If we played at a faster past we would have similar numbers but unlike the Ducks when we play against outclassed opponents we try to keep it under 70.
all the oregon hype
- Thread starter Chance Sprinkle
- Start date
- Status
If we played at a faster past we would have similar numbers but unlike the Ducks when we play against outclassed opponents we try to keep it under 70.
The key to stopping offenses like Oregon's, aTm's, Baylors, Clemson's etc is disrupting the rhythm and timing. I watched Clemson and Boston College Saturday and rhythm is the key to these type offenses. You don't even have to get a negative play to disrupt the offense.
But I guess you could say that about any offense.
But I guess you could say that about any offense.
This argument and hype reminds me of last years hyping of the mighty Notre Dame defense that we would never be able to run on. How'd that work out?
I for one do not want to be a fan that fuels their fire. They are a dangerous team that can beat any team on a given day without having their best day.
Yes they are hyped, and getting a lot of the attention because they continue to be the great SEC killer hope. Part of that is deserved, part of it may not be. I think there is plenty of evidence that our team and coaching staff can handle them, talent wise, speed wise and scheme wise. They however should not be underestimated. That team has good players that believe, run their scheme very well, and will have a huge chip on their shoulder. If our team comes out overconfident, we could get in a hole we can't dig out of quick. if our team gets a lead and relaxes, they can get back into it quick. Don't think it could not happen. I respect what they have much more than what Notre Dame had last year.
Yes they are hyped, and getting a lot of the attention because they continue to be the great SEC killer hope. Part of that is deserved, part of it may not be. I think there is plenty of evidence that our team and coaching staff can handle them, talent wise, speed wise and scheme wise. They however should not be underestimated. That team has good players that believe, run their scheme very well, and will have a huge chip on their shoulder. If our team comes out overconfident, we could get in a hole we can't dig out of quick. if our team gets a lead and relaxes, they can get back into it quick. Don't think it could not happen. I respect what they have much more than what Notre Dame had last year.
All the talking heads are saying this is the best Oregon team they have ever seen. I think they just have short memories and wishful thinking...
2010 Oregon averaged just over 300 YPG rushing, 230 passing, 48.5 PPG. This year's group is slightly better than that team at 320 rushing, 300 passing and 54 PPG. *U went into the NCG and limited them to 75 yards rushing, gave up 375 through the air but held them to 19 total points. That was with a defense that we all feel was not top tier SEC caliber.
You may say I am whistling past the graveyard but I just ain't that scared of them...
2010 Oregon averaged just over 300 YPG rushing, 230 passing, 48.5 PPG. This year's group is slightly better than that team at 320 rushing, 300 passing and 54 PPG. *U went into the NCG and limited them to 75 yards rushing, gave up 375 through the air but held them to 19 total points. That was with a defense that we all feel was not top tier SEC caliber.
You may say I am whistling past the graveyard but I just ain't that scared of them...
No question. They are a very good team that doesn't need any help getting motivated. They seem to be the country's "only hope" to finally take down the big bad evil empire that is the SEC. Trust me, if it happens all we're going to hear is "You see, look what would have happened the past seven years if we'd had a playoff." Don't think for one minute there won't be this type retroactive like thinking.
I don't think anybody is scared to play Oregon, in fact I'd love to see that game, but I don't think we should just dismiss them either. They can flat out score and their defense is good enough to give them a chance against anybody, Bama included. I think we have a better team and would beat them, but it wouldn't be anything like last year's game with ND.
Yup there will always be retroactive what ifs. It is much more fun being on the owning of the crystal side of it though :biggrin2:
Yep. You got that right. They can speculate all they want but reality sits in the trophy case for us. :biggrin2:
I don't understand why everyone wants to compare Oregon with Texas A&M, personally. They're really not that similar.
Sure, they both feature a lot of "spread" elements, generally run up-tempo, and go no-huddle a lot but that's where the comparisons end. Schematically, they're actually very different.
First, look at the offensive lines:
- Texas A&M is heavier... Oregon has one starter tipping the scales at over 300 Lbs while Texas A&M has four. The Ducks average 290 Lbs along the line while the Aggies average a little over 305 - over 15 Lbs more per man - while still running a no-huddle, up-tempo offense. Granted, not quite as up-tempo as Oregon but still.
- The alignments are different... Oregon uses very wide splits - not quite as wide as Mike Leach's line but pretty close - while Texas A&M uses fairly average splits. Texas A&M will somewhat vary the size of their splits, depending upon alignment, on both passing and running downs with either passing and/or running plays called. The only time you'll really see Oregon tighten up their splits is in a goal-line / 4th and inches type situation.
- The schemes are different... While both run Zone blocking schemes they run them quite differently. Oregon primarily uses an outside zone blocking scheme with combo block assignments progressing inside to outside, attempting to seal the inside of the line in order to either open up a primary lane (on inside runs) or "cutback" lane (on outside runs) for the runner in the middle of the field while relying more on one-on-one blocking to seal the edge and/or the ball-carrier's speed to outrun the defense to the edge on outside runs or when the runner "bounces" outside when the hole is clogged on an inside running play. Texas A&M will regularly pull guards on outside running plays, iso runs, and counters while Oregon - on the rare occasion they do pull a guard - usually only does so on inside runs. Oregon doesn't have a set of true counter running plays in their playbook; they really just have one little inside trap running play. Their backs and QB are very good at seeing and hitting cutback lanes, though, so proper lane discipline and containment is still important even though they don't run counters to keep slants and run-blitzes to a minimum. Finally, Texas A&M will run a true power-run, man blocking scheme on occasion - mostly with two tight-ends on goal line or short running plays but occasionally on long downs - in an attempt to move the line of scrimmage a yard or two down the field. Oregon, on the other hand, does no such thing. Even on goal line or 3rd or 4th and inches Oregon, if they attempt to run it inside, will still try to create a "hole" for the back to go through to get the yard or two they need. This is why they will call an outside run or even a pass play more often than inside runs on these type plays.
Now, the Receivers:
- Texas A&M is bigger... The Aggies' top three WRs average a little over 6' 2", 200 Lbs while the Ducks' top three WRs average right at 5' 10", 190 Lbs. Four of the Aggie's top seven receiving threats are at least 6' tall, with one of those falling "short" being a RB. Oregon, meanwhile only has one WR and a TE among their top six pass catchers taller than 6' - both of which are 6' 4', incidentally - but have amassed only 9 and 10 receptions, respectively, this season.
- Texas A&M has taller trees... The Ducks seem to be masters of the big play, leading the nation with 56 plays from scrimmage of over 20 yards. However, the vast majority of those plays are either long running plays (23) or catch-and-run passing plays. While the Ducks will beat you over the top on a long passing play every now and then, they don't stretch the field vertically with their route trees. Oregon depends upon horizontal stretching, or spacing, to try to get their runners and receivers the ball in space; they get their big plays by making people miss. They run a lot - and I mean a lot - of screens and quick slants when they pass the ball. A&M, on the other hand, runs a lot of pro-style route trees out of their "spread" offense. They try to create vertical space in the passing game in order to get their big plays.
- Texas A&M can win jump balls... Due to the height and weight of their receivers - as well as the plethora of opportunities they get from Manziel simply heaving the ball indiscriminately down the field - the Aggies' WRs have shown an uncanny ability to win jump balls on passing plays. If the Ducks start relying on their WRs to win jump balls against even a decent secondary, they're going to end up throwing a lot on interceptions.
Finally, the backfield:
- Oregon is generally faster... I'm not sure who would win a footrace between Manziel and Mariota but it would be fun to watch.
At the RB position, though, Oregon seems to be a bit faster overall. Texas A&M is a little bit bigger but not enough to matter that much, except that...
