I am concerned

[Natebishop3]

I think our offense looked great last night, but our defense really made the Wildcats look better than they are. They carved us up all night through the air and it didn't seem like we were able to adjust to it. Honestly I think the game would have been much, much closer if Zona hadn't had some major issues in the first quarter with all the drops and mis-ques. If Arizona can hang that many points on us, how are we going to stop Stanford?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I felt we covered the underneath stuff closely. To me the problem was over the top of the linebackers. When their receivers got 15+yards down field they were all to often very open. And I mean by a mile. That happened at least a dozen times. That has to be addressed.

 

[Natebishop3]

I felt we covered the underneath stuff closely. To me the problem was over the top of the linebackers. When their receivers got 15+yards down field they were all to often very open. And I mean by a mile. That happened at least a dozen times. That has to be addressed.

Do you think that's an issue with experience in the secondary or is it an issue with getting enough penetration on the DLine? I thought we did a good job stopping the run yesterday, but Zona could pretty much get a first down whenever they wanted once they started throwing and found a rhythm.

 

[Natebishop3]

BTW, I hate doing it but I'm going to post a link to Canzano's column today. He pretty much summed up my thoughts on the defense last night. I disagree with JC about 99% of the time but I think he was on the money with this one.

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/or...f/2011/09/canzano_oregons_defense_all_th.html

If the Ducks can't figure out how to stop a mediocre Pacific-12 Conference offense such as Arizona's, how can it expect to slow Arizona State, USC and Stanford? It's those games that will define the UO season, and winning one or two isn't going to be enough. And I have to think Cardinal quarterback Andrew Luck is unavailable for comment on the matter because he probably saw Arizona-Oregon highlights and hyper-salivated.

Oregon had 516 eye-popping yards of total offense.

Wow, right?

Well, Arizona had only 30 fewer yards. Also, that was some game of dodgeball that Nick Foles was playing as his teammates dropped pass after pass.

 

[Targus]

That's nonsense (not you....Can). Here's the FACTS why!

We all knew Foles is the best passer in the Pac12. The stats prove it. UA has physical, talented and experienced WR's in support of Foles. He's going to get his yards. We won't face another passer like him - period.

Oregon gave up a lot of yards but again considering how long our defensive was on the field and our 2's and 3's got time... Foles had 239 yards vs Stanford and 400 yards vs OK St. We'll be just fine but have areas to improve. I like our coverage!!

Some would argue Luck is a better passer, but surprisingly Stanford ranks just above UCLA and OSU w/ total pass yards (one less game) and at 285 pass yards per game isn't anywhere near UA, WSU and is behind Cal and ASU.

We just faced the best pass offense in the Pac and 4th best in the nation - on the road.

We won. Enough said.

 

[Natebishop3]

That's nonsense (not you....Can). Here's the FACTS why!

We all knew Foles is the best passer in the Pac12. The stats prove it. UA has physical, talented and experienced WR's in support of Foles. He's going to get his yards. We won't face another passer like him - period.

Oregon gave up a lot of yards but again considering how long our defensive was on the field and our 2's and 3's got time... Foles had 239 yards vs Stanford and 400 yards vs OK St. We'll be just fine but have areas to improve. I like our coverage!!

Some would argue Luck is a better passer, but surprisingly Stanford ranks just above UCLA and OSU w/ total pass yards (one less game) and at 285 pass yards per game isn't anywhere near UA, WSU and is behind Cal and ASU.

We just faced the best pass offense in the Pac and 4th best in the nation - on the road.

We won. Enough said.

Those are good points T... make me feel a little better about it.

With that said, I want to see Cliff starting from here on out.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Do you think that's an issue with experience in the secondary or is it an issue with getting enough penetration on the DLine? I thought we did a good job stopping the run yesterday, but Zona could pretty much get a first down whenever they wanted once they started throwing and found a rhythm.

I watched some of the replays and it was the db defense. As an example, on one play the 'Cats ran a crossing rub play. It wasn't a pick, but it was close. Our db who covered the receiver crossing towards the corner ran behind the other receiver giving his man a 7-10 yard separation. You always keep your man in front of you. Always. That's coverage 101A. We were also biting on every pump fake, every hitch & go... It's such basic mistakes, I have to say it's a coaching problem.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

That's nonsense (not you....Can). Here's the FACTS why!

We all knew Foles is the best passer in the Pac12. The stats prove it. UA has physical, talented and experienced WR's in support of Foles. He's going to get his yards. We won't face another passer like him - period.

