21.Oct.2010 Is Jacquizz Rodgers Overused?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)

Jacquizz Rodgers has 141 of the Beavers' 142 carries by a running back. That is 99.3%. Some might argue, “But Angry, the fly sweep is a run, so Wheaton and James Rodgers act as the 2nd back.” Okay, in that case, Quizz has “only” received 89% of total carries. Another argument might be, “Angry, Quizz is the best back in football—any coach in his right mind would give him 99% of carries!”

Really? Have you heard of a coach by the name of Nick Saban? He won a National Championship last year with a Heisman Trophy running back. Take a guess the percentage of the team’s carries Mark Ingram received.

Okay, I will tell you: 52% (271 out of 520 total carries), and he won a Heisman Trophy in the SEC.

Interesting, no?

Then there is the law of diminishing returns to consider, which states:

Diminishing returns (also called diminishing marginal returns) refers to how the marginal production of a factor of production starts to progressively decrease as the factor is increased, in contrast to the increase that would otherwise be normally expected. According to this relationship, in a production system with fixed and variable inputs (say factory size and labor), each additional unit of the variable input (i.e., man-hours) yields smaller and smaller increases in outputs, also reducing each worker's mean productivity.

Is this phenomenon taking place before our eyes? I do not know, but the numbers say that as Quizz has progressed in his career, he has become less effective. His rushing average is listed below:

2008: 4.8

2009: 5.3

2010: 4.4

While his can be attributed to tougher competition, it could also be physical wear and tear on his 5’7 frame. Riley has never used his backups, so some will indubitably argue for the former, but they are missing the larger point: using multiple backs benefits everyone. There is no need for Quizz to absorb the impact of every hit—think of all the 1 yard runs.

If Ryan McCants, Jordan Jenkins, et al are not good enough to receive a single carry per game, then you must concede Riley whiffed on his entire stable of running backs, further solidifying his reputation as a poor recruiter.  

“Angry, it’s simple: Riley just trusts Quizz more than the others so he gets all the carries!!.”

Okay, tell yourself what you must, but I’m always going to put more merit in how a National Championship coach manages his roster over a 3rd place finisher in the Pac-10. And I dare you to find another head coach who uses the same back 99% of the time. That is my challenge to any dissenter.

While Quizz is a great player, there’s no reason to believe he wouldn’t be better with an occasional breather, and further, nothing brings a team together more than defined, niche roles where all are allowed to excel. That is what family is about. Right?

Jump to Bottom
  • VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Angry I agree… I would love to see McCants or Jenkins get more touches (or any touches). It would not only rest Quizz but give the offense another demension, and open up some possible double back formations where either one is a threat

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Riley’s offense features a single back, with an old school zone read blocking scheme. I’m not sure how effective this would be with “double backs”, as this is counter intuitive to making zone reads.

      What’s lacking right now is execution, not scheme.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I can’t argue with this. All Quizz’ 1 yard and 0- runs into the middle of the line can be used up by Jenkins. The added effect is that he gives the defense a slightly different look, and he softens the middle by just putting his shoulders down and plowing.

    There will also be plays where our line wins position, and Jenkins can break it for a decent gain.

    What are we going to lose… a carry on Quizz’ stat line?

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      “All Quizz’ 1 yard and 0- runs into the middle of the line” are happening because of poor execution up front, adding a back with deficient reps to the equation is asking for turnovers.

      The added effect is that the defense knows that back is getting less reps, and isn’t going to make as sharp of reads.

      Multiple backs in our offense is a bad idea, unless they are splitting reps in practice (they aren’t).

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Gee… if only there were a way to get the back-ups reps in practice.

        I’m going to have to formulate a hypothesis and get to everyone with my findings.

        • gladbeav says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          You have 3 full days of practice to prepare each week, and a 200 page playbook to tweak and design specifically for that opponent. Every rep counts, and there simply are not enough to spread around and be effective in our current system (like it or not).

