10-27-2017, 08:44 PM
Here's my theory: we played like crap.
I agree with you to the extent that Shaw does tend to dial the playbook down when we are facing poor opposition. I don't know if that constitutes sandbagging, which typically implies deliberately playing below ability. I think this is more a case of not wanting to put stuff on film for our next opponent.
I think it is probably worth discussing where we fell short.
The defense played fine. Compared to OSU's other opponents, they had a lower yards per play against a very good Washington team and Minnesota. Of note, they actually got more yards per play against USC than against us. We were tied with Minnesota for third most points given up to OSU behind UW (7) and USC (10). We held them to 264 total yards. We forced three turnovers. We only got to their QB twice, though. It wasn't a great defensive performance given the opponent, but it was a pretty good one.
The offense, on the other hand, did not. Compared to OSU's other opponents, we were dead last in yards per play, and it wasn't even close. 3.7 ypp was over 2 yards less than Colorado, their next lowest opponent. It was 2.5 yards per play lower than FCS Portland State. Only Washington State managed fewer rushing yards than the 81 we managed; nobody had fewer passing yards. While OSU had played a couple close games, we scored less than half as many points as the next lowest scoring team, FCS Portland state. OSU gave up over points twice, it had not given up fewer than 30 points until we played them.
On offense it is obviously easy to point the finger at Chryst (or at Shaw for not replacing him), but really our offense was in a funk any way we cut it. Rushing, we got 3 yards per cary, less than any other team that played OSU. We obviously missed Love, but I was struck by how much our other running backs struggled. To my untrained eye, the offensive line did open holes; the running backs seemed to impatient to wait for them to develop or hit the wrong hole. We had a bit of second half success running outside the tackles or those numbers would have been worse. But last night the running game's struggles seemed to fall largely at the feet of the running backs. I think a competent running back should have been able to rip off 5+ yards per carry most times with the football; Love would have likely had several long touchdowns.
And that of course leaves us with Chryst, whose struggles here have been documented. My unified theory is that the coaches still believe in him, but I'm not sure he believes in himself. I think the Oregon game, which many have dismissed as an aberration may be what the coaches think he can accomplish day in and day out. Maybe he does it day in and day out in practice but on Saturday night (or THursday night as the case may be) with the lights shining bright on him, he is trying too hard. He aims his throws instead of just letting them rip. He waits too long for his receivers to get open instead of trusting them to make the play; he just takes too long to pull the trigger. He gets tunnel vision instead of scanning the field. So his throws are errant, often to a well covered receiver, and too often the DB can read where he is going. I think the coaches really truly believe this is a fixable problem. Like pretty much everyone here, I don't think so. And the Oregon to OSU transition seems to suggest that even if you fix it for a while, it can rear its ugly head at any time.
Ultimately, we will see if the coaches keep pushing (and if so, whether they are ultimately successful and Chryst develops into a decent QB), or if they throw in the towel and go with Costello. Personally, I'd love to see what Costello can do with a couple weeks of consistent first team reps. I'd love to see more and more of the playbook opened up to him. I think given that we have Love, we don't need a QB who is as good as Chryst was against Oregon; we just need a QB who is never as bad as Chryst was against SDSU and OSU.
BC
I agree with you to the extent that Shaw does tend to dial the playbook down when we are facing poor opposition. I don't know if that constitutes sandbagging, which typically implies deliberately playing below ability. I think this is more a case of not wanting to put stuff on film for our next opponent.
I think it is probably worth discussing where we fell short.
The defense played fine. Compared to OSU's other opponents, they had a lower yards per play against a very good Washington team and Minnesota. Of note, they actually got more yards per play against USC than against us. We were tied with Minnesota for third most points given up to OSU behind UW (7) and USC (10). We held them to 264 total yards. We forced three turnovers. We only got to their QB twice, though. It wasn't a great defensive performance given the opponent, but it was a pretty good one.
The offense, on the other hand, did not. Compared to OSU's other opponents, we were dead last in yards per play, and it wasn't even close. 3.7 ypp was over 2 yards less than Colorado, their next lowest opponent. It was 2.5 yards per play lower than FCS Portland State. Only Washington State managed fewer rushing yards than the 81 we managed; nobody had fewer passing yards. While OSU had played a couple close games, we scored less than half as many points as the next lowest scoring team, FCS Portland state. OSU gave up over points twice, it had not given up fewer than 30 points until we played them.
On offense it is obviously easy to point the finger at Chryst (or at Shaw for not replacing him), but really our offense was in a funk any way we cut it. Rushing, we got 3 yards per cary, less than any other team that played OSU. We obviously missed Love, but I was struck by how much our other running backs struggled. To my untrained eye, the offensive line did open holes; the running backs seemed to impatient to wait for them to develop or hit the wrong hole. We had a bit of second half success running outside the tackles or those numbers would have been worse. But last night the running game's struggles seemed to fall largely at the feet of the running backs. I think a competent running back should have been able to rip off 5+ yards per carry most times with the football; Love would have likely had several long touchdowns.
And that of course leaves us with Chryst, whose struggles here have been documented. My unified theory is that the coaches still believe in him, but I'm not sure he believes in himself. I think the Oregon game, which many have dismissed as an aberration may be what the coaches think he can accomplish day in and day out. Maybe he does it day in and day out in practice but on Saturday night (or THursday night as the case may be) with the lights shining bright on him, he is trying too hard. He aims his throws instead of just letting them rip. He waits too long for his receivers to get open instead of trusting them to make the play; he just takes too long to pull the trigger. He gets tunnel vision instead of scanning the field. So his throws are errant, often to a well covered receiver, and too often the DB can read where he is going. I think the coaches really truly believe this is a fixable problem. Like pretty much everyone here, I don't think so. And the Oregon to OSU transition seems to suggest that even if you fix it for a while, it can rear its ugly head at any time.
Ultimately, we will see if the coaches keep pushing (and if so, whether they are ultimately successful and Chryst develops into a decent QB), or if they throw in the towel and go with Costello. Personally, I'd love to see what Costello can do with a couple weeks of consistent first team reps. I'd love to see more and more of the playbook opened up to him. I think given that we have Love, we don't need a QB who is as good as Chryst was against Oregon; we just need a QB who is never as bad as Chryst was against SDSU and OSU.
BC