Oregon gave up a lot of yards but again considering how long our defensive was on the field and our 2's and 3's got time... Foles had 239 yards vs Stanford and 400 yards vs OK St. We'll be just fine but have areas to improve. I like our coverage!!

Some would argue Luck is a better passer, but surprisingly Stanford ranks just above UCLA and OSU w/ total pass yards (one less game) and at 285 pass yards per game isn't anywhere near UA, WSU and is behind Cal and ASU.

We just faced the best pass offense in the Pac and 4th best in the nation - on the road.

We won. Enough said.

Good points, but there is no excuse for so many wide open receivers down field. If those easy dropped passes are caught, we might have lost.

 

[Wheels]

2010 total yards: Arizona 506 to Oregon's 537
2009 total yards: Arizona 441 to Oregon's 459
2008 total yards: Arizona 527 to Oregon's 504

Our defenses that were "better" than the one that played last night still gave up a crapload of yards to UA's Air Raid attack. Only way to shut them down yard wise would be to have a Defense like LSU's. Color me not worried.

 

[Natebishop3]

2010 total yards: Arizona 506 to Oregon's 537
2009 total yards: Arizona 441 to Oregon's 459
2008 total yards: Arizona 527 to Oregon's 504

Our defenses that were "better" than the one that played last night still gave up a crapload of yards to UA's Air Raid attack. Only way to shut them down yard wise would be to have a Defense like LSU's. Color me not worried.

While I see what you're saying Wheels, I agree with BP. There's no excuse for some of the lapses in defense last night.

 

[Targus]

This is good. I enjoy when true fans question the teams efforts.

I see the high yardage given up and can understand one being concerned. However, saying they could have won without the dropped passes is strange. Foles completion % was 59% in the game - he's was 73% vs Stanford and OK St and over 80% vs N. AZ. We sacked him 5 times for nearly 50 lost yards.

Come on...the best QB in the conference (top 5 nation) just attempted nearly 60 passes in a home game! Against Stanford he only attempted 33.

Sure, we can look at yards but we need to consider how many plays they ran and the pace of the game.

Me personally? I'm proud of our secondary. We won. One could argue that the normally sure handed UA receivers were intimidated and not focused. Why? Our secondary intimidated them!!

No way UA wins this game even if they caught every pass!




AZstarnet.com reported: The usually surehanded receivers had a bewildering night, dropping first-half passes that would have kept the UA in the game. David Roberts dropped a pass over the middle on third-and-long, forcing the Wildcats to punt, and Juron Criner muffed three first-half throws, including one at the goal line. Dan Buckner juggled a touchdown pass. The unit rebounded to finish strong: David Douglas caught seven passes for a career-high 120 yards, and Criner finished with nine grabs for 96 yards. Roberts, who impressed against Stanford a week ago, caught four balls for 60 yards and two scores.

Read more: http://azstarnet.com/sports/blogs/f...7ae-11e0-bd99-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1Z09Q5iTC

 

[Natebishop3]

This is good. I enjoy when true fans question the teams efforts.

I see the high yardage given up and can understand one being concerned. However, saying they could have won without the dropped passes is strange. Foles completion % was 59% in the game - he's was 73% vs Stanford and OK St and over 80% vs N. AZ. We sacked him 5 times for nearly 50 lost yards.

Come on...the best QB in the conference (top 5 nation) just attempted nearly 60 passes in a home game! Against Stanford he only attempted 33.

Sure, we can look at yards but we need to consider how many plays they ran and the pace of the game.

Me personally? I'm proud of our secondary. We won. One could argue that the normally sure handed UA receivers were intimidated and not focused. Why? Our secondary intimidated them!!

No way UA wins this game even if they caught every pass!




AZstarnet.com reported: The usually surehanded receivers had a bewildering night, dropping first-half passes that would have kept the UA in the game. David Roberts dropped a pass over the middle on third-and-long, forcing the Wildcats to punt, and Juron Criner muffed three first-half throws, including one at the goal line. Dan Buckner juggled a touchdown pass. The unit rebounded to finish strong: David Douglas caught seven passes for a career-high 120 yards, and Criner finished with nine grabs for 96 yards. Roberts, who impressed against Stanford a week ago, caught four balls for 60 yards and two scores.

Read more: http://azstarnet.com/sports/blogs/f...7ae-11e0-bd99-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1Z09Q5iTC

I don't know if they could have won, but the game would have been a hell of a lot closer if they had actually caught the two wide-open passes that would have gone for TDs. Listen, I wasn't so much worried about AZ, but more worried about the fact that they exposed some holes in our secondary. I'm more worried about how those holes could be exploited by Andrew Luck.