  • Alex says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    McCants is a better overall back than Jenkins with far more upside, but I think Riley just doesn’t trust him with the football. And who can blame him? Our ability to protect the football and not fumble is very impressive and is all that has kept us in a lot of games. How many total carries do Quizz have, and 0 true fumbles. McCants? No idea what his fumble-to-carry ratio is but I’m guessing it’s in the ballpark of 1 in 5. Ouch.

    First, do no harm.

    I wouldn’t mind seeing Jenkins get some carries, but I would much prefer to utilize Quiz in a more effective way. Up-the-middle should be run sparingly with our O-line… not 25 freaking times per game. We need to run more plays around the corners, in addition to screen passes. Seriously, the screen pass was like one in three plays last year, and we seem to have completely forgotten it.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      If Riley doesn’t trust him with the football, then it’s another recruiting “miss”…having 1 RB is a huge disadvantage.

      • gladbeav says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        It’s a one-back, old-school zone read offense. It’s incredibly dependent on reps throughout the week to execute. It is not simply dive left or dive right as many fans assume. There are a lot of pre-snap and post-snap reads that must be made, and are different every week depending on the game plan. Quizz is our best back and gets all of the reps. It’s that simple. This is our philosophy, and when executed well, especially on the offensive line, is incredibly effective.

        Making the assumption that a particular coach doesn’t trust a player, or that by having one feature back is a huge disadvantage, or a recruiting “miss”, is misguided.

        • angry angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I don’t think we really believe it’s dive left/right–that is frustration and humor talking. It’s zone blocking (like the Denver Broncos).

          I don’t doubt it can be effective. What I doubt is that it wouldn’t be more effective with more than one runner getting the ball. You’d have to explain why no other school limits their running game to one back for me to accept it’s the best strategy. Strategies that are good/great are mimicked quickly.

  • Alex says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Someone who’s been a fan longer than me- did Riley treat his other star RBs the same way? Simonton, Bernard, Jackson? Or did their backups spell them?

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Yes, Riley runs a pro-style offense with one feature back, who makes a multitude of pre and post-snap reads based on defensive alignment. It’s incredibly repetition dependent to execute.

  • ean says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Riley has always been a one back guy. I don’t think Quizz has been given too many touches this year (last year maybe). With as much as we have had to pass the ball I really don’t feel like Quizz has been over used. I think the big issue is not having a reliable back-up. I think Riley is afraid that McCants will put the rock on the mat. Also no offense Angry, but Mark Ingram is a bad example, for one the guy was injured earlier in the year and for second his back-up is possible the second best back in the nation. That is the possibly the best 1-2 punch college football has seen in a while. Yes if we get back to running the ball more often a viable back-up must be found, which I think if we can get to that point the trust issues with McCants wont matter because we will have a decent sized lead. As far as next year hopefully the Malcoms or Ward are as good as advertised. I think the smaller quick back works best in our system, yes a quick big back would be better but I think a 5 star guy is a long shot.

  • gladbeav says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Short Answer: No.

    Long Answer:

    “We’re talkin’ bout practice!”

    It’s easy as a fan to make personell observations and hypothetical adjustments on the fly, like you’re playing a video game, and switch things up when your star tailback’s fatigue drifts into the yellow or orange on NCAA ’11.

    However, in the real world things up working a little bit different.

    Executing in football is all about adequate preparation, and this only becomes consistant with a ton of reps in practice.

    While fans are entitled to their own opinion on play calling and coaching philosophy on game day, the truth of the matter is that 98.99% of the work has already been done before everyone shows up at the stadium on Saturday.

    Quizz gets damn near all of the reps in games because he gets the same amount of reps with the 1’s in practice all week long. It doesn’t matter if you are Walter Payton, Reggie Bush, or Jordan Jenkins. You aren’t going to execute the game plan as effectively if you’ve had 1% of the reps in practice all week as the guy in front of you.

