09-22-2015, 05:05 PM
Available here: http://mgovideo.com/2015-michigan-vs-oregon-state/
Replay of OSU/Michigan
09-22-2015, 09:02 PM
Thanks for posting that game WIM. OSU has some talent. I think we can run it down their throats and keep our O on the field for a long time.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-23-2015, 02:58 AM
Kind of amusing how the context told us what this post was about, but typically "OSU/Michigan" would mean something else...
Kind of amusing how the context told us what this post was about, but typically "OSU/Michigan" would mean something else...
09-23-2015, 08:41 AM
(09-23-2015, 02:58 AM)ChicagoVisitor link Wrote:Kind of amusing how the context told us what this post was about, but typically "OSU/Michigan" would mean something else...
I'm getting used to "tOSU" for the Buckeyes.
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
09-23-2015, 09:24 AM
(09-23-2015, 08:41 AM)martyup link Wrote:[quote author=ChicagoVisitor link=topic=12894.msg130141#msg130141 date=1443002328]
Kind of amusing how the context told us what this post was about, but typically "OSU/Michigan" would mean something else...
I'm getting used to "tOSU" for the Buckeyes.
[/quote]
I'm thinking they should be called aOSU for an Ohio State University.
BC
(09-23-2015, 08:41 AM)martyup link Wrote:[quote author=ChicagoVisitor link=topic=12894.msg130141#msg130141 date=1443002328]
Kind of amusing how the context told us what this post was about, but typically "OSU/Michigan" would mean something else...
I'm getting used to "tOSU" for the Buckeyes.
[/quote]
I'm thinking they should be called aOSU for an Ohio State University.
BC
09-23-2015, 10:22 AM
Publius, what is your abbreviation of choice here?
(Everytime I see tOSU, I think "toe-sue" and shake my head at its similarity to tofu.)
(Everytime I see tOSU, I think "toe-sue" and shake my head at its similarity to tofu.)
09-23-2015, 11:26 AM
(09-23-2015, 11:11 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:Funny, I always think "toss you"
BC
Ha! Awesome ;D
If I had a dollar every time I was distracted, I wish I had some ice cream.
(09-23-2015, 11:11 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:Funny, I always think "toss you"
BC
Ha! Awesome ;D
If I had a dollar every time I was distracted, I wish I had some ice cream.
09-23-2015, 12:53 PM
"OSU has some talent. I think we can run it down their throats and keep our O on the field for a long time."
I am fearful that OSU thinks the same thing about running on Stanford . . . and will do it.
Without Phillips, Stanford has been vulnerable on run defense. I already miss the ultra-stout defenses against the run Stanford fielded in the last 2-3 years.
And if you can't stop the run . . . well, no game is a "should win" (and certainly no gimme).
I am fearful that OSU thinks the same thing about running on Stanford . . . and will do it.
Without Phillips, Stanford has been vulnerable on run defense. I already miss the ultra-stout defenses against the run Stanford fielded in the last 2-3 years.
And if you can't stop the run . . . well, no game is a "should win" (and certainly no gimme).
"OSU has some talent. I think we can run it down their throats and keep our O on the field for a long time."
I am fearful that OSU thinks the same thing about running on Stanford . . . and will do it.
Without Phillips, Stanford has been vulnerable on run defense. I already miss the ultra-stout defenses against the run Stanford fielded in the last 2-3 years.
And if you can't stop the run . . . well, no game is a "should win" (and certainly no gimme).
I am fearful that OSU thinks the same thing about running on Stanford . . . and will do it.
Without Phillips, Stanford has been vulnerable on run defense. I already miss the ultra-stout defenses against the run Stanford fielded in the last 2-3 years.
And if you can't stop the run . . . well, no game is a "should win" (and certainly no gimme).
09-23-2015, 02:36 PM
(09-23-2015, 12:53 PM)teejers1 link Wrote:Without Phillips, Stanford has been vulnerable on run defense.
You mean like the 1.3 yards per carry Stanford gave up to UCF?
I think that the better statement is that so far, the Stanford defense is equipped to deal with bad offenses but vulnerable to good offenses. [Not so surprising over all.] While Stanford allowed $C a healthy 5.5 yds/rush, they also allowed a strong 8.5 yds/pass attempt. Kessler had a PER of 180.5 [that's the best Kessler has ever had against a non-bottom feeder Pac 12 team].
Fortunately, OSU isn't very good on offense and in particular cannot pass. OSU is last in the conference in yds/game (117th nationally), yds/play (119th), points/game (111th), and pass rating (114th).
They can run a bit, 7th in the conference in yds/carry (57th), 5th in yds/game (41st).
All of this against FCS weakling Weber State (2-10 last year), Michigan (pretty good defense), and San Jose State.
They seemed to be on a bit of an upswing vs San Jose State, and of course the worry is that they are about to suddenly figure out the new system and new QB. Could happen.
But broadly speaking, I am more worried about an offensive implosion if Hogan cannot play (or cannot play well) against what might be a pretty good defense - though poor opponents make that mostly unmeasurable so far.
(09-23-2015, 12:53 PM)teejers1 link Wrote:Without Phillips, Stanford has been vulnerable on run defense.
You mean like the 1.3 yards per carry Stanford gave up to UCF?
I think that the better statement is that so far, the Stanford defense is equipped to deal with bad offenses but vulnerable to good offenses. [Not so surprising over all.] While Stanford allowed $C a healthy 5.5 yds/rush, they also allowed a strong 8.5 yds/pass attempt. Kessler had a PER of 180.5 [that's the best Kessler has ever had against a non-bottom feeder Pac 12 team].
Fortunately, OSU isn't very good on offense and in particular cannot pass. OSU is last in the conference in yds/game (117th nationally), yds/play (119th), points/game (111th), and pass rating (114th).
They can run a bit, 7th in the conference in yds/carry (57th), 5th in yds/game (41st).
All of this against FCS weakling Weber State (2-10 last year), Michigan (pretty good defense), and San Jose State.
They seemed to be on a bit of an upswing vs San Jose State, and of course the worry is that they are about to suddenly figure out the new system and new QB. Could happen.
But broadly speaking, I am more worried about an offensive implosion if Hogan cannot play (or cannot play well) against what might be a pretty good defense - though poor opponents make that mostly unmeasurable so far.
09-24-2015, 10:40 AM
Just rewatched the Stanford-USC game. USC players, including Kessler, broke a lot of tackles. Players were in position for a number of sacks, TFL, tackles for short gains but couldn't finish the play. I'm guessing that the talent-level of the opponent had something to do with these missed opportunities, and I'm looking for a UCF-type performance from the defense versus OSU.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
Just rewatched the Stanford-USC game. USC players, including Kessler, broke a lot of tackles. Players were in position for a number of sacks, TFL, tackles for short gains but couldn't finish the play. I'm guessing that the talent-level of the opponent had something to do with these missed opportunities, and I'm looking for a UCF-type performance from the defense versus OSU.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
09-24-2015, 11:45 AM
Interesting note about this game: Spielman, the color commentator, identifies Michigan's success (such as it is) as throwing on first down, which sets them up in favorable situations (in which running might be appropriate) in subsequent downs.
Interesting note about this game: Spielman, the color commentator, identifies Michigan's success (such as it is) as throwing on first down, which sets them up in favorable situations (in which running might be appropriate) in subsequent downs.
09-25-2015, 12:49 PM
That works if your first down throw averages ~6 yds, I'm guessing. Running with 4 or fewer yards to go generally seems like a solid bet, which would cause the defense to cheat up a bit.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »