11.Jul.2011 Beavers (quietly) Collecting Rose Bowl Caliber Talent

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)

I'll wait until after fall camp to make a prediction about the 2011 season, but on paper the 2012 team looks all-world.

Have a look at my predicted roster and see if you agree:

QB Ryan Katz, Sr. (The importance of an upperclassman QB cannot be overstated).
RB Storm Woods/Terron Ward, So. (hard to say, but I like this combo best, with Ward acting as a scat back).
FB/HB Tyler Anderson, RS So.
WR Markus Wheaton, Sr. (if he doesn't bolt for the NFL).
WR Jordan Bishop, Sr.
WR Obum Gwachum, RS So. (Tyler Trosin/Brandin Cooks, So. (or red-shirt freshmen) should be in the mix)
TE Tyler Perry, RS So.
OT Grant Enger, Jr. Darryl Jackson, So.
OG Michael Phillipp, Sr. Josh Andrews, Jr.
C Roman Sapolu, RS So.

K Trevor Romaine, RS So.
P ? Keith Kostol, So. (hopefully this problem gets rectified during the current recruiting cycle).

The offense looks explosive, but green at a few key positions.

The defense might be even better.

DE Scott Crichton, RS So.
DE Rusty Fernando, Sr. (not sold on this guy, but everyone else is so I'll roll with it until I see a better option).
DT Castro Masaniai, Sr.
DT Fred Thompson, So.
LB Michael Doctor, Jr.
MLB Tony Wilson/Feti Unga, Sr.
LB Shiloah Te'o, Sr. (Akuna and Welch will be in the mix)
CB Jordan Poyer, Sr.
CB Rashaad Reynolds, Jr.
S Anthony Watkins, Sr.
S Josh Lagrone, Sr. (or Ryan Murphy, So.)

Look at the combination of talent and seniority on the defense. It's impressive. Most of these guys weren't elite recruits, but they're solid 3-star athletes who will have prepared for two or three years in the system. This reiterates a key point: the Beavers don't need 5-star recruits. They just need legit 3-star athletes.

Also, guys like Wynn, Zimmerman, et al could step up and play early, but most likely they'll fill out the two-deep rather than win starting jobs.

While 2011 could be rough, 2012 looks to be a perfect storm of both talent and experience.

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

    Angry. You’re not trying to get my hopes up are you. Stop teasing me!

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

      Did you see this article: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6751931
      Willie Lyles, who was paid $25,000 by Oregon, billed California $5,000 for a package similar in description to the services provided to the Ducks’ program, according to an invoice obtained by the Oregon newspaper via open-records request. Lyles billed LSU $6,000, the report said, for what is described as game film from junior colleges in California and Kansas.

      Do you think the good recruiting is more from our coaching changes or what is happening with the yucks?

  • BeaverBeliever20 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Things definitely are looking up and 2012 should be an awesome year. Btw, you have Markus Wheaton listed as a RS Sr and Bishop as a true Sr. It actually should be the opposite of that.

    I actually think Wynn will step up and possibly be a starting DE. I believe he’s more than capable of this.

    In 2012 this team has a legit shot at winning the Pac-12 and making a Rose Bowl. That’s a realistic goal. The nonconference games will be extremely tough though. They open up @BYU and then come home to play Wisconsin the following week. Not the easiest start to the season.

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

      They open up @BYU and then come home to play Wisconsin the following week. Not the easiest start to the season.
      It’s definitely better than 2012, with Wisconsin on the road and BYU at home. Russel Wilson will be gone and the Beavs offensive line should be D1 quality.

      Bishop red-shirted? I don’t know how I forgot Wheaton since that decision (not to red-shirt him) drove me batty.

      • BeaverBeliever20 says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I thought Bishop did but on osubeavers.com it says he didn’t, so I guess I’m wrong. The decision to not redshirt Wheaton irritated me as well.

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

          point of clarification: do you want talented young players to play or to be redshirted? is this more than just an either/or?

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

            I think we feel Wheaton’s freshman season was wasted since he only played a handful of downs.

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

    I hate looking that far ahead but I’ll make one comment anyway.
    It doesn’t matter how deep we are at rb/hb/fb, Riley only uses one a year and benches the rest.

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

      I’m not sure that’s fair to say at all. In the last three years, who have we had that could come in for Quizz without seeing a HUGE decrease in production? McCants is a huge bust, Stevenson was hurt all of last year, and Jenkins did not have even close to the same impact that Quizz had while he was in the game. To say it doesn’t matter how deep we are is complete speculation, because we have never been deep (at least in the last few years).

