OREGON GAME THREAD - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: OREGON GAME THREAD (/thread-22362.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: OREGON GAME THREAD (/thread-22362.html)
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - BostonCard - 10-04-2021
I thought for the most part Gilmore (who I'd forgotten was a Stanford alum) and Flemming did a pretty good job, with the exception of the injury to Tremaine (which I commented on in real time). I suppose if I were a Duck, I would gripe about how much the two of them accentuated the fact that Oregon had this in the bag.
BC
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - teejers1 - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 12:48 PM)CTcard Wrote:(10-04-2021, 10:36 AM)teejers1 Wrote: And I don't blame Shaw for West not throwing ball out of bounds, instead of falling down in bounds to keep clock rolling.
Why not?
While I don't know that I blame Shaw in particular, I do blame the coaching and preparation of West. A QB in that situation has to know that unless there is a very clear path towards the sideline and a decent gain, one can simply not hold onto the ball and scramble. And its the coaching staff's job that their QBs know that.
The second issue is that was probably the best place to use the remaining TO. Maybe there would be another tackle inbounds without a first down, maybe not. But there is no reason that possible future scenario would take more time than this actual situation.
Where I agree in holding back on blame is that it wasn't the most egregious error ever and the execution of getting McKee in and the next play off was quite good. I do wonder why Oregon didn't take the chance to substitute and burn a little more clock.
1. As BC noted, you can't guarantee that a kid will not lose his head/have a lapse when the Bright Lights go on; and
2. Real time - well, watching the DVR of the game last night - I had the exact same reaction when McKee trotted back on the field: why didn't Oregon burn some clock with subs? Not Cristobal & Co.'s finest game (massive understatement).
P.S. To BC, yes, timeout burnage. I don't mind running it somewhere in that sequence with a TO left, and believe it or not, I'm not a micro-second-guesser on every single play called . . . just ones that stand out as hard to defend. I didn't mind the run call; just dubious that McKee going left is best option (and he possibly could have tossed it OOB when he saw he was not going anywhere). But that brings up a question: if McKee fakes handoff and boots left and is going to get drilled for a loss or no gain, can he just throw the ball past LOS OOB? I know the rule on a drop back is that if you're outside the hashmarks the only requirement is that ball going out of bounds must cross the line of scrimmage. But my gut tells me that would not apply in a running play where QB, outside the hashes, realizes there is nowhere to go and just tosses it OOB past the LOS. But I don't know the rule on that situation and am too lazy to look it up. Anyway, if that were legal, then the McKee boot left is even more defensible.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - CowboyIndian - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 04:35 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(10-04-2021, 12:48 PM)CTcard Wrote:(10-04-2021, 10:36 AM)teejers1 Wrote: And I don't blame Shaw for West not throwing ball out of bounds, instead of falling down in bounds to keep clock rolling.
Why not?
While I don't know that I blame Shaw in particular, I do blame the coaching and preparation of West. A QB in that situation has to know that unless there is a very clear path towards the sideline and a decent gain, one can simply not hold onto the ball and scramble. And its the coaching staff's job that their QBs know that.
The second issue is that was probably the best place to use the remaining TO. Maybe there would be another tackle inbounds without a first down, maybe not. But there is no reason that possible future scenario would take more time than this actual situation.
Where I agree in holding back on blame is that it wasn't the most egregious error ever and the execution of getting McKee in and the next play off was quite good. I do wonder why Oregon didn't take the chance to substitute and burn a little more clock.
1. As BC noted, you can't guarantee that a kid will not lose his head/have a lapse when the Bright Lights go on; and
2. Real time - well, watching the DVR of the game last night - I had the exact same reaction when McKee trotted back on the field: why didn't Oregon burn some clock with subs? Not Cristobal & Co.'s finest game (massive understatement).