 

[Targus]

Every game reveals areas to work on. Sure...and Luck is going to get his yards, but saying things like UA carved us up or we're weak or Luck is going to exploit us is a bit of a fearful mentality. There were a few misdirections with open receivers...that will happen when a team runs over 60 pass plays. But, for the most part coverage was tight and passes were quick outs and working sidelines -- if coverage wasn't "good" we wouldn't have sacked Foles for a season high.
I can't say it enough...our 2's and 3's held their own against a future NFL QB.

Foles has stats that stand alone and we were the most successful team to hold him to season low completion % and pass rating. Foles is in a league of his own - way above Luck.

Would you say we were pretty good last year? Well, last year we beat UA 48-29 -- a game we actually trailed and Foles went for 448 yards w/ 3 TD's. The year before that it took 2 OT's to win and Foles went 30/46 for 314 w/ 4 TD's.

He's a future NFL QB. He's good. We held him to a season low not in overall but statistically.

Go Ducks! Nice win!

 

[Wheels]

While I see what you're saying Wheels, I agree with BP. There's no excuse for some of the lapses in defense last night.

To me there is. When you have the top WR corps in the conference, and a hell of a QB (that left handed throw was ridiculous!) with 60 chances to beat you... you are going to get beat a lot. Even with a top tier secondary. Also throw in the fact that teams are playing catchup so they are throwing almost 70% of the time, it will happen. Look look at the D-Boyz in 08... that Secondary was loaded, Thurmond, Byrd, Ward, and Chung and that Oregon team was ranked 14th from the worst in Pass YPG against in the whole nation.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footba...=Total&conference=I-A_all&year=2008&sort=1115

 

[Targus]

Oregon has the best offense in the conference, the best special teams and is only allowing 80 more yards per game than the #1 rated defense -- and a few completed passes in a 35-9 halftime game would have made it close?

LOCO...

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

To me there is. When you have the top WR corps in the conference, and a hell of a QB (that left handed throw was ridiculous!) with 60 chances to beat you... you are going to get beat a lot. Even with a top tier secondary. Also throw in the fact that teams are playing catchup so they are throwing almost 70% of the time, it will happen. Look look at the D-Boyz in 08... that Secondary was loaded, Thurmond, Byrd, Ward, and Chung and that Oregon team was ranked 14th from the worst in Pass YPG against in the whole nation.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footba...=Total&conference=I-A_all&year=2008&sort=1115

I don't expect us to cover them like a glove on every play. But I would say then on 40% of the plays they had us beat bad over the top. hanks to drops and good pressuring of the QB we escaped what could have been a long night. But that said, I am also proud of many of the good things our defense did.

 

[Targus]

I'd strongly disagree with 40%.

 

[Natebishop3]

Oregon has the best offense in the conference, the best special teams and is only allowing 80 more yards per game than the #1 rated defense -- and a few completed passes in a 35-9 halftime game would have made it close?

LOCO...

When those passes were wide open and heading towards the end zone.... yes. They just flat out dropped them. Unlike Thomas, Foles was putting the ball right on the money and his receivers were failing him badly. It wasn't good defense.

 

[Targus]

Wasn't good, huh? Ok. Not like we held Foles to his lowest completion % and QB rating yet this season. In fact, we have to go back to Nov of 2010 to find Foles with less than 60% pass rating.

I guess it's possible we just disagree, but Kelly stated, "Sometimes you've got to chalk it up to, that (receiver) is a really good player, and (the quarterback) put the ball right where it needed to be."

Sounds like Kelly would disagree with the 40% assessment too.

 

[Natebishop3]

Wasn't good, huh? Ok. Not like we held Foles to his lowest completion % and QB rating yet this season. In fact, we have to go back to Nov of 2010 to find Foles with less than 60% pass rating.

I guess it's possible we just disagree, but Kelly stated, "Sometimes you've got to chalk it up to, that (receiver) is a really good player, and (the quarterback) put the ball right where it needed to be."

Sounds like Kelly would disagree with the 40% assessment too.

Funny thing about that completion percentage, it doesn't reflect dropped passes that Foles put right on target and his receivers simply dropped them. His receivers were off last night, plain and simple. That doesn't have anything to do with our defense.

 

[Targus]

As stated by the AZ media, there were 5 dropped passes with 4 key ones which would have significantly helped move chains/score. Foles attempted 57 passes. Those 4 passes make up 7% of all passes attempted.

