Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 7:31:49 GMT -6
Good article in I think it was ESPN the Mag on why we actually should have expected a relatively low-scoring game. With the time off, you essentially have teams playing Week 1 games again and we all know that early in the season, the defense is ahead of the offense.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 11, 2011 7:37:38 GMT -6
Yeah fingerz I was surprised also with the passing, but shouldn't of been. When Kelley was in New Hampshire he had a kid named Ricky Santos and him and his WR (forgot his name) just broke massive amount of records. I know Santos just threw the ball around when Kelley was there. I just didn't think Thomas had that great of an arm (missed a few key passes, and threw some questionable balls). The receiver's name was David Ball. He actually plays in Canada now. I'm pretty sure that, even though they were successful in the air, they had a pretty potent run game as well. I coach and live in NH, so Chip Kelley was nearly an everyday fixture around here for over a decade. He graduated HS about 15 miles from me. I have to admit, I was never particularly fond of the guy, but he was always helpful when you'd talk to him.
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 11, 2011 8:02:50 GMT -6
People say this was a defensive struggle because both teams didn't put up their normal 50 points, but was it really a defensive game? Auburn had 519 yards Oregon had 449 yards. Almost 1000 yards of offense in a defensive struggle. What it came down to was turn overs on the plus side of the field and missed conversions on 4th and goal. It was a great game to watch I thought. Just don't let the score board fool you, there was a ton of offense in that game, just not a ton of point.
|
|
|
Post by realdawg on Jan 11, 2011 8:14:22 GMT -6
I thought both defenses played a bend but dont break type game. There was alot of yards, but not many points. Although both defenses allowed the other teams to move the ball, they often stiffened inside the red zone.
|
|
|
Post by coachdubyah on Jan 11, 2011 8:40:58 GMT -6
To say those 2 teams were evenly matched would be a HUGE understatement. It was 1 of the most evenly matched National Championship that I have seen since Texas VS USC in 05-06. However, asl it does in most football games it came down to the boys up front.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 11, 2011 9:13:38 GMT -6
Here's my question: I thought Auburn did a great job on Oregon's run game, particularly its inside read game, and even more in particularly its midline. It seemed like Auburn's strategy was, whenever Oregon tried to not block Fairley and to read him, he just kamikaze'd into the backfield to blow up the mesh point. He had a bunch of these. And then when they tried to read someone else he often split the blocks. He was incredible.
Any thoughts on this? I'd never seen a team so successfully just do that -- just say if you don't block my guy he's going to run straight at the mesh point and blow it up. I don't think the Oregon QB did a very good job on run reads, but he also had that War Daddy flying in on every snap. This really killed them on the goalline.
|
|
|
Post by spreadattack on Jan 11, 2011 9:16:32 GMT -6
I would think that over 4 months of preparation from the defenses is what allowed the offensive struggles tonight. It seemed early on that Oregon was trying all sorts of different wrinkles that I had never seen them do prior. With the defenses so tutored up on eachother's offensive gameplan it was almost as if each coach felt inclined to bring in a bunch of new wrinkles and maybe even change up their gameplan. I understand the front four of Auburn absolutely dominated the Oregon offensive line and thus they were unable to run as much as they wanted, but it seemed right from play 1 that Oregon's gameplan was to throw much more than normal. The midline play was what I figured they would go to time and time again to slow down the play of Fairley, but once I saw him blow it up two or three times I was left eating my words. They absolutely shut down the midline perfectly. Great game, but I hated for it to go down in the final two minutes as it did. Very good post and I agreed on the midline and Fairley. I was also confused about (a) why Oregon ran do much weird stuff -- all that three back stuff didn't seem helpful and (b) why they didn't use more outside zone/stretch/jet runs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 9:20:38 GMT -6
Everyone talking about why Oregon didn't run more to the perimeter, but when they did try it,l they weren't very successful. They had success with the screen game and short pass game to the perimeter but not running it outside.
|
|
|
Post by dazzleox on Jan 11, 2011 9:42:10 GMT -6
I haven't seen so many players in the backfield out of the shotgun since Marshall Goldberg's dream backfield or the Four Horsemen of Notre Dame.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 11, 2011 9:51:04 GMT -6
I haven't seen so many players in the backfield out of the shotgun since Marshall Goldberg's dream backfield or the Four Horsemen of Notre Dame. I thought it was fantastic, and showed the Kelley has some creative ideas about how to utilize personnel, etc. I was actually impressed with the offensive structure of both teams. I thought Auburn's offense was a little bit more "series based" and more fun to watch...but I think they could have benefited from slowing their pace down a bit to give their Defense a rest. It seemed like Oregon's pace had a more profound impact on the Auburn D than vice-versa.
