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 - dabigv13 - 11-03-2014

I think the assertion that we need a big RB to be successful is completely absurd, for several reasons.

Perhaps first off, we have been successful recently without a big RB. Stepfan Taylor was 215, which is good sized but not a bruiser.

Secondly, our current RBs who were here last year, while certainly not very busy, did nonetheless do pretty good. Barry J only had 8 carries but averaged 8.4 yards, Kelsey Young averaged 7.9 on 14 carries, and Remound Wright averaged 5.1 yards on 20 carries, not bad considering a fair number of those were goalline carries.

Thirdly, 5 of the top 10 RBs in terms of yards in the NCAA this year are less than 210 lbs. In the Pac-12, the number 2 and 3 RBs by yards (Paul Perkins of UCLA and Devontae Booker of Utah) both weigh 200 lbs.

Fourth, our RBs came in very highly recruited- Barry J, Wright, Young and McCaffrey were all 4 star recruits.

Can we run the exact same offense we ran before? Perhaps not. But plenty of programs are finding ways to make "small" RBs, who were much less heralded than our guys, cornerstones of their offenses. Maybe more read-option would help, but a lot of pro style teams can operate with undersized RBs. Jeremy Langford of Michigan State weighs in at 208. The excellent Melvin Gordon of Wisonsin is 207. No one would confuse either of those teams as gimmicky scatback friendly spread offenses.

Here's another thought experiment, if Tyler Gaffney were here again this year, would our offense be any more successful? I don't really think so. It's hard for any RB to be successful if he's getting hit behind the line of scrimmage consistently.

I don't have singular golden answer to our offensive woes, but I'm pretty sure that our lack of a bruiser in the backfield is not the big thing holding us back.

Re: Oregon game thread - CowboyIndian - 11-03-2014

(11-03-2014, 07:46 PM)dabigv link Wrote:I don't have singular golden answer to our offensive woes, but I'm pretty sure that our lack of a bruiser in the backfield is not the big thing holding us back.

Doesn't everything you wrote prior to this sentence point to an, at best, underperforming or, at worst, way overrated OL. That's what I've been seeing all year.

Re: Oregon game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-03-2014

(11-03-2014, 08:38 PM)CowboyIndian link Wrote:[quote author=dabigv link=topic=11041.msg104373#msg104373 date=1415069185]

I don't have singular golden answer to our offensive woes, but I'm pretty sure that our lack of a bruiser in the backfield is not the big thing holding us back.

Doesn't everything you wrote prior to this sentence point to an, at best, underperforming or, at worst, way overrated OL. That's what I've been seeing all year.
[/quote]

For me, the OL is the main one, yes. I don't think the offense needs a *bruising* back as much as a good one. Young/Wright/Sanders are mediocre -- and, worse, inconsistently so. So they'll fool observers into thinking they're good based on a one, two-game sample before regressing to the mean. (Hard to tell with McCaffrey, who seems good but is only handling limited opportunities. Easy to say he should tear it up given more, but I remember this debate about Kelsey Young and Anthony Wilkerson as well. A strong freshman year is a nice indicator but not a guarantee.)

Re: Oregon game thread - dabigv13 - 11-03-2014

Yes, definitely. I think this very highly regarded OL has certainly underperformed expectations. Is it because the players just aren't that good, need more experience/weight training, or are in a scheme that is not utilizing their talents, is something beyond my pay grade.

But yes, if I could improve one area, I would certainly pick better OL play over better QB play or better RB play. I'd also rather have our WRs drop a few less balls than pine for a 230 lb RB.

I don't think you can say that our RBs are mediocre- I don't have any stats to back this up, but when our guys get good blocking, they seem to make the most of it. Barry J has shown an ability to shake a tackle and get a couple extra yards and Young and McCaffrey both have shown burst to get past players. It may be that our blocking scheme is a poor fit for ALL of their running styles, but again I have a hard time seeing Gaffney or Taylor performing much better with this blocking than our current guys.