P.S. To BC, yes, timeout burnage. I don't mind running it somewhere in that sequence with a TO left, and believe it or not, I'm not a micro-second-guesser on every single play called . . . just ones that stand out as hard to defend. I didn't mind the run call; just dubious that McKee going left is best option (and he possibly could have tossed it OOB when he saw he was not going anywhere). But that brings up a question: if McKee fakes handoff and boots left and is going to get drilled for a loss or no gain, can he just throw the ball past LOS OOB? I know the rule on a drop back is that if you're outside the hashmarks the only requirement is that ball going out of bounds must cross the line of scrimmage. But my gut tells me that would not apply in a running play where QB, outside the hashes, realizes there is nowhere to go and just tosses it OOB past the LOS. But I don't know the rule on that situation and am too lazy to look it up. Anyway, if that were legal, then the McKee boot left is even more defensible.
Isn't the rule for grounding "outside the tackle box"? Or is that pros?
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - teejers1 - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 04:41 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(10-04-2021, 04:35 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(10-04-2021, 12:48 PM)CTcard Wrote:(10-04-2021, 10:36 AM)teejers1 Wrote: And I don't blame Shaw for West not throwing ball out of bounds, instead of falling down in bounds to keep clock rolling.
Why not?
While I don't know that I blame Shaw in particular, I do blame the coaching and preparation of West. A QB in that situation has to know that unless there is a very clear path towards the sideline and a decent gain, one can simply not hold onto the ball and scramble. And its the coaching staff's job that their QBs know that.
The second issue is that was probably the best place to use the remaining TO. Maybe there would be another tackle inbounds without a first down, maybe not. But there is no reason that possible future scenario would take more time than this actual situation.
Where I agree in holding back on blame is that it wasn't the most egregious error ever and the execution of getting McKee in and the next play off was quite good. I do wonder why Oregon didn't take the chance to substitute and burn a little more clock.
1. As BC noted, you can't guarantee that a kid will not lose his head/have a lapse when the Bright Lights go on; and
2. Real time - well, watching the DVR of the game last night - I had the exact same reaction when McKee trotted back on the field: why didn't Oregon burn some clock with subs? Not Cristobal & Co.'s finest game (massive understatement).
P.S. To BC, yes, timeout burnage. I don't mind running it somewhere in that sequence with a TO left, and believe it or not, I'm not a micro-second-guesser on every single play called . . . just ones that stand out as hard to defend. I didn't mind the run call; just dubious that McKee going left is best option (and he possibly could have tossed it OOB when he saw he was not going anywhere). But that brings up a question: if McKee fakes handoff and boots left and is going to get drilled for a loss or no gain, can he just throw the ball past LOS OOB? I know the rule on a drop back is that if you're outside the hashmarks the only requirement is that ball going out of bounds must cross the line of scrimmage. But my gut tells me that would not apply in a running play where QB, outside the hashes, realizes there is nowhere to go and just tosses it OOB past the LOS. But I don't know the rule on that situation and am too lazy to look it up. Anyway, if that were legal, then the McKee boot left is even more defensible.
Isn't the rule for grounding "outside the tackle box"? Or is that pros?
You could be right. And while it's probably too late for me, I'm going to belatedly adhere to the maxim about it being better to keep quiet at the risk of being thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt about it.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - GoodGrief - 10-04-2021
(10-03-2021, 10:06 AM)scorecard Wrote: The player who threw John Humphreys after the play was dead was Dontae Manning, the Ducks' 5 star freshman cornerback. Humphreys was probably holding on the play, but was surprised this didn't draw a penalty because Humphreys went flying and body whipped another Ducks player.
Can anyone tell me roughly when this occurred? I missed it and want to see the ridiculousness for myself.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - CTcard - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 04:52 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(10-04-2021, 04:41 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(10-04-2021, 04:35 PM)teejers1 Wrote: But that brings up a question: if McKee fakes handoff and boots left and is going to get drilled for a loss or no gain, can he just throw the ball past LOS OOB? I know the rule on a drop back is that if you're outside the hashmarks the only requirement is that ball going out of bounds must cross the line of scrimmage. But my gut tells me that would not apply in a running play where QB, outside the hashes, realizes there is nowhere to go and just tosses it OOB past the LOS. But I don't know the rule on that situation and am too lazy to look it up. Anyway, if that were legal, then the McKee boot left is even more defensible.
Isn't the rule for grounding "outside the tackle box"? Or is that pros?
You could be right. And while it's probably too late for me, I'm going to belatedly adhere to the maxim about it being better to keep quiet at the risk of being thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt about it.