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 11, 2011 9:54:47 GMT -6
Here's my question: I thought Auburn did a great job on Oregon's run game, particularly its inside read game, and even more in particularly its midline. It seemed like Auburn's strategy was, whenever Oregon tried to not block Fairley and to read him, he just kamikaze'd into the backfield to blow up the mesh point. He had a bunch of these. And then when they tried to read someone else he often split the blocks. He was incredible. Any thoughts on this? I'd never seen a team so successfully just do that -- just say if you don't block my guy he's going to run straight at the mesh point and blow it up. I don't think the Oregon QB did a very good job on run reads, but he also had that War Daddy flying in on every snap. This really killed them on the goalline. Interestingly, this is pretty much how we did it this past season. One Gun team we played ran the Zone Read, Counter Read, and Midline Read. We basically told our DL that if you go unblocked, run through there and get to the QB mesh point as quickly as possible. We told them their PRIMARY responsibility was to tackle the QB...but they were to play it very similar to what Auburn did. Since they didnt' have a trap or anything like that to keep us from doing it...we figured it would work. It worked great. We held their QB, who had rushed for 200 yards the week earlier, to single-digits, and we actually had 2-3 plays where we got to both the RB and the QB as the mesh was happening, effectively tackling both.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2011 10:31:23 GMT -6
the most impressive thing to me was the stamina of Fairley. He was the biggest guy on Auburn's DLine - got limited breaks in the 70+ snaps of Oregon and even after the openers of screens (numerous perimeter attacks), cuts, and misdirection....he still was explosive in the late 4th quarter. That was phenomenal conditioning let alone, unbelievable play-making ability.
|
|
|
Post by bruceeien on Jan 11, 2011 10:34:57 GMT -6
I think Kelly got away from their base offense and ran Next years offense. I never saw the outside zone/ sweep play that Oregon ran so much. They never ran to the sideline and let the back find a hole in the stretch
Oregon has a huge problem bext year with LaMicahel James, Kenyon Barner and now Lachey Seastrunk in the backfield. It looked like a Shotgun version of the Wishbone.
|
|
|
Post by gdn56 on Jan 11, 2011 10:41:26 GMT -6
Fairley said in a postgame interview that he watched tons of film and that his coaches told him to expect midline and to just attack the quarterback. He also said that he was told not to get caught in between and just attack. So I guess that ones on Thomas of Oregon. Oh anyone else here Coach Meyer talk about the Single Wing in his post game analysis of Oregon in the red zone... Yup, Tebow Jump Pass, gap blocking ... oh the glory days. Also does anyone know why Oregon went away from the OZ whether it was Jet or stretch? Everything was Zone triple, IZ, or IZ midline. ONE more. Related To GDN56 if you combined midline with stretch wouldn't that just be an inverted veer except your zone blocking it, instead of doubling in veer? Essentially, yes it would.
|
|
|
Post by coache67 on Jan 11, 2011 10:51:03 GMT -6
Everyone talking about why Oregon didn't run more to the perimeter, but when they did try it,l they weren't very successful. They had success with the screen game and short pass game to the perimeter but not running it outside. I was wondering why when they did attack the perimeter, they kept going to the short side of the field. I was flipping out watching that over and over and over...
|
|
|
Post by lochness on Jan 11, 2011 11:02:31 GMT -6
I think Kelly got away from their base offense and ran Next years offense. I never saw the outside zone/ sweep play that Oregon ran so much. They never ran to the sideline and let the back find a hole in the stretch Oregon has a huge problem bext year with LaMicahel James, Kenyon Barner and now Lachey Seastrunk in the backfield. It looked like a Shotgun version of the Wishbone. That's not a bad problem to have, coach.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 11, 2011 11:10:09 GMT -6
Everyone talking about why Oregon didn't run more to the perimeter, but when they did try it,l they weren't very successful. They had success with the screen game and short pass game to the perimeter but not running it outside. I was wondering why when they did attack the perimeter, they kept going to the short side of the field. I was flipping out watching that over and over and over... Auburn was running a lot of fire zones off of the wide side of the field. Best bet is to try and eek out a few yards to the short side then run right into a blitz. We can all sit back and question the play calling but each team had 40+ days to game plan, watch film, and practice. They know what they were doing, why they were doing it and when they were doing it.