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

        I’ve heard several people say that McCants was/is a bust, but really? Other than his knee injury in ’09 is there something I’m missing about him?
        He averaged almost 4 yards per carry on 85 attempts in 2008 when he and Quizz were freshmen and that was it, period.
        He’s had 10 attempts in 2 years since, why? I know he had knee surgery in ’09 but he was back and ready to go late that season. Then Riley gave him 4 attempts last year. From what I’ve seen he hasn’t been given a chance so to call him a bust is to say that Riley uses one back exclusively and the rest sit, untested.

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

    I have to agree with you that based on paper we look great, but we’ll be trumped by the duo of Banker/Langsdorf = Bangsdork.

    I’ll keep on believing that we’ll never get a Rose Bowl until those guys are gone.

    Which will be a waste because that team under any other coordinators would be goofy good.

    • BeaverBeliever20 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I think the Beavers can still make a Rose Bowl with those two as coordinators but I would prefer they weren’t on the staff, so having them around is a concern.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

      I think people are hung on the coordinators and their decisions based on the personnel available and the decisions that came from those choices. Look at the increased talent levels first, then look at the available schemes. The coordinators will look a lot better when a mature QB, Pac 12 level talent on the o-line and LB’s who can run with any offense are on the field. I’m not saying that the actual personnel decisions made in the past make for strong willed coordinator decisions. But having nothing but top quality talent will make the same play-calling seem brilliant.

      We had a couple years of lousy recruiting which left us with personnel who could not do what the coordinators wanted to get done. We have seen it coming, and last year was what many of us thought it would be without someone like James making the amazing plays he normally does. I was an eight or nine win proponent given the o-line and LB talent available. But when James went down against UA it was apparent that the QB would fall off as well. The failure of last year’s team came when our most potent talent, our leader, was off the field.

      As personnel mature and our staff begin to make decisions based on their talent levels, we can expect a completely different team to take the field. We can get hung up on the poor schemes played out in 2010, or we can look forward to the same schemes succeeding with exponentially better talent on the field in the future.

      I vote for large success which draws other coaching opportunities for these coordinators. I agree here that play-calling could be better, but I also think attrition within the coaching ranks is best when coaches are hired away for the work done by the players themselves.

      This train of thought is also known as: Pankey was never going to not be the slowest player on the field, and Katz was never going to be anything but a first year QB in a complex offense.

      • brownale9000 says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I agree.

        We’ve had good offenses and good defenses with these coordinators. It’s about the players first, coaching during the week second, play calling on Saturday third.

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

        I’m hung up on the coordinators because they are the CEO’s of their respective groups. The OC should try as many plays in their arsenal as possible and that will exploit which groups are failing you and then you put pressure on your lower managers (Offensive Line Coach) to make changes needed to correct the problem. If you are too conservative some other business will destroy you, and your efforts made in the name of “staying safe” will be your own undoing.

        Now in the case of Banker, he’s allowed one of his lower managers, Newhouse, to fail at perhaps one of the most important positions since 2008 and now that position is empty. Now, like a good hands on CEO he has to roll up his sleeves and coach up the weakest link, and if his business goes under this year he has no one to blame but himself. However, if Banker gets fired in this way at least I will respect the man for taking on the toughest assignment for himself. Right now, Langsdorf just seems like an uncreative bitch who got lucky with the Public Relations Kidney move.

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

          I’m not giving a pass on personnel decisions. I’m just saying the personnel decisions led to the poor play-calling. Better personnel makes for better play.

          I too hate waiting for graduations to make the proper personnel decisions.

  • rsteve503 rsteve503 says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I dont need a Rose Bowl, from OSU. Just good solid play and effort. Last year could have been significantly different with some real motivation. I hope Riley took note and cranks his team up some, for each game.

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

      On the motivation/team chemistry thing, I’d like to hear others comments regarding the effect of having Quizz as the one superstar player on the team. I am not at all certain but wonder if team effort would have been better without the focus which was on him. I certainly admire his work ethic and talent, however have often wondered if he was a negative in terms of team chemistry. OTOH James seems to me to be a real motivating team guy, hope he can approach 100% in September. Thoughts?

      Oh yeah, I’m with OS_Beaver, I need to see a Rose Bowl from OSU at least once this decade.

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

        I agree…Quizz was a great RB and competitor, but I think his frustration with the offensive line destroyed his moral, and his discontent festered throughout the team. To me that is ultimately a Riley issue–he should have played different linemen. Imagine Quizz behind a real D1 offensive line….

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

          No kidding, it absolutely is a Riley issue!

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

          Didn’t the team vote Quizz “most inspirational player” at the end of last year? I think the UW OT loss and Stanford shutout loss were more damaging to the team’s moral than Quizz’s remarks.

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

        Interesting comments from Mitchell on the competitive nature of underclassmen on last year’s team:

        http://www.osubeavers.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/the-ten-spot.html

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

          Damn, that guy can talk. I should have interviewed him instead of Cooks.

          Strange he called Jacquizz a senior, though.

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

    I am sorry but I do need a Rose Bowl from OSU at some point..hopefully this decade..please. That said progress would be nice so to see Oregon St. in a Holiday or Alamo before we break through to the Rose is OK if it plays out that way. Riley just really needs to get to a bowl this year so there isn’t too much noise. While the Holiday would be great this year I could handle a Las Vegas Bowl. Not yet sold on Langsdorf or Banker at this point. The defense hasn’t been really solid for too long and playcalling from Langs seems like it could be better. I like some of the changes that will be tried this year on D but the proof will be in the pudding. I am optimistic Brennan with a stable of receivers for the next few years can get our offense in a nice rythym and that Storm Woods and Terron Ward will be good. Markus will be awesome in 2012 so if we can get in a good headspace and start quick it should be a nice year for the Beavs and hopefully a new milestone under Riley. By that I really mean Alamo or better for 2012 if we play our cards right, take care of business week by week, and especially if the Ducks face some trouble.

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

      Yeah, I definitely need a Rose Bowl. I can’t believe a fan just wrote that he doesn’t need a Rose Bowl. That attitude needs to change. Luckily, it is (slowly).

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

        That attitude, Angry, seems so driven deep into the Beaver fan DNA that it will never change, I fear.

  • jlclark4u jlclark4u says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    The 2011 class looks to be fairly solid, but I’m much more excited for the 2012 class. Katz should have a nice receiving corp that year.

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

    Just playing devil’s advocate on the Langsdorf thing….

    ….say you have 100 plays in your playbook,but your offensive line sucks shit somethin fierce…

    …how many of those plays are you going to even bother calling? Anything that requires more than three seconds to develop is a sack or a busted scramble of a play. That’s gotta reduce your available plays in a pro style offense by about 75%? It’s no wonder they were predictable,Quizz up the middle was about 40% of the playable offense….

    I’m not saying Danny Langsdorf is a great playcaller,but he’s definitely more creative than Riley ever was.

    Hell,has a RB ever thrown for a touchdown before Quizz had TWO in his college career?

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

      It’s hard to judge him right now since the offensive line talent is piss poor. He definitely comes off as stubborn, uncreative, and unimaginative, but you are right, with this line most plays would be a bust, so any coordinator would be limited. I cannot wait until these “hogs” are gone so we can see what we really have. It’s frustrating Riley was willing to waste 3 years on this group rather than make changes while he could have salvaged something.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

      I agree with the frustration of the o-line play. We all know about Andrews, and we’ve seen how one motivated player can make our o-line 300% better. So I’ll hang my hat on that for now. But I agree with the sentiment that personnel dictates limited play-calling. I said it above, and I’ll say it again. Play the better players, and your schemes will look more like genius than the pathetic display put on last year.

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

      “Hell,has a RB ever thrown for a touchdown before Quizz had TWO in his college career?”

      There have been plenty. Off the top of my head, I can come up with the 1991 Civil War at Autzen. On 3rd and 20, Chad Paulson threw a center fade to Maurice Wilson for a TD. I was there. It was awesome.

      Funny stat… I had just transferred from Rice, which had the longest losing streak in the nation before they played SMU in 1991… and SMU team in their first year after the death penalty. The 1991 CW marked the end of the currently longest losing streak in the nation… held by the Beavs.

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

      WFO-

      Good devil’s advocate work there.

      The thing is- if I’m Danny Langsdorf, no matter how shitty my line is, I will call a play that the other team won’t expect every now because (if it works like it should) it will be successful (granted, if the play takes advantage of a weakness). If the O-line drops the ball again and again it will at least take the pressure off my back because the most seasoned fan will know that I’m at least trying and it will be Mr. Cavanaugh’s problem to put pressure on his personnel.