You mentioned 40% (open) and make it sound like their WR were just standing around in the open field. That's false. Even Kelly commented on the talent of QB and WR and said you have to chalk it up to a QB dropping the ball right where it needs to be.

But, it is possible you know more about the coverage than Kelly...

 

[Targus]

Getting more specific, I thought Pleasant had a nice game. He had several solo tackles and broke up a few passes. One should have been picked - but, as we know, stuff gets dropped. John Boyett was a ball hawk, had some big hits, deflections and almost had two picks.

Dropped balls work both ways...

 

[Natebishop3]

As stated by the AZ media, there were 5 dropped passes with 4 key ones which would have significantly helped move chains/score. Foles attempted 57 passes. Those 4 passes make up 7% of all passes attempted.

You mentioned 40% (open) and make it sound like their WR were just standing around in the open field. That's false. Even Kelly commented on the talent of QB and WR and said you have to chalk it up to a QB dropping the ball right where it needs to be.

But, it is possible you know more about the coverage than Kelly...

I didn't mention 40%. That was BP. Listen, I'm not the only person who noticed that the pass defense was sub-par on Saturday night, so I'm not crazy.

 

[Wheels]

I didn't mention 40%. That was BP. Listen, I'm not the only person who noticed that the pass defense was sub-par on Saturday night, so I'm not crazy.

sorry if you feel you are being attacked. Thats not my intent at all. I personally wasnt saying that you said it was 40% (I know you were mentioning that to Targus not me) I am just pointing out that if you give a top level QB 60 Attempts with the top corps of WR's and a pretty young CB's... (I know Cliff Harris, and Gildon are experienced but I'm referring to the likes of Mitchell, Ifre, Mathis etc, players who would be in during nickel and dime packages) ... Yards are going to be given up.

You mentioned in the OP that you were concerned which is fine. I personally am just pointing out why I'm not concerned.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I didn't mention 40%. That was BP. Listen, I'm not the only person who noticed that the pass defense was sub-par on Saturday night, so I'm not crazy.

sorry if you feel you are being attacked. Thats not my intent at all. I personally wasnt saying that you said it was 40% (I know you were mentioning that to Targus not me) I am just pointing out that if you give a top level QB 60 Attempts with the top corps of WR's and a pretty young CB's... (I know Cliff Harris, and Gildon are experienced but I'm referring to the likes of Mitchell, Ifre, Mathis etc, players who would be in during nickel and dime packages) ... Yards are going to be given up.

You mentioned in the OP that you were concerned which is fine. I personally am just pointing out why I'm not concerned.

Just say the word Nate and I'll ban Wheels out of this forum.

 

[Targus]

Nope. Wrong again. By my calculations, you're 84.5% crazy. Bad news is Stoops is only 84.7% crazy so you're in with some pretty rough company!!

Just kidding!!
We disagree. Good. Doesn't mean we can be respectfully so. I think our secondary, like every position on the field, came away with areas of improvement. I'm just one that feels we did pretty well against the best passing offense in the conference - even with our 3's on the field.

A conference win is just that...a win. This game was arguably over after Q1 and it was nice to see us have the opportunity to go deep on the bench for increased experience with the 2's and 3's.

We've got some areas to work on...but, bring on Mr. Luck.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

As stated by the AZ media, there were 5 dropped passes with 4 key ones which would have significantly helped move chains/score. Foles attempted 57 passes. Those 4 passes make up 7% of all passes attempted.

You mentioned 40% (open) and make it sound like their WR were just standing around in the open field. That's false. Even Kelly commented on the talent of QB and WR and said you have to chalk it up to a QB dropping the ball right where it needs to be.

But, it is possible you know more about the coverage than Kelly...

I watched the game and saw a lot of replays with people just running free. I'm not making it up. Look at the game yourself and tell me if I'm wrong.

 

[Targus]

I respect your opinion and have agreed to a very minimal extent. I don't think you're really open to any other opinion here. Are you telling me that with limited TV coverage, you see and are able to observe more coverage than the coaches and media that are present?

1. Tell me when Foles had a lower completion % and QB rating. This is a direct result of coverage.

Woody from RG stated: The Duck defense played great football outside of a couple of drives in the second half, when they momentarily allowed the Wildcats to get back into the game. After getting only three sacks in the first three games, Oregon got five in this game: including two by defensive end Dion Jordan, one by Terrell Turner and two by linebackers Dewitt Stuckey and Josh Kaddu.

Schroeder from RG stated: Combine that with a defensive performance that was adequate — Nick Foles is good, folks, and he’s got some good targets to hit — and the takeaway from Saturday was that yeah, the Ducks have found a pretty good rhythm. Another good example of Oregon’s dominance...

I've already posted Kelly's comments on his secondary efforts. He was asked about the efforts of the secondary and basically said sometimes you just have to chalk it up to a great QB putting the ball right where it needs to be. When have you ever known Chip to not point out weaknesses and areas for improvement?

We're in agreement, there were some blown coverages. 40% - pure crap. It's FOOTBALL and it happens - and will happen more with nearly 60 some pass plays. I've already agreed the coverage is an area to work on, but if fans are going to bellyache over a few blown coverages - to the top passing team in the conference, especially when our 2's, 3's and even 4's (!) are guarding some of the best WR's around (a luxury made possible by a large early lead) then they fail to see the effort made by Pleasant, Boyett and others in this good conference win.

What was the spread on this game? 16? And we won by 25? Hhmmmm....

Hey, guess what!? Stanford and Oregon have shared one common opponent thus far - UA. Guess what, in that game, Foles completed 72% of his passes (59% vs UO) and UA had MORE yards per play vs Stanford than they did against UO. Stanford scored 37 points against that suspect UA defense...UO laid 56 in a contest where the foot was taken off the gas a bit and a lot of kids got to play....

Maybe I just don't understand football and coverage as well as you, but I'm sticking to my guns...our secondary will have some film to watch but overall, it was a great effort by the boys who had to shut down the best passing attack in the Pac for this to be a win.

"The only stat that matters is a win or a loss and we won tonight," safety John Boyett said following the game.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I respect your opinion and have agreed to a very minimal extent. I don't think you're really open to any other opinion here. Are you telling me that with limited TV coverage, you see and are able to observe more coverage than the coaches and media that are present?

1. Tell me when Foles had a lower completion % and QB rating. This is a direct result of coverage.

Woody from RG stated: The Duck defense played great football outside of a couple of drives in the second half, when they momentarily allowed the Wildcats to get back into the game. After getting only three sacks in the first three games, Oregon got five in this game: including two by defensive end Dion Jordan, one by Terrell Turner and two by linebackers Dewitt Stuckey and Josh Kaddu.

Schroeder from RG stated: Combine that with a defensive performance that was adequate — Nick Foles is good, folks, and he’s got some good targets to hit — and the takeaway from Saturday was that yeah, the Ducks have found a pretty good rhythm. Another good example of Oregon’s dominance...

I've already posted Kelly's comments on his secondary efforts. He was asked about the efforts of the secondary and basically said sometimes you just have to chalk it up to a great QB putting the ball right where it needs to be. When have you ever known Chip to not point out weaknesses and areas for improvement?

We're in agreement, there were some blown coverages. 40% - pure crap. It's FOOTBALL and it happens - and will happen more with nearly 60 some pass plays. I've already agreed the coverage is an area to work on, but if fans are going to bellyache over a few blown coverages - to the top passing team in the conference, especially when our 2's, 3's and even 4's (!) are guarding some of the best WR's around (a luxury made possible by a large early lead) then they fail to see the effort made by Pleasant, Boyett and others in this good conference win.

What was the spread on this game? 16? And we won by 25? Hhmmmm....

Hey, guess what!? Stanford and Oregon have shared one common opponent thus far - UA. Guess what, in that game, Foles completed 72% of his passes (59% vs UO) and UA had MORE yards per play vs Stanford than they did against UO. Stanford scored 37 points against that suspect UA defense...UO laid 56 in a contest where the foot was taken off the gas a bit and a lot of kids got to play....

Maybe I just don't understand football and coverage as well as you, but I'm sticking to my guns...our secondary will have some film to watch but overall, it was a great effort by the boys who had to shut down the best passing attack in the Pac for this to be a win.

"The only stat that matters is a win or a loss and we won tonight," safety John Boyett said following the game.

Well, I also spoke with a couple of coworkers who were at the game. One was a college 3-time all-american linebacker (granted, it was at Eastern Washington) and he seems a bit knowledgeable about the game. He tells me it was a miracle AZ didn't score 9 TD's with those receivers running around uncovered down field. Or maybe it just seemed so.

But the game is over and we did win and I am sure if there are deficiencies, they will be addressed.

 

[Targus]

Against Oregon, Foles was held to his lowest QB rating and completion % since Nov of 2010. We hear about how good Stanford's defense is...Foles completed 73% of his passes against Stanford and 59% vs Oregon and had more yards per completion vs Stanford. Additionally, there were some 'catchable' balls vs Stanford that didn't end in completions.

Oregon's secondary did a nice job.