    Riley’s offense is old school, sure, and relies heavily on a one-back backfield, and you can have your own opinions on that matter as far as offensive philosophy goes, no doubt the NFL is currently transitioning to a “running back by committee” era. But, at the end of the day, coach Davis is going to give the reps with the number 1’s to Quiz pretty much 100% of the time all week long in practice. Because those other guys aren’t getting adequate reps all week long, their pre and post snap reads aren’t as sharp, they aren’t as accustomed to the speed, or to to playing with Katz for that matter. This means less production, and a much higher risk for turnovers in our complicated offense (it’s not as simple as it might seem on the surface).

    It’s not that Quizz “is the best back in football—any coach in his right mind would give him 99% of carries!”. That’s actually pretty irrelevant in our system.

    Our offense is an old-school, pro-style, one-back offense. Like it or not, this is the philosophy.

    Improvement in our running game isn’t going to happen with personell changes in the backfield on game day, in my opinion that would more likely bring more turnovers if anything. Marked improvement in the running game is only going to happen when the offensive line gets healthy and happy, as it’s difficult to make zone reads when 300+ pound dudes are coming right back at you, it doesn’t matter who’s carrying the ball in such a case. The offensive line has to improve across the board down the stretch.

  • OS_Beaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Like Angry said,

    Time to start scheduling San Diego St. most years. Who else is down there? San Jose St and Fresno St. are already in our region.

  • OS_Beaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I don’t mind playing Hawaii, UNLV and Nevada either. Maybe BYU every once in awhile. We should do a Big Ten team more often too. I like the series with Wisconsin and Minnesota we have coming up.

  • angry angry says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Oregon is scary.
    I am dreading the Civil War. Their second team is better than our first.

    • Alex says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      My thoughts exactly. Darron Thomas is the complete package…the running ability coupled with pinpoint accuracy is just unstoppable. Makes Masoli look like a clown.

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Oregon is playing really good football right now, their offense and defensive line’s are playing lights out. I’m looking forward to civil war though, should be a great game.

  • CastorNation says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    For the most part except certain key spots most players on the team switch out. I thought that McCants was running better in spring and fall. A couple of years ago he was very tentative as a runner. But I would like to see if occasionally having a large back might free things up. I remember last year when we were a little beat on defense Oregon bringing in Blount changed the game. After last Saturday, I wonder if I need to start looking to next year. I don’t see them beating Stanford, USC or Oregon if they play like they did in WA. Maybe Riley needs to take back over play calling. Up the middle worked OK 2 years ago, but one good run out of 20 isn’t good odds. Does running up the middle do something I am not aware of. For the most part play calling has turned a very talented back into a one dimensional back that is easy to read.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Your last sentence sums up my frustration. It makes the defenses job easy if the run is coming from one player. A big back would punish the linebackers more, wear them out, and make Quizz more effective.

      Though, after tonight, it doesn’t matter–nobody is taking down Oregon except injury. Say what you want about UCLA, but they have very talented defense.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        That’s right. That makes Cal as good or better than UO since they pretty much demolished UCLA in the same fashion… only UCLA had their starting QB in at the same time.

        UCLA’s defense has made Kevin Riley and Darron Thomas look like Steve friggin’ Young in successive games. Even the Beavs and Wazzu won’t be claiming this at year’s end.

        • gladbeav says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          No, it doesn’t. Football is an execution based game, and any team can beat any other depending on the effectiveness and the execution of their game plan. Cal is a good team, but executes very sporadically. UCLA is a talented team, but young and inexperienced in a complicated system.

          UCLA got blown out by Oregon tonight, but if they played again next week, UCLA has the talent to win that game. It’s all execution.

          • JackBeav says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Sorry…

            UCLA has executed very very very poorly on the defensive side for two successive games against two previously (and futuristically) suspected throwing-challenged QB’s. And they have managed to be outscored 60-3 in the first half of those two games.

            When UCLA plays next week, they will still have all the talent in the world, and they will still execute very very very poorly.

            Why can’t I just say they suck? It’s really a lot easier to use two words. You could say it’s a much more efficient execution of language.