The rule is that if the person throwing the ball is outside of the tackle, and throws the ball past the line of scrimmage, then there is no intentional grounding. There is nothing in the rule about what type of play was called.
However, I don't think I have ever in my life seen a QB, or any runner, do that on a called run play.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - Spiny_Norman - 10-04-2021
Transcript of the post game presser - https://www.oregonlive.com/ducks/2021/10/what-david-shaw-stanford-players-said-after-beating-oregon.html
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - ADPinWDC - 10-04-2021
(10-03-2021, 11:15 PM)martyup Wrote: Our defense held OR to its lowest scoring output this season. And, our offense scored more points on the Ducks than any opponent thus far. So, there's that.
Not sure how much a difference it made... but Oregon OffCo Joe Morehead was in the hospital with "emergency surgery".
Was not at the game.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/oregon-offensive-coordinator-joe-moorhead-remains-in-hospital-after-undergoing-surgery-saturday-per-report/
(10-03-2021, 01:53 PM)Austroturf Wrote:(10-03-2021, 05:28 AM)CTcard Wrote: - It looks like we're facing a situation this year where good Stanford is quite good and can play with anyone on the schedule, whereas bad Stanford can probably lose to just about anyone on the schedule. At some level that's always true, but it seems more extreme right now.
Entirely correct here. The range between "good Stanford" and "bad Stanford" seems to be the widest I have seen in recent years. This 2021 incarnation of Stanford football has the McKee X-factor and a bevy of capable receivers that can be a threat from anywhere on the field. Or this same offense can go 3-and-out 5 times in a row. Likewise, the defense can occasionally stand tall and deny the opponent at the goal line, then give up 240 rushing yards to a team like Vanderbilt.
We have seen two execrable performances this season (Kansas State, UCLA), a workman-like victory against Vanderbilt, a demolition of Troy and a miracle comeback to beat the vaunted #3 Ducks in OT. Has any other team in FBS produced such uneven results in five games?
Years ago, back in the seventies of the previous century, there was a glib anecdote about Stanford football positing that you never knew which Stanford would show up at any given game. The one capable of losing to San Jose State, or the one capable of taking down juggernauts. In fact, the 1971 Rose Bowl champion team managed to lose to San Jose State 13-12 that same year. We seem to have reverted back to that kind of team: giant killers in one game, pathetic losers in the next. It makes for an unpredictable and exciting life as a fan, but it's also a sign of regression from where we were early in the last decade.
Technically, at 2-1, we control our own destiny in the Pac-12 North. But who dares to predict the next 6 conference games (@ASU, @WSU, UW, Utah, @OSU, Cal)? Which Stanford trots onto the field on any given Saturday? Do we take down the newly-ranked Sun Devils in Tempe, then lose to the hapless Cougs in Pullman's Martin Stadium? Each scenario seems plausible at this point. To prove a point, if anyone had told you Stanford would be 3-2 after five games, you would have assumed victories over K-State, UCLA and Vanderbilt and losses to USC and Oregon and would have been wrong on all but one game. What a season so far!
Since you asked... I predict we hose Calsucks and keep the Axe.
@ASU -- Loss; @WSU -- Win; vs UW -- Win; vs Utah -- Win; @OSU in Nov -- Loss; vs Kal -- Win.
[All of those results match the ESPN game predictor odds]
So we finish 6-3 in the North, behind ORST -- the new "smash-mouth" football team in the league.
The Beavs really have their back up to take down the Ducks this year in Eugene.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - BostonCard - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 06:25 PM)CTcard Wrote: The rule is that if the person throwing the ball is outside of the tackle, and throws the ball past the line of scrimmage, then there is no intentional grounding. There is nothing in the rule about what type of play was called.
However, I don't think I have ever in my life seen a QB, or any runner, do that on a called run play.
Correct, there is no way to know whether a play was designed as a run or a pass as far as the rules are concerned. If the QB throws it, it's a passing play (with the caveat that run-blocking offensive linemen could get called for an illegal downfield block, but for the fact that the rule almost never gets enforced, and that assumes that one of our offensive linemen would be able to push his defender back that far, and if he did, then the QB probably would score the touchdown instead of having to throw it away). So, if he got out of the tackle box and he threw it beyond the line of scrimmage, it would not be intentional grounding. However, I have never seen this either, and it would take an unusually heady QB to take a running play, realize nothing was doing, and throw the ball away.