- Texas A&M runs tougher... I'm not questioning anyone's individual toughness or "man-hood", per se, but rather simply talking about running style. While no one is going to start calling any of the Aggie tailbacks "bruisers" any time soon, they are when compared to the Ducks' tailbacks. The Ducks create missed tackles by making guys miss; when they're asked to break tackles, they generally don't. The Aggie backs can make you miss as well but are equally adept at breaking arm tackles, especially when running inside.
- An Ace versus a Joker... Mariota is an Ace, to use a playing card analogy, while Manziel is a Joker. Both QBs have fairly strong, accurate arms. If you give them time they'll pick you apart - of course, that can be said of any very good QB. Both of them can turn a broken play into a big play. The difference is in how they do it. Let's be honest here - from an observer's perspective it appears that Mariota does his magic using pure skill while Manziel relies much more upon pure, dumb luck. Mariota can feel pressure in the pocket, escape towards the line of scrimmage, and then run for 10 or 20 or 70 yards. Manziel can do the same thing. Mariota can also, from the same situation, pull up in front of the line of scrimmage and hit a receiver cutting across the middle with a quick pass for 10 or 20 yards or more if the receiver can make some people miss. Manziel can do the same thing. The difference is that Manziel is just as likely to turn around, run 12 or 15 yards back behind the line of scrimmage, all the while breaking two or three tackles, while giving his receivers enough time to have a snack or take a bathroom break before getting open for a big play. The average football play lasts around 6-7 seconds. Mariota can take a six second play and turn it into 50 or 60 yards. Manziel can take a six second play, turn it into a 16 or 17 second play, and then turn it into whatever he wants. While Mariota probably has more pure skill from a strictly running and/or throwing standpoint, Manziel is not far behind and has intangibles coming out the wazoo. Bottom line: you can at least somewhat game-plan for what Mariota brings to the table; there's no way to game-plan for what Manziel brings to the table.
From a schematic standpoint the two teams are actually quite different. In my opinion, Alabama matches up much better against Oregon than Texas A&M.
Having said that, at the end of last year I thought that there were only three teams in the country that had a legitimate chance of beating Alabama had they faced us in the BCS Championship Game: Oregon, LSU, and Texas A&M.
Sure, they both feature a lot of "spread" elements, generally run up-tempo, and go no-huddle a lot but that's where the comparisons end. Schematically, they're actually very different.
First, look at the offensive lines:
- Texas A&M is heavier... Oregon has one starter tipping the scales at over 300 Lbs while Texas A&M has four. The Ducks average 290 Lbs along the line while the Aggies average a little over 305 - over 15 Lbs more per man - while still running a no-huddle, up-tempo offense. Granted, not quite as up-tempo as Oregon but still.
- The alignments are different... Oregon uses very wide splits - not quite as wide as Mike Leach's line but pretty close - while Texas A&M uses fairly average splits. Texas A&M will somewhat vary the size of their splits, depending upon alignment, on both passing and running downs with either passing and/or running plays called. The only time you'll really see Oregon tighten up their splits is in a goal-line / 4th and inches type situation.
- The schemes are different... While both run Zone blocking schemes they run them quite differently. Oregon primarily uses an outside zone blocking scheme with combo block assignments progressing inside to outside, attempting to seal the inside of the line in order to either open up a primary lane (on inside runs) or "cutback" lane (on outside runs) for the runner in the middle of the field while relying more on one-on-one blocking to seal the edge and/or the ball-carrier's speed to outrun the defense to the edge on outside runs or when the runner "bounces" outside when the hole is clogged on an inside running play. Texas A&M will regularly pull guards on outside running plays, iso runs, and counters while Oregon - on the rare occasion they do pull a guard - usually only does so on inside runs. Oregon doesn't have a set of true counter running plays in their playbook; they really just have one little inside trap running play. Their backs and QB are very good at seeing and hitting cutback lanes, though, so proper lane discipline and containment is still important even though they don't run counters to keep slants and run-blitzes to a minimum. Finally, Texas A&M will run a true power-run, man blocking scheme on occasion - mostly with two tight-ends on goal line or short running plays but occasionally on long downs - in an attempt to move the line of scrimmage a yard or two down the field. Oregon, on the other hand, does no such thing. Even on goal line or 3rd or 4th and inches Oregon, if they attempt to run it inside, will still try to create a "hole" for the back to go through to get the yard or two they need. This is why they will call an outside run or even a pass play more often than inside runs on these type plays.