          • angry angry says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            They beat a good Texas team in Austin. So, it probably is an execution thing (and lack of confidence/bad offense that demoralizes the defense, etc). I look at UCLA’s defense and salivate at having those guys on ours. Even after that game last night I still think UCLA has a talented defense. They looked to be fast and trying. Oregon is just that good. The only team with the horses to stop them is USC, but they don’t have the motivation. OSU has the motivation, but they have no horses.

          • ean says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            UCLA is a running team. Shut down their run game they have nothing. Beavers might struggle.

  • BeaverBill BeaverBill says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Here is a thought. Does Katz have to throw the ball more often because OSU needs to give our sole running back more breaks?

    I totally agree that Quizz is over-ran. The guy is in the best shape of anyone on the team but you see him gassed at times through-out the games.

    Quizz does his best work when there is room to run. He is not a big guy and I would us him for the 1 yard pound if i had a big guy.

    Here is another thought, practice other running so he is game ready. Throw his in there, watch the defense say pass, and have the new guy run it. Just a thought.

    Quizz’s #1 fan.

    • BeaverBill BeaverBill says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Wish this system had edit for my posts for morons like me.
      He is not a big guy and I would us him for the 1 yard pound if i had a big guy….
      should read…
      Quizz is not a big guy and if I had another guy who could run who was big I’d let him ground and pound.

      • gladbeav says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        No. Riley’s offense should often be about 60% pass, 40% run, with one solitary feature back.

        Quizz can take a few plays off is he is gassed, sure, but the game plan depends on him being in there for a vast majority of the reps.

        Failing to execute the blocking scheme is a whole other story (and the one we should be focusing on).

  • michaelm says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Part of the reason Quizz is never spelled by a backup, at least this season, is that every game has been so tight that the Beavs really couldn’t afford to sit him for a series and risk losing a possession. Had we played in a couple blowouts, the percentage would still be high, but may not jump off the page as it does now.
    That does speak to the issue of recruiting though. That there is not another back on the roster worthy of carrying the ball 5 or 6 times in a competitive game is a testament to a severe lack of talent at the position.

    • BeaverBill BeaverBill says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Well said and true… every game has been a dog fight.

      Maybe we could have had more wins if we had another back though. I love that we can pass the ball and our prospects for passing like very bright in the future. But the hardest teams to beat are teams who control the ball in a running game. Why? You rest your defense and tire out the defense.

      Isn’t it funny how everything we discuss here on the blog always goes back to recruiting and coaches.

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      “That does speak to the issue of recruiting though. That there is not another back on the roster worthy of carrying the ball 5 or 6 times in a competitive game is a testament to a severe lack of talent at the position.”

      This is way off base. Ryan McCants and Jordan Jenkins are both great back up’s, and plenty capable of executing the offensive scheme if they can get the reps.

      If you recall, when we were down to Seiverson in the civil war a few years back, and that ended up working out pretty well.

      Why? because football is an execution based game, especially in a zone-read blocking scheme. We played lights out that game up front, and a back that would have a hard time walking on in most of the pac ten made Oregon look silly.

      Many people are making misguided assumptions based off entirely false pretenses. Quizz is getting as many reps as he does by design, not deficiency in personell or recruiting or otherwise.

      The running game will take off when we execute up front, which we are struggling greatly to do so right now.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        As I recall, Clinton Polk executed himself a TD off some half dozen carries for some half dozen yards in that same Civil War.

        I don’t disagree with the failed blocking. I also don’t disagree with not giving backs who have no reps the ball in live action. I just

        • JackBeav says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          got cut off apparently.

          I just question the lack of foresight when a single back gets all the reps, ergo he gets all the carries in the game. What happens if Quizz was hurt on the late whip-down in the endzone after the first OT TD… that Jay Stricherz’ crew did not call?

          Do we then go to an empty set because we have nobody who has taken any reps all week?

          Have we had enough reps with empty sets to counter such a position?

          • gladbeav says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Clinton Polk is another good example of a back up stepping in when given the reps.