BC
The OC being out was announced as a "non-COVID-related illness". I hope he has a full recovery.
BC
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - Goose - 10-04-2021
I for one am quite glad West DIDN'T try to throw the ball. Recently he has had a tendency to throw to the wrong team. Seriously, I believe West wasn't going to throw the ball almost no matter what. What remained of his career pretty much blew up because of interceptions. I doubt he had any confidence after going out there with no warmup and no opportunity to get ready. After a couple of plays, maybe, but no matter what Shaw said, I doubt West was really "ready".
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - CowboyIndian - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 09:13 PM)Goose Wrote: I for one am quite glad West DIDN'T try to throw the ball. Recently he has had a tendency to throw to the wrong team. Seriously, I believe West wasn't going to throw the ball almost no matter what. What remained of his career pretty much blew up because of interceptions. I doubt he had any confidence after going out there with no warmup and no opportunity to get ready. After a couple of plays, maybe, but no matter what Shaw said, I doubt West was really "ready".
West was "warming up" every timeout...throwing 15-yard passes on the sidelines.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - scorecard - 10-04-2021
(10-04-2021, 05:26 PM)GoodGrief Wrote:(10-03-2021, 10:06 AM)scorecard Wrote: The player who threw John Humphreys after the play was dead was Dontae Manning, the Ducks' 5 star freshman cornerback. Humphreys was probably holding on the play, but was surprised this didn't draw a penalty because Humphreys went flying and body whipped another Ducks player.
Can anyone tell me roughly when this occurred? I missed it and want to see the ridiculousness for myself.
This play happened at 4:36 left in the 2nd quarter, on a 3rd and 17 from our own 11 yard line, leading 17-7 at the time. McKee keeps it and runs to the right towards the Stanford sideline, and Humphreys is blocking for him. Manning is frustrated with being held, and just after Humphreys relaxes as McKee runs out of bounds, Manning throws him essentially judo style right in front of the Stanford sideline. Could have easily been a personal foul and an automatic first down, but who's complaining about personal fouls, right?
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - GoodGrief - 10-04-2021
ahh, got it, thanks
(10-04-2021, 10:56 PM)scorecard Wrote:(10-04-2021, 05:26 PM)GoodGrief Wrote:(10-03-2021, 10:06 AM)scorecard Wrote: The player who threw John Humphreys after the play was dead was Dontae Manning, the Ducks' 5 star freshman cornerback. Humphreys was probably holding on the play, but was surprised this didn't draw a penalty because Humphreys went flying and body whipped another Ducks player.
Can anyone tell me roughly when this occurred? I missed it and want to see the ridiculousness for myself.
This play happened at 4:36 left in the 2nd quarter, on a 3rd and 17 from our own 11 yard line, leading 17-7 at the time. McKee keeps it and runs to the right towards the Stanford sideline, and Humphreys is blocking for him. Manning is frustrated with being held, and just after Humphreys relaxes as McKee runs out of bounds, Manning throws him essentially judo style right in front of the Stanford sideline. Could have easily been a personal foul and an automatic first down, but who's complaining about personal fouls, right?
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - Goose - 10-05-2021
(10-04-2021, 10:13 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:I am sure he was. However, the sense of urgency is different when you know you are going out there or think you might at least. Ideally, backup QBs are always ready mentally and physically. In a situation where the game is almost over any backup undoubtedly thinks he isn't going to play. Not much time left, what are the odds?(10-04-2021, 09:13 PM)Goose Wrote: I for one am quite glad West DIDN'T try to throw the ball. Recently he has had a tendency to throw to the wrong team. Seriously, I believe West wasn't going to throw the ball almost no matter what. What remained of his career pretty much blew up because of interceptions. I doubt he had any confidence after going out there with no warmup and no opportunity to get ready. After a couple of plays, maybe, but no matter what Shaw said, I doubt West was really "ready".