      I can’t excuse a lack of creativity because you’re afraid that the line will break down. If that’s the case, our Line coach is the one that needs to change the personnel. Otherwise you’re just coddling the pathetic Walktards (my nickname for the line of the last couple years) and you’re just wasting series. Coaches need to be willing to work together but at the same time they need to do what needs to be done to make sure their squad (which is the entire offense) to succeed. Not doing so shows an amazing lack of self-preservation that makes for a poor leader.

      Langsdorf, as the OC, needs to act more like a CEO of the whole offense rather than a spineless Riley puppet.

      At least with Banker it looks like a much needed part of the staff got the axe and he himself is taking over the task of coaching up the heart and soul of the defense, which is more hands on than Langsdork is being. If he fails at such a position I’ll hold my position that he should be chopped next as notice to Langsdorf.

      So, in short- if we don’t have a winning season (which is both in regular season record and a bowl game win) / or a losing season with a vindicating win in Eugene) my dream scenario is Banker gets cut. Then in 2012, Langsdorf will have no one but himself to blame if we lose out.

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

    The game at Wisconsin will reveal all.

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

      I don’t know how much it will reveal outside the game itself. It will give us a feel for their schemes and personnel for a 2012 rematch. But their game is only similar to Stanford and USC in our conference. I’d throw Cal, UW and ASU in the mix, but they are all scrambling to find an offense which beats out the same thing we’re looking to beat. So their schemes will be eclectic at best.

      It will be a good test, and it will likely prepare us well for the big, mauling offenses to come later in the year. But it won’t tell us much about how well we do against half the league. I give us a 15% chance @Wisconsin, and I won’t be surprised if we pull it out. But I don’t think we get a chance to play given the start time and schemes involved. It feels too much like the UCLA at Miami reschedule in 1998. I expect a sloppy, high scoring game where we lose something like 45-35.

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

    Has Masaniai got his wimmins problems behind him? I don’t recall seeing a resolution to his incident or the topic addressed by the athletic department but maybe I just haven’t been observant.

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

    Dont’ forget, special teams should also be impressive, with fast coverage and return teams. Poyer has proven himself effective on returns, throw in Wheaton and the potential of somebody like Cook, and there could be some game changing returns.

    I also like the potential for situational role players to diversify the offense, for example Gwacham at WR and Hamlett at TE in red zone offenses. I know Hamlett has a lot to prove, but his height makes him intriguing. In the recent past, its seems like only James Rodgers (as a true freshman running the fly sweep) was the only effective role player. I see the potential for new role players to make it very difficult for opposing defenses.

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

    Lots of talk about 2012. I’m hopeful that it will be a strong year like everyone else. Is the fact that everyone is ignoring 2011 and focusing on 2012 confirm my fears that 2011 is going to be a mediocre year? I’m predicting a 6-6 year, with 7-5 being a possibility. 8-4 will be a huge over achievement by this group, but not out of the questions if all the injuries get worked out before the season starts.

    The excitement for 2012 and lack of discussion of 2011 is indicative that everyone feels this year will be a struggle.

    Agree that it’s Rose Bowl or bust in the next five years. Anything less is a failure.

    • BeaverBeliever20 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I actually don’t think 2011 will be struggle, as long as this group has some focus and plays with some motivation which last year’s team struggled with. I can see this group go 9-3 with losses to Wisconsin, Stanford and Oregon. Every other game on the schedule this team can win and if they play with focus they can win these games. If they do that I see them playing in the Alamo Bowl with a shot at winning 10 games.

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

      Right now, I agree with 6-6. But, that can change (either way) by the end of fall camp. I’m trying to hold off my skepticism until we go through that process.

      I don’t think we have a 15% chance at Wisconsin as JackBeav wrote. I’ve seen OSU overwhelmed before kickoff too many times in this type of game to fall for it. I’d put the odds closer to 1% and expect another public embarrassment. I had the odds around 10% until I heard Russel Wilson would be quarterbacking the Badgers.

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

      The 15% comes from a much improved defense. With Watkins at S and Doctor and Collins at LB, we should see a D which is so much better than has seen in the last four years.

      The Wilson dilemma pushes two ways. He can play, but he needs time with the personnel in place to make his game work. We gain some advantage from the early season and early time scheduled.