            Back-ups are there to step in under those circumstances, but there can be a huge drop off due to lack of reps.

            There is a lot of risk to having a system that relies on one back that gets all the reps, the upside is that there is also high reward given proper execution.

  • mckalk mckalk says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    It seemed like McCants was being groomed as the change of pace back at one point. I think his injury set him back and then his ball security. It would interesting to get it from the horses mouth.

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Riley’s offense does not feature a “change of pace” back. Change of pace in our offense is the intermediate pass.

    • mckalk mckalk says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      By change of pace, I mean he runs in a different style from Quizz from the little we have seen of him.

  • VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    @gladbeav: I played football in high school, so I have some knowledge of the game, but your experience playing for OSU has obviously given you a lot more knowledge, especially regarding the Beavers and regarding Riley’s schemes and methods. So I’d like to ask you something — based on having just watched the Ducks “execute” UCLA last night on national TV.

    You say that it’s all execution, and that UCLA had the talent to beat Oregon if UCLA had executed properly. I assume you’d say the same about Oregon State — we could beat the Ducks in the Civil War this year, assuming we execute properly. That’s easy to say. But I’d like to dig a bit deeper.

    Let’s assume that the Ducks, in this year’s Civil War, will do their best to execute properly (as they certainly did last night against UCLA). On that assumption, how exactly do you foresee the Beavers defense stopping the Oregon offense? If you were coaching the Beaver defense, how would you prepare for the Ducks offense? Put in your terms, how would you STOP the Oregon offense from “executing” (in both senses of the word….) at Reser on December 4?

  • tim318 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Oregon State-Rodgers, James 7-56; McCants, Ryan 10-32; Francis, Jeremy 3-4; Johnson, Chris 2-3; Moevao, Lyle 9-minus 6.

    That is the rushing stat line from the 2008 Civil War when Quizz missed the game due to injury. And we remember how dismal the running game was in the 2008 Sun Bowl. So having experienced back-ups is pretty important.

    Quizz, even when not carrying the ball, is left in the game as a pass-blocker or a receiver.

  • tim318 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I think the observation that the OSU rushing attack is not as effective as previous seasons is something we agree on. There are many hypotheses about why this is…is Quizz getting worn down from overuse, are teams better defending our offense, are we passing the ball more out of necessity (due to score or inability to rush the ball)? Or does this point to run blocking and injuries? Personnel? Play-calling or system issues?

  • angry angry says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    @gladbeav.

    You wrote: “Making the assumption that a particular coach doesn’t trust a player, or that by having one feature back is a huge disadvantage, or a recruiting “miss”, is misguided.”

    Yet, you haven’t explained why, if this system is beneficial, nobody else has adopted it. I’m talking about the system of using one physical back (i.e. the same human being), not a one-back/ace formation. Again, name another college program where the featured back has received 99% of their team’s carries.

    And Quizz has looked (a) gassed and (b) ineffective in plenty of games so far. McCants wouldn’t be a better play over an exhausted and ineffective back?

    To pin this all on blocking or fumbles seems ridiculous. Even when players get in a coach’s doghouse for fumbling, they usually have opportunity (a carry here and there) to get out. I’ve seen McCants block fine, and we heard all spring that Jenkins picked up the system etc. Plus, they don’t need to block if you hand them the ball. I’m talking about a breather, a few carries, not replacing Quizz.

    It really is about trust, and I’m putting myself in a coach’s shoes with this comment, but if I were a coach and didn’t trust a player, I probably would feel like I recruited the wrong guy.

    • gladbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      It is what it is. You have a system, a philosophy, a scheme, and then you go out and try to execute it to perfection. When you do, you win.

      In our offense, the philosophy is that it is beneficial to have one feature back because of the repetitions needed to execute the offense on a weekly basis, and the difficulty in getting those reps to more than one guy. There is a drop off as you go down the depth chart because they just don’t have the reps that week.

      I’m not trying to make an argument that “this way” is better than “that way”. Believe me, when I found myself 5th deep @ running back I was all about a “running back by committee” approach, haha.

