Is it time for Oregon to reconsider their system? I've never been a believer in the "scoring too fast" thing but...last night, they might just have done that. After getting pummeled, they get a turnover. They then scored with a long pass on the next play, running their defense out to get pummeled again. I absolutely saw some things in that game that led to the end of the run 'n shoot in the NFL. Whether it was reality or merely perception, the run 'n shoot was seen as an offense that got less effective the closer it got to the goal line and that tired out a team's own defense faster than the opposition's. And in the Cotton Bowl, we saw the other perceived weakness which was that teams couldn't "close out" games. College isn't the NFL, but we saw rather dramatic failures by the two most uptempo offenses in CFB this bowl season.
Bama likes the pro style and has 3 national titles. That NFL style is also what Kirk Ferentz likes use at Iowa, and Iowa has not been ranked in 4 years. Its not just about the system.
Its all about athletes. Ohio State has 51 different 4 or 5 star recruits on its roster. Thats a big reason why OSU is national champs despite losing key players to injury.
(01-13-2015 04:04 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]Is it time for Oregon to reconsider their system? I've never been a believer in the "scoring too fast" thing but...last night, they might just have done that. After getting pummeled, they get a turnover. They then scored with a long pass on the next play, running their defense out to get pummeled again. I absolutely saw some things in that game that led to the end of the run 'n shoot in the NFL. Whether it was reality or merely perception, the run 'n shoot was seen as an offense that got less effective the closer it got to the goal line and that tired out a team's own defense faster than the opposition's. And in the Cotton Bowl, we saw the other perceived weakness which was that teams couldn't "close out" games. College isn't the NFL, but we saw rather dramatic failures by the two most uptempo offenses in CFB this bowl season.
I disagree with that in some ways.
It was 21-10 entering the 3rd. Ohio St had the fluke interception. Oregon had the 70 yd td pass that you said 1st play. Ohio St got ball back and we had the Winston play over again, except no score. Oregon ran 5 plays and kicked the FG to get within 1 21-20. So I wouldn't say that was the example of Oregon's system screwing them...
However, I would take what happened after that....
Ohio St took the last 6:52 of the 3rd and went methodically down the field. Scored TD last play. Oregon got the ball to start the 4th. 20 yd completion 1st play then a run 2 passes punt. Only 1:03 off the clock. Then for OSU another long 76 yd drive taking about 5 minutes. So for Ohio St 21 plays 151 yds almost 11 minutes off the clock, and 14 pts. For Oregon 4 plays 20 yds 1:03 off the clock. To me- that is more of a problem than the 70 yd pass.
Hard to play against physical teams if you never practice against one.I think you could win with any system even the triple option.
OSU plays a lot of spread they just run it with power like Mississippi state. The hurry up no huddle works if you're faster . Power running offenses work if you're line is a strength. I think A system like Oregon has can work if you have a deep defense.
Ohio State's offense was better than Oregon's defense and Ohio State's defense was better than Oregon's offense when the game was played. That's all. The Buckeyes made all the critical plays when the game mattered, and the Ducks didn't. It's all about making the plays. What system is run is irrelevant. As long as the system is perfectly executed on both sides of the ball, it results in victory.
(01-13-2015 04:04 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]Is it time for Oregon to reconsider their system? I've never been a believer in the "scoring too fast" thing but...last night, they might just have done that. After getting pummeled, they get a turnover. They then scored with a long pass on the next play, running their defense out to get pummeled again. I absolutely saw some things in that game that led to the end of the run 'n shoot in the NFL. Whether it was reality or merely perception, the run 'n shoot was seen as an offense that got less effective the closer it got to the goal line and that tired out a team's own defense faster than the opposition's. And in the Cotton Bowl, we saw the other perceived weakness which was that teams couldn't "close out" games. College isn't the NFL, but we saw rather dramatic failures by the two most uptempo offenses in CFB this bowl season.
I guess it depends on what you want. Oregon has won a bazillion games using that system, but just not the big one. Would they trade a bunch of those wins for a chance (not a guarantee) that they'd win a national championship? How did they do before they went to this uptempo system? I don't recall a lot of success. Even with all of Phil Knight's money, I'm not sure they can recruit enough great players to play a style like Alabama.
