014

I look at Scott Frost, ex Stanford and Nebraska QB, in the Duck OC position and wonder what if?

Re: Oregon game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-02-2014

(11-02-2014, 08:43 PM)stanforddad link Wrote:I look at Scott Frost, ex Stanford and Nebraska QB, in the Duck OC position and wonder what if?

"What if we attempted to graft an entirely different offensive system onto ours, using small, quick wide receivers and running backs onto a team with bulky tight ends and wide receivers? What if we tried to use reasonably mobile QBs -- for so-called pro-style QBs -- and put them in a system with much greater demands on QB mobility?" etc.