      That being said, I would not feel comfortable making the reads that I would need to if I spent all week with the 2’s and 3’s or scout team even, and a coach can’t expect me to make those reads if that be the case.

      McCants and Jenkins are great back-ups. But in our offense, their role keeps them on the sideline baring extenuating circumstances, by design.

      The point I’m trying to emphasize is that like it or not, this is our system. McCants and Jenkins don’t sit on the sideline because of “lack of trust” or because they were “failed” recruits or whatever other conclusion you want to jump to. They are our #2 and #3 backs, and are doing a great job of it. They are on the sideline by design, and when our offensive philosophy in general and the difficulties in executing it are taken into consideration, this design actually makes a lot of sense.

      However, making the argument that we might benefit from a different approach is totally valid, as everyone has their own opinions on coaching philosophy, even the fans.

      You can argue with anyone in circles for days over which is the better philosophy, everyone is going to have their own opinions on the matter, but getting from those opinions to the conclusion that McCants and Jenkins are on the sideline because of “lack of trust” or because they are “failed recruits” is a logical fallacy based on a lack of understanding of our current philosophy.

      This is why it has been the Quizz, Bernard, Wright and Jackson show over the years. For better or worse.

      Get what I’m saying?

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I think the case being made is that Quizz gets all the play because Quizz does it all well. It’s not necessarily that Riley doesn’t trust the other backs. It’s that Quizz at 70% does everything better than the others at 100%.

    While that may be true, the counter argument is that Quizz at 95% does everything better than Quizz at 70%. And 70% is where he’s stuck (in perpetuity) if he never gets a breather. If he does get a breather, and another back is in, you can bet we’re going to pass. And play action will not work in this instance.

    Giving the ball to a Jenkins or McCants and sending them up the middle for no gain does more than sending Quizz to do the same. Regardless of blown assignments on the line or wont for a big play, the big backs keep the defense honest and can deliver hits on the middle from a much different angle than can Quizz. A LB or D-lineman with a slight stinger from a hit delivered by a big back is more likely to flail at Quizz on the next play than is the same player who just threw a helmet-less Quizz to the ground.

  • VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    This post just got Jacquizzed on

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I remember a story about Tony Gwynn and his bat. He always used the same size bat, so every bat in his bag was the same size–and hand-picked at the factory.

    Despite their similarities, he always had a favorite bat because he said he could feel its use better than all the others. But he wouldn’t use that bat exclusively even though he felt it performed better than all others. He would protect it from certain pitchers he felt would more likely break it–I think they were hard throwing lefties and knuckle-ballers.

    Even though he claimed (probably truthfully) that he could feel the difference and know the capabilities of every bat he owned, he didn’t use his best bat always for fear that it would be broken.

    He also had reasons to use other bats for certain situations. Pulling or pushing the ball required a certain bat. Bunts required another bat altogether.

    It almost seems that this is a universal theme among highly precise athletes.

    I would consider Johnny Bench the best catcher of all time. You can come up with your own choice if you like, but how many of them called every single game when they were physically able?

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Good point.
      Then you think of a guy like Cal Ripken, who could have been a whole lot better (by his own admission) if he had taken time off.

  • ean says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    It appears (from the scouting sites, so FWIW) that the Beavs are targeting a JuCo RB. So either they are not confident in the young guys backing up Quizz or they are thinking Quizz is gone. Wouldn’t it be ironic if Quizz left and James stayed?

    • Line Stepper says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I think it’s just the coaching staff wanting more quality depth at the RB position. Quizz is not leaving early because:

      1.) His stats suck this year compared to previous years and where he should be at.

      2.) He’s too small and too slow to enter the draft early with any hope of a first day selection.

      Quizz will need another year to show his NFL worth in his Senior season… lack of breakaway speed will kill him. This is where LaMichael James has a huge advantage over Jacquizz.