Now, the Receivers:
- Texas A&M is bigger... The Aggies' top three WRs average a little over 6' 2", 200 Lbs while the Ducks' top three WRs average right at 5' 10", 190 Lbs. Four of the Aggie's top seven receiving threats are at least 6' tall, with one of those falling "short" being a RB. Oregon, meanwhile only has one WR and a TE among their top six pass catchers taller than 6' - both of which are 6' 4', incidentally - but have amassed only 9 and 10 receptions, respectively, this season.
- Texas A&M has taller trees... The Ducks seem to be masters of the big play, leading the nation with 56 plays from scrimmage of over 20 yards. However, the vast majority of those plays are either long running plays (23) or catch-and-run passing plays. While the Ducks will beat you over the top on a long passing play every now and then, they don't stretch the field vertically with their route trees. Oregon depends upon horizontal stretching, or spacing, to try to get their runners and receivers the ball in space; they get their big plays by making people miss. They run a lot - and I mean a lot - of screens and quick slants when they pass the ball. A&M, on the other hand, runs a lot of pro-style route trees out of their "spread" offense. They try to create vertical space in the passing game in order to get their big plays.
- Texas A&M can win jump balls... Due to the height and weight of their receivers - as well as the plethora of opportunities they get from Manziel simply heaving the ball indiscriminately down the field - the Aggies' WRs have shown an uncanny ability to win jump balls on passing plays. If the Ducks start relying on their WRs to win jump balls against even a decent secondary, they're going to end up throwing a lot on interceptions.
Finally, the backfield:
- Oregon is generally faster... I'm not sure who would win a footrace between Manziel and Mariota but it would be fun to watch.
At the RB position, though, Oregon seems to be a bit faster overall. Texas A&M is a little bit bigger but not enough to matter that much, except that...- Texas A&M runs tougher... I'm not questioning anyone's individual toughness or "man-hood", per se, but rather simply talking about running style. While no one is going to start calling any of the Aggie tailbacks "bruisers" any time soon, they are when compared to the Ducks' tailbacks. The Ducks create missed tackles by making guys miss; when they're asked to break tackles, they generally don't. The Aggie backs can make you miss as well but are equally adept at breaking arm tackles, especially when running inside.
- An Ace versus a Joker... Mariota is an Ace, to use a playing card analogy, while Manziel is a Joker. Both QBs have fairly strong, accurate arms. If you give them time they'll pick you apart - of course, that can be said of any very good QB. Both of them can turn a broken play into a big play. The difference is in how they do it. Let's be honest here - from an observer's perspective it appears that Mariota does his magic using pure skill while Manziel relies much more upon pure, dumb luck. Mariota can feel pressure in the pocket, escape towards the line of scrimmage, and then run for 10 or 20 or 70 yards. Manziel can do the same thing. Mariota can also, from the same situation, pull up in front of the line of scrimmage and hit a receiver cutting across the middle with a quick pass for 10 or 20 yards or more if the receiver can make some people miss. Manziel can do the same thing. The difference is that Manziel is just as likely to turn around, run 12 or 15 yards back behind the line of scrimmage, all the while breaking two or three tackles, while giving his receivers enough time to have a snack or take a bathroom break before getting open for a big play. The average football play lasts around 6-7 seconds. Mariota can take a six second play and turn it into 50 or 60 yards. Manziel can take a six second play, turn it into a 16 or 17 second play, and then turn it into whatever he wants. While Mariota probably has more pure skill from a strictly running and/or throwing standpoint, Manziel is not far behind and has intangibles coming out the wazoo. Bottom line: you can at least somewhat game-plan for what Mariota brings to the table; there's no way to game-plan for what Manziel brings to the table.