|
|
|
Post by gunrun on Jan 11, 2011 11:19:43 GMT -6
Coachcb, thanks, I was wondering what Auburn was doing in terms of perimeter defense. I definitely like Outside Zone with Midline better than Inside Zone because the spacing is better where the defender cannot play both. Oregon was hurt by this in the 1st qtr in the Red Zone one time IZ with Midline. They usually run it with OZ, which was puzzling. Also, I saw a couple of times for both teams where they ran down and up stunts, which Deuce talks about in his new blog if you haven't seen it yet: footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Post by Coach JR on Jan 11, 2011 11:31:56 GMT -6
Here's my question: I thought Auburn did a great job on Oregon's run game, particularly its inside read game, and even more in particularly its midline. It seemed like Auburn's strategy was, whenever Oregon tried to not block Fairley and to read him, he just kamikaze'd into the backfield to blow up the mesh point. He had a bunch of these. And then when they tried to read someone else he often split the blocks. He was incredible. Any thoughts on this? I'd never seen a team so successfully just do that -- just say if you don't block my guy he's going to run straight at the mesh point and blow it up. I don't think the Oregon QB did a very good job on run reads, but he also had that War Daddy flying in on every snap. This really killed them on the goalline. After watching it, that's exactly what I thought..."Attack the mesh point". Fairley said after the game they were were coached to attack the QB though, but Coach Rocker may have told them to attack the QBs hands or attack the ball then the QB. Whatever it was, it seems it was either too quick to read, or gave a false read. Cam Newton also got blown up on a similar read vs Oregon's DE. Seems both DCs were well prepared for that.
|
|
|
Post by struceri on Jan 11, 2011 11:35:52 GMT -6
Auburn dominated upfront but if Oregon could have taken advantage of their redzone opportunities they probably would have won. Seemed like Oregon kinda gave up on the run towards the middle of the 3rd quarter and into the early part of the 4th. I know they werent gashing them but even 3 yards is better than nothing and it allows your offense a little bit of rhythm.
|
|
|
Post by waltkus72 on Jan 11, 2011 12:19:51 GMT -6
To the person that mention they had defenders coming off the edge. That should not have deterred Oregon from doing what they do. Everyone knows to beat the bear front or a front with overhang you can run speed option at him, or even shovel.
|
|
|
Post by waltkus72 on Jan 11, 2011 12:26:27 GMT -6
lochness. Yeah it was a craze up here. I live in North Central Mass, right across the border in Mass. And a couple years ago it was neat because the HS coaches would bring players up to meet Kelley and they would do clinics frequently. Even one of the HS coaches got a lot of spread stuff from him. And now it would be impossible to have a conversation
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 11, 2011 12:28:04 GMT -6
To the person that mention they had defenders coming off the edge. That should not have deterred Oregon from doing what they do. Everyone knows to beat the bear front or a front with overhang you can run speed option at him, or even shovel. No, "everyone" knows that it comes down to EXECUTION. Oregon struggled to EXECUTE against the fire zones so they strayed away from their perimeter game. Everything works on paper; doesn't work that way on the field without execution.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 14:31:20 GMT -6
Oregon ran a lot shovel, though, and other than their last TD play, they didn't have a lot of success with it either. I'm no spread expert by many means and I'm not trying to start a fight here, but it seems to me that I saw them run the concepts a lot of you are saying they should have ran! Like an above posts says, it comes down to execution and not a whole lot was going to work in the run game against Auburn's Dline last night.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2011 14:34:21 GMT -6
I guess I shouldn't say "a lot" of shovel, but they ran it three or four times that I can recall off the top of my head. Didn't have a whole lot of success with it until that last time.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 11, 2011 14:51:44 GMT -6
Coachcb, thanks, I was wondering what Auburn was doing in terms of perimeter defense. I definitely like Outside Zone with Midline better than Inside Zone because the spacing is better where the defender cannot play both. Oregon was hurt by this in the 1st qtr in the Red Zone one time IZ with Midline. They usually run it with OZ, which was puzzling. Also, I saw a couple of times for both teams where they ran down and up stunts, which Deuce talks about in his new blog if you haven't seen it yet: footballislifeblog.blogspot.com/They were struggling with their zone read/midline packages because Thomas had a hard time with the option. It really was an execution deal: Fairley and the rest of Auburn's DL were charging the mesh fast and Thomas just blew a lot of the reads. Or, he didn't even have time to make a read before Fairley was hitting him in the mouth. So, what do you do as an option team? The philosophy is predicated on reading those guys that are hard to block but what happens when you're not reading them well and getting chewed up? I have coached in several SBV programs and that is not a position you want to be in... But, Oregon responded by relying on their screen and quick passing games which they did well.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 11, 2011 15:01:40 GMT -6
I guess I shouldn't say "a lot" of shovel, but they ran it three or four times that I can recall off the top of my head. Didn't have a whole lot of success with it until that last time. This is another one of those "looks good on paper" issues. Auburn had their DL flying up-field and shovel option takes advantage of that. But, Oregon's OL couldn't get the defenders inside of the read blocked; so they didn't go very far. However, they did an excellent job when they scored on the shovel play.