West was "warming up" every timeout...throwing 15-yard passes on the sidelines.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - Phogge - 10-05-2021
We've seen what West can do and more importantly what he can't do. He should be playing D3. I'm sure he is a fine "student-athlete." I don't think McKee will come out but if Stanford somehow wins out, McKee is lights out and goes to a New Year's bowl then the team may be in the hands of a couple of kids with zero experience (assuming West goes on to complete the sanctified "40 year decision"). Shaw should seriously think about getting on his knees with the school and beg for a transfer QB because there will be a bunch of them available in January and there is no more sitting out a year.
And you industrial moguls that is what any savvy CEO would do for his business.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - Goose - 10-05-2021
(10-05-2021, 10:19 AM)Phogge Wrote: We've seen what West can do and more importantly what he can't do. He should be playing D3. I'm sure he is a fine "student-athlete." I don't think McKee will come out but if Stanford somehow wins out, McKee is lights out and goes to a New Year's bowl then the team may be in the hands of a couple of kids with zero experience (assuming West goes on to complete the sanctified "40 year decision"). Shaw should seriously think about getting on his knees with the school and beg for a transfer QB because there will be a bunch of them available in January and there is no more sitting out a year.McKee essentially had no experience before this year either, so in and of itself that isn't a total killer (He still has damn little). The questions are1) will there be any good QBs out there who want to transfer, 2) want to come to Stanford or can be convinced to do so, and 3) can get admitted, Shaw begging or not? I suspect this issue is way down on the priority list. Lets win out and win the Rose Bowl. Then we can fret about McKee leaving. Actually, given how the draft went last year a QB with damn little experience can go pretty high, even the first round. That would be the real problem. We probably would take a win out and Rose Bowl year with McKee leaving. A Sun Bowl type season (or worse) with him leaving would be the real killer.
And you industrial moguls that is what any savvy CEO would do for his business.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - BostonCard - 10-05-2021
I hear Butterfield may be looking for a new landing spot (that one is for Phogge).
BC
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - Phogge - 10-05-2021
Butter has no future in Eugene. Thompson has the skills for their offense. Herbert looks like a star in a drop back offense but he could run a bit. Butter would fit into Shawvita's system. One can always hope.
And there will be multiple guys in the portal (Stargate) who think they can play and are currently sitting on a bench.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - slide - 10-05-2021
(10-05-2021, 12:20 PM)Phogge Wrote: Butter has no future in Eugene. Thompson has the skills for their offense. Herbert looks like a star in a drop back offense but he could run a bit. Butter would fit into Shawvita's system. One can always hope.
And there will be multiple guys in the portal (Stargate) who think they can play and are currently sitting on a bench.
a West, Patu and Daniels QB lineup probably looks attractive to QBs transfers looking for a starting job.
RE: OREGON GAME THREAD - gailtate - 10-05-2021
(10-05-2021, 10:35 AM)Goose Wrote:(10-05-2021, 10:19 AM)Phogge Wrote: We've seen what West can do and more importantly what he can't do. He should be playing D3. I'm sure he is a fine "student-athlete." I don't think McKee will come out but if Stanford somehow wins out, McKee is lights out and goes to a New Year's bowl then the team may be in the hands of a couple of kids with zero experience (assuming West goes on to complete the sanctified "40 year decision"). Shaw should seriously think about getting on his knees with the school and beg for a transfer QB because there will be a bunch of them available in January and there is no more sitting out a year.McKee essentially had no experience before this year either, so in and of itself that isn't a total killer (He still has damn little). The questions are1) will there be any good QBs out there who want to transfer, 2) want to come to Stanford or can be convinced to do so, and 3) can get admitted, Shaw begging or not? I suspect this issue is way down on the priority list. Lets win out and win the Rose Bowl. Then we can fret about McKee leaving. Actually, given how the draft went last year a QB with damn little experience can go pretty high, even the first round. That would be the real problem. We probably would take a win out and Rose Bowl year with McKee leaving. A Sun Bowl type season (or worse) with him leaving would be the real killer.
And you industrial moguls that is what any savvy CEO would do for his business.
Kevin Hogan's experience as a starter in 2012 was far less than McKee's today. Hogan got Stanford to the Rose Bowl (after beating UCLA twice). McKee may be the superior QB but Hogan's advantage was lower-body strength. Kept him essentially injury free. Pray for McKee's health.