Two Questions: Status after one game and Mitchell

[Targus]

1. We got what we thought was coming. Oregon had this game in the bag half way through the first quarter. Lots of 2,3 and 4's got time. Heck, Huff was even playing RB. Our offensive and defensive calling/stunts were vanilla with about six different plays called (although varying formations). To me, this looked more like a spring game.

With the performance, has your projected season results gone up or down? I still think we land in the NC or RB.

2. Mitchell. Mitchell. Mitchell. No, I don't like he was ejected, but it was the correct call. Had an opponent done that to DAT or Marcus, I'd be pissed. What are your thoughts?

http://i812.photobucket.com/albums/zz45/Paul_Kysar/targeti10_standard_7090_zps747ac0fe.jpg

 

[SlyPokerDog]

The player slid, I'm not sure what Mitchell could have done differently.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I agree with Sly. He was already into his tackle when the QB slid. Nothing he could do. It's a personal foul and that's it. Awful call by the refs.

 

[THE HCP]

Hey, that was my replay! Sorry Mitchell!

 

[Natebishop3]

Seriously, what should the defender do in that situation?

He was already lined up, he wasn't leading with his helmet, and he would have put it right in the guy's numbers. The QB slid at the last second and his shoulder hit him in the head. I really don't see how that's fair to the defender.

 

[THE HCP]

Tough play, but as it happened and we looked at about 6 different angles in the truck.......I thought he deserved a penalty, but not so sure about the ejection. I think these guys want to all stick the shit out of the QB and get caught up in the moment. If he's going towards the sideline, you just have to ease up. Not an easy thing to do, but they have to learn to do that.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Tough play, but as it happened and we looked at about 6 different angles in the truck.......I thought he deserved a penalty, but not so sure about the ejection. I think these guys want to all stick the shit out of the QB and get caught up in the moment. If he's going towards the sideline, you just have to ease up. Not an easy thing to do, but they have to learn to do that.

Hopefully this will be a teaching play for the refs. How a personal foul does NOT warrant a game ejection.

 

[STOMP]

Hopefully this will be a teaching play for the refs. How a personal foul does NOT warrant a game ejection.

I'm more hopeful it's a teaching play for Duck defenders. The officials are in a tough spot trying to enforce this one, so best to avoid making them try to judge intent. Oregon doesn't need to have top players suspended in bigger games down the line

STOMP

 

[THE HCP]

Hate for that to happen against Stanford!

 

[Natebishop3]

So HCP, you think this is basically like a "hit out of bounds" type thing? Just don't go after them if they're heading out of bounds?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

So HCP, you think this is basically like a "hit out of bounds" type thing? Just don't go after them if they're heading out of bounds?

Didn't we lose big yards on a play in the national championship a few years back by not pursuing the player fully out of bounds?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I'm more hopeful it's a teaching play for Duck defenders. The officials are in a tough spot trying to enforce this one, so best to avoid making them try to judge intent. Oregon doesn't need to have top players suspended in bigger games down the line

STOMP

Good point.

So going forward no QB can be tackled low or high.

 

[THE HCP]

Didn't we lose big yards on a play in the national championship a few years back by not pursuing the player fully out of bounds?

Nah, our guys stopped cause they thought Auburn's RB's knee touched the ground....... he just spun and kept running.

 

[THE HCP]

So HCP, you think this is basically like a "hit out of bounds" type thing? Just don't go after them if they're heading out of bounds?

Sad to say, but yes. I used to play football and the mentality is to just BLAST the opponent every chance you get, but if they are really watching for this new "TARGETING" infraction, our guys just have to ease up and not try to stick them every chance they get. Kinda' goes against what these guys have been taught since Pop Warner though.

 

[STOMP]

Good point.

So going forward no QB can be tackled low or high.

So rather then adapting to change, you're advocating the program tell players to keep doing what they've always done and hope that the refs don't enforce the rule? Not acknowledging (and adapting to) a new reality seems a stupid way to operate to me

STOMP

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Didn't we lose big yards on a play in the national championship a few years back by not pursuing the player fully out of bounds?

We lost the opportunity to play in the Natty because our wide receiver didn't block for our quarterback once.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

So rather then adapting to change, you're advocating the program tell players to keep doing what they've always done and hope that the refs don't enforce the rule? Not acknowledging (and adapting to) a new reality seems a stupid way to operate to me

STOMP

My boss and I watched the play several times today and at the end I came around to thinking it was worthy of a game ejection.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

My boss and I watched the play several times today and at the end I came around to thinking it was worthy of a game ejection.

I agree; you can see him lower his helmet instead of raise it. He could have stayed straight and hit him with his shoulder, but he pursued the target with his helmet.

 

[STOMP]

Mitchell said Tuesday the “bang-bang play” was “a learning process.” He said the ejection won’t inhibit his play moving forward.

“You’ve got to be smart,” Mitchell said. “But at the same time, you’ve got to stay aggressive. Stay aggressive but not do nothing crazy.”

http://www.goducks.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=827611&SPID=139708&DB_OEM_ID=500&ATCLID=209249908

STOMP