      I don’t expect this game to be pretty. I expect a high scoring crap game where the outcome is likely never in question, but our boys will make it a good show. It will be like us @ Cincinatti or Louisville without us giving up in the second half.

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

        I am going to this game and I can tell you this, I won’t be trash talking before the game. Just looking forward to seeing how they do it in Madison.

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

          Have you been to Madison during a football game? That is an experience.

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

            Nope this will be my first time in the state of WI.
            So get this… I love to travel, and I love OSU. So a few years ago I thought of combining traveling to new areas with going to watch the Beavers play on the road, what an excellent idea!
            Well not really unless you like watching the Beavers get embarrassed every single time, ala Boise, Vegas, Seattle, Dallas….
            This year we’re scheduled to travel to Madison, Seattle(WSU), and Phoenix(ASU) in addition to attending all home games except Stanford.
            I travel to watch the team in hopes that they will win… someday. Someday I want to be there when we shock the world and beat a good team on the road. The last time I remember this happening was the 2007 CW in Eugene. Unbelievable feeling to win in someone else’s stadium that all the experts said you had no shot at winning!
            Alas my hopes have been dashed so many times that I no longer get my hopes up. Rather I try to enjoy the game day atmosphere and people in these new cities.

          • angry angry says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

            Sounds fun. Where do you find the money to travel that much and see so many games? Do you travel in an RV or buy lodging, too?

            Oh, and you should get breakfast here before the game: http://www.coolbeanscoffeecafe.com/

            Really nice shop and you see all the fans walking to the game as you eat.

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

            Thanks for the tip about Cool Beans!

            The money comes from our teenage son moving out onto his own so now we can travel and play like kids again! We fly to the games.

            But for home games (here comes a shameless plug, wait for it) we bring our “Beaver Lodge”, a 30′ Arctic Beaver Fifth Wheel to the fairgrounds and set up for the Flat Tailgate Society home base on Friday afternoons through Sunday. It’s a great place to tailgate because it’s free to park your car and only $2 round trip shuttle to the game, they (and we) have bathrooms and plenty of space to party, play Frisbee, games of rack-up-your-balls, throw a football around, set up the drinks and food tables, huge fire pits, stagger towards the ditch in a drunken stupor… that kind of stuff.
            We’re looking for more participants to share in the festivities too! Most info can be found here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Flat-Tailgate-Society/166360193395475

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

        I agree the D will be improved, but an early away game in Madison…I just see them coming out flat due to time zone and location, and I see that much improved D getting road-graded by Wisconsin’s never ending supply of NFL caliber hogs. Add Russell Wilson to that mix, and I hate our odds. I was thinking 38-13 Wisconsin. Ugh.

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

          But Wilson’s skills don’t translate to the skills the hosses at Wisconsin bring… at least for the first couple games.

          I expect them to dominate the line on offense, but if Wilson pulls it down because he doesn’t feel comfortable with the offense or his WR’s, he takes away from their whole plan. They will be willing to let him loose because of his abilities and because of our past (Pankey) containment problems. But i think that backfires. The early start time kills us more than it does them, but it will affect them as well.

          I’m calling a 45-35 loss after losing 42-17 at the end of the 3rd. I would say probably 10-3 at the end of one, 21-14 at the end of two.

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

            Sorry, 21-10.

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

            Yeah. I don’t know much about Wisconsin, 2011. I’m basing my comments off their team last year and OSU’s history in these games. A few months ago, I think I read they were returning a lot of guys on offense. Not sure, though.

            Edit: I’ll probably start researching them in August. Anyone know how strong they’re expected to be?

          • BeaverBeliever20 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            I think Wisconsin wins 35-30. They take a 35-17 at the end of three and the Beavers make a comeback attempt thanks to Wisconsin trying to sit on the ball. I think the Beavers make things real interesting but fall just short.

            I think Wisconsin has a 14-10 lead at halftime and thanks to some Beaver turnovers in the third build an 18 point lead on two different occasions in the quarter. If the Beavers were to make a big comeback and fall just short I could deal with that. They would be in a good game in a nonconference game on the road and not get embarrassed for once. If they won I would legitimately be shocked and it would be a big step for the program.

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

            They lose the best part of their o-line (and the most experienced) on the left side. the rest of their line is young, but they are talented. Catching them early is important.

            They are big enough and athletic enough that I don’t like our chances. But a good scheme can make them the fools. Add to that a wish for someone who plays a different game (their QB) than they play to succeed in the short term, and i think there’s a chance we win. It’s not a big chance, but I don’t remove the possibility.

            This is a Wisconsin team geared to beat Iowa, Michigan State, Penn State and Ohio State. Those are teams who will maul you at the line and hope for a big play here and there. We come with an offense predicated on beating you with any given play. And we come with the personnel with the ability to do it. It will take some luck to drag our chances out of the trenches, but I think it can be done.

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

            I recently watched a rerun of last seasons Wisc-ASU game which the Badgers won by a single point. Considering the graduation of many starters, I concluded that the Beavs can beat the Badgers IF they give a 60 minute effort. The addition of Wilson has the possibility that team chemistry may not gel till later in the season.
            I won’t be surprised if the Big TV Game curse is broken this time.

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

            Several BIG 10 teams last year had letdowns that didn’t make the conference look very good. I just don’t think this beaver team has the lineman on either side of the ball to keep pace for four quarters. I see busy Beaver LB’s and safeties (tackles for everyone!), and a beaver offense that becomes dependent on the pass. If accurate, turnovers become OSU’s hope, or the reason for their blowout loss.

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

    You had me at “QB Ryan Katz, Sr.”.

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

    To make a long rant short, I think concentrating on the play-calling is counterproductive. I think the personnel decisions have dictated the play-calling, and that was our downfall. WFO is on the same train. When you have people who can do only so much, only so much of the playbook is utilized.

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

      What you say has merit, Jack, but calling the same plays is just tiring your players out and the players aren’t learning anything because they are only making mistakes with the “safe” plays. At least if you’re taking a gamble your players might respond by stepping it up a bit or everyone will know it was your O-line’s fault. If a team stops another when they are doing the very thing they practiced all week to stop because it’s called a million times, it only makes you look like the idiot.

  • rsteve503 rsteve503 says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Well, since OSU almost went to a Rose Bowl or two this last decade, I guess wanting to get to one this decade isnt unreasonable. Esp if UO goes on some real sanctions.

    But I am satisfied with less. Guess that makes me an inferior fan….sorry…. I’ll go stand at the back… …sob….

    I agree about being creative with play calling… thats just good strategy — keep em off balance.

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

      Always WANT one, but never EXPECT one. Be realistic, and ask for more. Knowing what we’re capable of next year doesn’t mean we can’t be better.

      But knowing what we’re capable of and settling for something close to those expectations with some rosy afterthoughts is just pathetic.

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

    I’ve been receiving a lot of Duck hate the past 24 hrs. Not sure what is up. I see this incoming link:

    http://ducksattack.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10681

    I guess they’re coming from there.

    Anyway, Duck fans, I will address your complaints in the morning (though I think I already have..). Too tired right now.

    • BeaverBeliever20 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      “I just read the AngryBeav site….I have read some trash in my time on this earth, but that site either takes the cake or comes very close to it….It must really hurt to lose 3 CW in a row, not have a track program worth its weight in you know what, and a two-time NC baseball team get swept by a new in state rival team….Lets not even talk about their basketball program….Those poor pathetic bastards….I really feel for em….What a bunch of sore-losers….We always knew they were losers…..but, apparently their shortcomings are makin em good and sore these days…Not our problem….We will continue to kick their collective arses….and life goes on….Its the way things are…Whether they like it or not…Its the way things are…. ”

      That’s a personal favorite of mine. You know Angry, reporting on things you are told that just so happen to be negative means you’re just upset because the Beavers have lost three CW, and your track program “isn’t worth its weight”(lmao) and your upset the baseball team which won back-to-back titles four years got swept in a regular season series (Lol)

      It’s just hilarious that this was the best they could come up with. Once the violations hit they will all shit their pants and sob for a while. Normally, I don’t like to root for teams to get hammered by the NCAA by the Ducks are a special case. Their fans are so arrogant and myopic that I feel it would be a good thing to see their program get hammered. A lot of those fans can go back to being USC fans.

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

    Don’t forget when projecting how a team is going to do you have to take the schedule into account. How many games on the schedule can you win? Are your toughest opponents coming to your house or are you going there? A team’s schedule has a lot to say with how well their season turns out. (Look at Auburn last year as an example – they didnt have to play a tough game outside their own stadium until the final regular season game).

  • Recruiting Updates

  • Categories

  • Archives