From a schematic standpoint the two teams are actually quite different. In my opinion, Alabama matches up much better against Oregon than Texas A&M.
Having said that, at the end of last year I thought that there were only three teams in the country that had a legitimate chance of beating Alabama had they faced us in the BCS Championship Game: Oregon, LSU, and Texas A&M.
Good post Sip...Oregon has certainly arrived and deserve all of the hype. In fact, I prefer all the National attention on the Duck program so we can continue our steady march quietly towards our 3rd straight BSCNC. I want us to play the best of the best and truly think they will give us a heck of a game.
Not to hijack the thread but I've got a question about the teams that use the "wide splits" on their offensive lines. What is the purpose of this and why doesn't this cause defenses to line up in the gaps and just blow through those wide gaps?
Also, one more thing about comparing offenses, specifically the "big play" factor...
Most people think of Oregon as this amazing, high-scoring, big-play machine on offense. Most people also are now thinking of Texas A&M in the same manner. I think this is why many people want to compare or equate the two. So, let's take a quick look at those two high-octane offenses versus a pedestrian, slow, methodical offense like Alabama's...
Over the past three seasons (2012, 2011, and 2010) these three teams averaged the following points per game:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Points / Game[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]47.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]38.3[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]36.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I'll bet a lot of Ducks' fans would be a bit surprised to see Alabama's numbers that high. Also, it should be noted that by using the last three seasons it skews A&M's stats a little bit but not enough to make it inapplicable.
Also over the past three seasons, these three teams totaled the following numbers of big plays from scrimmage:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 600"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]20+ Yard Plays[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]30+ Yard Plays[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]30+ Yard Plays[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]250[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]125[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]68[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]219[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]100[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]102[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]213[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]102[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]42[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Again, I'm sure Alabama's numbers here will surprise some people. Of course, what do these numbers mean other than showing that Oregon scores more points and has more big plays? On the face, nothing. However, there's another factor here that is very important: the number of plays each team ran:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / Game[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3098[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3102[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2592[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
These numbers shouldn't surprise anyone. Both Oregon and Texas A&M run far, far more plays than does Alabama. However, what does this have to do with the above numbers?
Efficiency.
Taking these numbers, let's look at how many plays each team has had to run in order to amass those points or make those big plays:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 7 Points[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]11.39[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]14.56[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12.46[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 600"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 20yd+ play[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 30yd+ play[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 40yd+ play[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]24.8[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]45.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]14.2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]31.0[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]66.0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12.2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]25.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]61.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I'm thinking that even many Alabama fans might be surprised at these numbers.
Play for play, Alabama's offense has been just as efficient, if not more so, at both scoring points and making big plays as the high-octane, high-scoring, big-play machine offenses of the Oregon Ducks and the Texas A&M Aggies over the past three seasons.
All of this just goes to show that much of Oregon's (and A&M's for that matter) gaudy statistical numbers are just as much quantitative as qualitative. It also explains why Oregon's offense has been held to season lows the last two times they faced a decent SEC team.
Most people think of Oregon as this amazing, high-scoring, big-play machine on offense. Most people also are now thinking of Texas A&M in the same manner. I think this is why many people want to compare or equate the two. So, let's take a quick look at those two high-octane offenses versus a pedestrian, slow, methodical offense like Alabama's...
Over the past three seasons (2012, 2011, and 2010) these three teams averaged the following points per game:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Points / Game[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]47.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]38.3[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]36.4[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I'll bet a lot of Ducks' fans would be a bit surprised to see Alabama's numbers that high.
Also, it should be noted that by using the last three seasons it skews A&M's stats a little bit but not enough to make it inapplicable.Also over the past three seasons, these three teams totaled the following numbers of big plays from scrimmage:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 600"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]20+ Yard Plays[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]30+ Yard Plays[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]30+ Yard Plays[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]250[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]125[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]68[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]219[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]100[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]102[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]213[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]102[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]42[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Again, I'm sure Alabama's numbers here will surprise some people.
Of course, what do these numbers mean other than showing that Oregon scores more points and has more big plays? On the face, nothing. However, there's another factor here that is very important: the number of plays each team ran:[TABLE="class: grid, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / Game[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3098[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]3102[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]2592[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
These numbers shouldn't surprise anyone. Both Oregon and Texas A&M run far, far more plays than does Alabama. However, what does this have to do with the above numbers?
Efficiency.
Taking these numbers, let's look at how many plays each team has had to run in order to amass those points or make those big plays:
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 400"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 7 Points[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]11.39[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]14.56[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12.46[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="class: grid, width: 600"]
[TR]
[TD]Team[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 20yd+ play[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 30yd+ play[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Plays / 40yd+ play[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Oregon Ducks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]24.8[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]45.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Texas A&M Aggies[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]14.2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]31.0[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]66.0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alabama Crimson Tide[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12.2[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]25.4[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]61.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I'm thinking that even many Alabama fans might be surprised at these numbers.
Play for play, Alabama's offense has been just as efficient, if not more so, at both scoring points and making big plays as the high-octane, high-scoring, big-play machine offenses of the Oregon Ducks and the Texas A&M Aggies over the past three seasons.
All of this just goes to show that much of Oregon's (and A&M's for that matter) gaudy statistical numbers are just as much quantitative as qualitative. It also explains why Oregon's offense has been held to season lows the last two times they faced a decent SEC team.
Last edited:
I honestly feel its clear to anyone who watches football that only Alabama can beat Alabama but that is boring to say, so people have to come up with theories on who can beat the tide. I think Oregon might have a chance if we played in regular season, but with a month to prepare execution means a lot more than confusion. The real advantage for Alabama, should there be an Tide/Duck MNC match up is Alabama has been there done that, and the Ducks will be learning as they go.
"Bama doesn't lose they just un-win."
I can't take credit for this saying. I saw it on an LSU board a few years ago. LOL! It's funny I don't care who you root for.
Last edited:
Sometimes it does.
You typically see this with teams that run more of a West-Coast style offense, from the aspect of in-play tempo - short, quick passes and quick-hitting runs. You usually don't see many 5 and 7 step drops on passing plays and you almost never see a running back pressing a hole, i.e. waiting for a hole to develop.
The advantage to the wide splits on passing plays is that it gives the QB more throwing lanes for slant and drag routes, which those offenses will feature. On running plays, it gives the LBs an extra step or two that they have to take to get to the hole to meet the back, which is why you'll see the backs trying to hit the hole as quickly as possible. It also makes gap assignment for the DL more difficult, since there's an extra yard or two of total width to manage when trying to keep containment.
As far as having the DL constantly shooting the gaps to try and get penetration as quickly as possible, well, that's what screens are for.
The wider splits also help with the inside screens, both to RBs and WRs coming back across the middle. While the wider splits make it easier for the DL to shoot the gaps it also makes it easier for the OL to get off of their blocks and get to the second level where they can wall off the LBs, allowing the RB or WR to take the screen and get a head of steam before meeting up with defensive resistance.
For a good look at how to punish an offense that uses wide splits, go back and take a look at the Cotton Bowl we played against Texas Tech.
Last edited:
:biggrin2:
Yeah, that popped into my head the moment after I typed that phrase.
Oregon scored plenty against UT. And Alabama list to that Auburn team at home as well as to that LSU team at home.
- Status
New Posts
-
-
16 former CFB players granted TRO to come back to college to play this season- Latest: RammerJammer15
-
-
Trending content
Latest threads
-
16 former CFB players granted TRO to come back to college to play this season
- Started by RammerJammer15
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Million-dollar deals, broken promises and a two-week mad dash: Inside the QB transfer portal- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Pistols Firing: OSU's Morris kills armadillo in yard
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Multiple NFL signees granted 5th year of eligibility
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Deputy tries to serve 'unavailable' Deion papers
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-