(01-13-2015 04:42 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2015 04:04 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]Is it time for Oregon to reconsider their system? I've never been a believer in the "scoring too fast" thing but...last night, they might just have done that. After getting pummeled, they get a turnover. They then scored with a long pass on the next play, running their defense out to get pummeled again. I absolutely saw some things in that game that led to the end of the run 'n shoot in the NFL. Whether it was reality or merely perception, the run 'n shoot was seen as an offense that got less effective the closer it got to the goal line and that tired out a team's own defense faster than the opposition's. And in the Cotton Bowl, we saw the other perceived weakness which was that teams couldn't "close out" games. College isn't the NFL, but we saw rather dramatic failures by the two most uptempo offenses in CFB this bowl season.
I disagree with that in some ways.
It was 21-10 entering the 3rd. Ohio St had the fluke interception. Oregon had the 70 yd td pass that you said 1st play. Ohio St got ball back and we had the Winston play over again, except no score. Oregon ran 5 plays and kicked the FG to get within 1 21-20. So I wouldn't say that was the example of Oregon's system screwing them...
However, I would take what happened after that....
Ohio St took the last 6:52 of the 3rd and went methodically down the field. Scored TD last play. Oregon got the ball to start the 4th. 20 yd completion 1st play then a run 2 passes punt. Only 1:03 off the clock. Then for OSU another long 76 yd drive taking about 5 minutes. So for Ohio St 21 plays 151 yds almost 11 minutes off the clock, and 14 pts. For Oregon 4 plays 20 yds 1:03 off the clock. To me- that is more of a problem than the 70 yd pass.
Their offense never had a chance to get in rhythm as Ohio St. held the ball. The biggest problem with Oregon's offense was the Ohio St. offense.
I don't see Helfrich changing much of anything. They made it to the Championship game, and had a great season.
(01-13-2015 04:04 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]Is it time for Oregon to reconsider their system? I've never been a believer in the "scoring too fast" thing but...last night, they might just have done that. After getting pummeled, they get a turnover. They then scored with a long pass on the next play, running their defense out to get pummeled again. I absolutely saw some things in that game that led to the end of the run 'n shoot in the NFL. Whether it was reality or merely perception, the run 'n shoot was seen as an offense that got less effective the closer it got to the goal line and that tired out a team's own defense faster than the opposition's. And in the Cotton Bowl, we saw the other perceived weakness which was that teams couldn't "close out" games. College isn't the NFL, but we saw rather dramatic failures by the two most uptempo offenses in CFB this bowl season.
Houston had this same problem with Sumlin. The offense could go toe-to-toe with anyone but the defense was often gassed because the offense scored so quickly. If they scored in a play or two, it was worse than a three-and-out as far as the defense conserving energy (2-3 plays including the kickoff as opposed to 4 including the punt).
So I can buy into that some.
(01-13-2015 07:20 PM)_C2_ Wrote: [ -> ] (01-13-2015 04:04 PM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]Is it time for Oregon to reconsider their system? I've never been a believer in the "scoring too fast" thing but...last night, they might just have done that. After getting pummeled, they get a turnover. They then scored with a long pass on the next play, running their defense out to get pummeled again. I absolutely saw some things in that game that led to the end of the run 'n shoot in the NFL. Whether it was reality or merely perception, the run 'n shoot was seen as an offense that got less effective the closer it got to the goal line and that tired out a team's own defense faster than the opposition's. And in the Cotton Bowl, we saw the other perceived weakness which was that teams couldn't "close out" games. College isn't the NFL, but we saw rather dramatic failures by the two most uptempo offenses in CFB this bowl season.
Houston had this same problem with Sumlin. The offense could go toe-to-toe with anyone but the defense was often gassed because the offense scored so quickly. If they scored in a play or two, it was worse than a three-and-out as far as the defense conserving energy (2-3 plays including the kickoff as opposed to 4 including the punt).
So I can buy into that some.
The reason why I think scoring isn't the problem is in real time Oregon first off got a tv timeout before their "series". Then after the 70 yd pass first play, a replay review. Then after the extra point, another tv timeout. Then the kickoff. So it was a good 10 minutes between defensive plays. If you score, you get at least 1 tv timeout almost every score, and some times 2 tv timeouts.
The problem is much worse when you don't score. Oregon 4th quarter basically had a 5 minute real time break between long drives. They ran 4 plays in that time.
Oregon's system works very well against weak defenses. The system breaks down against a good defenses because the they snap the ball so quickly that a defenses can put them in a 3 and out within 45 seconds. If the defenses are able to do that there isn't much wear against them.
Oregon tries to get a big lead quickly to change the dynamic of the game at the start. If they don't, then they are in trouble.
Its why they haven't been very successful against top SEC and Big 10 teams with great defenses.