      When Quizz does finally leave or gets injured, Stevenson, McCants, and Jenkins are not good enough to carry the season’s load at RB. Riley probably wants a RB thats ready to step in right away and carry the load if something happens, and you don’t know if any of the incomming recruits will be able to do that, although Storm Woods is looking like an awesome under-the-radar pick-up.

      BTW, what is the name of the JUCO prospect mentioned on recruiting site?

      • Warren says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        His name is C.J. Anderson. He has no other offers and is visiting Washington State in December.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I disagree. Quizz never makes it past the first day if he goes. He has way too much value as a late second round to middle third round pick.

        You think someone like Bill Belichek or Bob McNair passes on Quizz if he’s sitting there in the third round? They’d have to be stoned to miss that opportunity to get a quality back with a great work ethic, a great off-field temperament and superior all-around RB skills.

        I trust that he has about 4.5 speed from watching his track performance last spring. That puts him about two-tenths of a second faster than the all-time NFL rushing leader… and about two inches shorter.

        While Al Davis goes and picks LMJ in the first round, someone intelligent will steal Quizz in round two or three.

        That’s for next spring. If Quizz stays and doesn’t get hurt he gets to do something nobody has ever done. He gets to be the first RB to ever rush for 1000+ yards in four different seasons in the Pac 10.

        Simonton missed that honor by a handful of yards his senior year, and I wonder to this day why the coaches didn’t make a huge effort to get him those yards.

  • Warren says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Man, you guys are Jets fans? Go Pats!

  • mckalk mckalk says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    With all being said , at the end of the day, if I was a coach I would have a hard time resting Quizz because of his unbelievable ball security. I mean, does everyone understand that he has never fumbled from a hit in two and a half years of playing division one level football? That has to be pushing some kind of record. Turnovers are so crucial, why risk one if you do not have to?

  • OS_Beaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Quizz is a great player but he needs to keep having big games so the nation sees him on par with Lamichael James. Quizz is doing fine but James has reached the stratosphere in multiple games and they are blowing teams out of the water. They look like the most seasoned Roman gladiators out there, while teams like UCLA looked like they were getting eaten alive. I am still waiting to see that level of focus, determination and constant execution from the Beavs. The Ducks look like they value every play and moment right now. Beavs need to have that same spirit of total purpose and force of will.

  • BeavGirl BeavGirl says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    yes.

  • OS_Beaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    The Cal game is on TV on Fox College Sports at 12:30pm on Oct 30. Never heard of it and it isn’t on DISH. Anyone know where or who will be able to get this? I am thinking that the best sports bars should get it? Thanks!

    • mckalk mckalk says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      It is on Direct TV channel 617 as part of their Sports Pak. This is all of the regional sports networks around the country. I saw the Utah/Iowa St. game on this channel. It was not HD, so did not look the greatest, but I guess I cannot complain. There is a lot of redundancy since many channels show the same Big 12 game of the week, but there are some regional variations, so maybe some sports bar would have this package.

  • mckalk mckalk says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Cliff is reporting this, so it is confirmed. I was getting my information from a Cal football blog originally.

    The start time of the Oregon State homecoming football game against California on Oct. 30 in Reser Stadium has been finalized.

    It’s now at 12:30 p.m. with the game being broadcast by Fox College Sports (Comcast 413-415, DirecTV 617 or 623).

  • VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Angry, I agree that Quizz is used too much. I would also connect his decreasing production to the offensive line. This years offensive line is horrible! But, I have questioned why doesn’t Jenkins or McCants carry the ball and help give Quizz a breather? Most successful teams have a 1-2 punch at running back! I’ve also wondered why OSU doesn’t run more 2 back offense or I-formations? Here is what the future at running back looks like as far as I know: Jovan Stevenson is out this year due to shoulder surgery. Malcom Marble is running the scout team and redshirting, Terron Ward is greyshirting and arriving this winter.

  • […] those who countered my assessment that Rodgers is overused with "The Beavers haven't had big enough leads to use the backups" looked silly at […]

  • Recruiting Updates

  • Categories

  • Archives