|
|
|
Post by coache67 on Jan 11, 2011 18:04:33 GMT -6
Cb you coach for Oregon or something? You seem to be getting pretty defensive about this I do have a couple issues with that "they knew what they were doing and who are we to question them defensive stance" though. Youre right in that they had a long time to prepare but maybe that is why they were having problems as was mentioned above, and it was also pretty obvious, to some who watch Oregon more than I do, that the ducks had added some wrinkles to the game plan, but at some point you've got to use the counters to your base offense that got you into that game in the first place. Isn't that we're supposed to do at it's basest form run our plays, if they stop them, run our plays off those plays and if they stop those dig into our playbook/game plan at halftime (or earlier or later for some) and figure out how to counter their counter? But then again maybe it was just the "pucker effect" that affects some coaches and players in the biggest games on the biggest stage? Not saying that's what it was, but since we're all speculating here...
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 11, 2011 19:22:26 GMT -6
Cb you coach for Oregon or something? You seem to be getting pretty defensive about this I do have a couple issues with that "they knew what they were doing and who are we to question them defensive stance" though. Youre right in that they had a long time to prepare but maybe that is why they were having problems as was mentioned above, and it was also pretty obvious, to some who watch Oregon more than I do, that the ducks had added some wrinkles to the game plan, but at some point you've got to use the counters to your base offense that got you into that game in the first place. Isn't that we're supposed to do at it's basest form run our plays, if they stop them, run our plays off those plays and if they stop those dig into our playbook/game plan at halftime (or earlier or later for some) and figure out how to counter their counter? But then again maybe it was just the "pucker effect" that affects some coaches and players in the biggest games on the biggest stage? Not saying that's what it was, but since we're all speculating here... Nahh, I honestly didn't care about either team. But, I'd sell my first born child to get a chance to coach at that level. Guess I better start having kids then. I don't like hearing people question play-calls and game planning because, as an HC, I don't like it when people do it to us. As coaches, we're the ones that watched all of the film, set and ran all of the practices and game planned. I wondered why Oregon didn't have some GT Counters and Traps in place to handle Auburn's DL when they were flying upfield on the option. But, Oregon has had success with their Zone Read, Veer and Midline all year long and I haven't seen them run any complimentary kick-out schemes. So, to me, it wouldn't make any sense for them to take time to install those blocking schemes and rep them. They do have stuff like Speed and Shovel Option to handle fronts like that and it's worked for them. But, the OL just didn't get it done against Auburn up front. And, honestly, a GT Counter or Trap looks really good on paper but it's still up to the OL to execute and get the job done. When you think about it, they came in with the best game plan an option team can have. They accounted for Fairley by trying to option him but it just didn't work because the cat can friggin run. I don't think it would have mattered if they had trapped him because now the rest of the OL is blocking 1-1 and they weren't executing well anyway. Oregon obviously had a Plan B; their short passing game. They ran that stuff well and it was obvious that it was part of their game planning process because of their no-huddle scheme. They had to come into that game with the quick game play-call cards ready to go so it wasn't like they were just adjusting on the fly.
|
|
|
Post by gunrun on Jan 12, 2011 5:38:44 GMT -6
I agree. The trap vs. Fairley would have been a good play with the way he was flying upfield on Midline. Wow, Trap, what an original play, lol. Funny how we can forget some plays in our quest to be innovative.
|
|