27.Oct.2013 Stanford Post Game

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.6/5 (5 votes cast)

I’m going to keep it short, but I wanted to note that was a typical Riley game, in that, on the big stage, they had every opportunity to win, yet came up short. As usual, it was Riley himself costing the team. He was calling a great came early on, and then those 4th downs got him. They weren’t even second guesses on my part. I wrote “take the points” and “why go for it?” before the plays. It’s impossible to know if playing those downs correctly would have mattered, but I do know it wasn’t smart football. It was gutsy football…but not smart football. There’s a time and place for risk, and when you’re winning the game and playing dominating D, that isn’t the time. Riley was trying to push things and become a maverick to show he’s still aggressive and relevant. Problem is it’s not his natural tendency, so he doesn’t know when to do it, and when he does it’s forced.

That game should have been a win. It just required smarter coaching decisions and a little more execution (Mannion missing the easy TD to Cooks). The offense was clearly nervous early on. Mannion played alright, but he’s definitely not a Heisman candidate, and we know now he was benefiting from the light competition. The game answered some questions.

Overall, that was a strong kick in the nuts. Fans have been stoked twice this year, opening day and Saturday, and both times they got a steel-toed in the sack. This will repeat over and over, as it is Riley’s wont. Big hat, no cattle.

Jump to Bottom
  • Bob says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +10 (from 14 votes)

    I’m one of the guys who in the past bitched about Riley constantly kicking field goals and never “going for it.” Haven’t you too? Last night I was one of thousands yelling “Go for it.” He did, more than once, and it didn’t work. I’m not going to be a dick now and say, “He shouldn’t have gone for it, take the points, not smart football.”

    We can’t have it both ways.

    • whatever says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +3 (from 13 votes)

      Yes. Angry has absolutely been that guy. Lame to call those decisions wrong only in hindsight. Its come to be expected here though.

      • Numbers says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

        Angry posted exactly what I was thinking at that moment , keeping me from posting myself… “Take the points here”. I get what you’re trying to complain about, but that’s like me asking my wife to salt the pasta and she eventually does by simply dumping the whole container in. Yeah, we want more aggression, but we want it within reason.

        • angry angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -1 (from 5 votes)

          It’s amazing there are people out there who don’t understand this. Like, if you say a coach is passive they believe it’s tantamount to saying, “he should just cut the punter, go for two point conversions every time, and onside kick after each score.”

          I don’t think we’ve ever talked about 4th downs here. Ever. Maybe briefly after the Washington game a few years ago.

          • BeavItOrNot says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

            No one said that. Only the straw man in your head said it.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -5 (from 5 votes)

            Incorrect use of a fallacy. It was clearly stated, and it is in print above. Big lose for you. Stick to poor, confusing humor. It’s as good as you get.

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

            I don’t see where you came to that conclusion.

            I feel like one of the complaints I see on here frequently is that Riley is not aggressive enough in his play calling, and that clearly includes giong for it on 4th and short when you think that you will need touchdowns to win the game rather than field goals. Turns out we didn’t need touchdowns, but if Riley had gone for the FG, ended up losing by 2 or 3 points, then Angy would be saying that Riley missed yet another opportunity ont he national stage by not going for it when we have a high percentage chance of getting 2 yards.

            The point is, it is really easy to look back and complain about what they should have done. Angry will complain about Riley’s coaching decisions after a loss no matter what that decision was.

            GB vs Minn last night, Minn has a 3rd down from about 10 yards out towards the end of the 1st half. Instead of passing it, AP runs it in for a TD when everyone expects pass. Turns out to be a great decision but if it had not worked, the Minn coach is the dumbest person in the world.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)

            See? THAT’s how a straw man is constructed.

            I understand you want this to be the way it might have happened. But it didn’t, and it won’t. There will always be grumbling in the face of a loss. And there will always be 20/20 hindsight. But oh well.

            Being reckless is not being aggressive. But I do choose what Riley did in this game over what he has done in the past in that range. How often have we seen a 4th and five from the 35 or so, and Riley goes and punts the ball? And how often has that been against quick strike teams who don’t play the field position game?

            This game was one of field position, and even with the 4th down misses we won it except for a couple mistakes. So I can’t fault Riley for trusting his defense in those situations. But I can fault him for not feeling the game itself and taking points when the opportunity arises… at least half the time. And when we take those chances, we don’t run plays into the strength of the defense. That’s not aggression. That’s banging your head against the wall.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -4 (from 4 votes)

            And Minnesota is not a good analogy even in minutia. Their management isn’t as bad as it was in when Mike Lynn was the GM. Oddly enough, Minny got rid of position because of Lynn (I would have too). But Spielman isn’t exactly making sound decisions.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -3 (from 5 votes)

            I think you’re conflating past discussions on this blog where the Beavs have been in the red zone often against teams like Nikegon and had to settle for FGs instead of TDs. That’s not the same as a game like this, but for the sake of the argument I think you’re making let’s do so.

            It’s not the same.

            Settling for FGs in the red zone is not the same as going for it on 4th and short from the 35 or 30… in any reality.

            The former is a general discussion with much more depth than just choosing to go for it instead of kicking the FG. It means we don’t have the personnel or play-calling to drive it home in the first place. That’s what “settling” means. We couldn’t do one thing, so we settled for another.

            Many years ago I got in an argument with angry about whether or not we should have gone for it on 4th and 16 while down four late in the game and at the opponent’s 27. I argued that we should have taken the points and kicked it away then tried to hold them for another chance to win. Angry argued that we had to go for it in that game because we probably weren’t going to get another chance if their offense got the ball again. And we couldn’t settle for a FG in that situation for the same reason. I thought the difference in motivation and momentum would have been better had we made the FG to go down by one, and our D would have stepped up with more enthusiasm if they had the other team in that position. And I also argued that when we got the ball back we could then kick another FG to win instead of needing a TD or nothing.

            These are the types of discussions that happen here. And they differ based on situations from year to year. We don’t say, “I and others did this, but we’re not dicks. Because we did this but didn’t say that, and I’m committing you to that same mentality even though you clearly aren’t and haven’t been.”

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

            Jack,
            A discussion on the space program would be fascinating. While most of my work is on the molecular and sub-molecular level, much of the complex mathematics can be applied to the universe as a whole. My research in molecular orbits is especially interesting when applied to planetary and lunar orbits. Excellent suggestion Jack!!

            LP

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

            It was better below.

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

            1. I wrote “take the points” on a commercial break, before the play happened.
            2. Complaining about (lack of) aggression does not equate to going for it on 4th downs. Terrible logic.
            3. Just because a call works, doesn’t make it the right call. e.g. if a coach goes for every 4th down and converts 1, does that mean it was the right call and all the others were wrong? No, mostly likely every call was wrong and 1 worked.

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

            You guys need to let this go

            http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Arguing_976987_287797.jpg

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

            It comes as no surprise to me that you are confused by my humor.

            We’ve discussed fallacies before. You were aggressively underwhelming in your analysis. Looking for a redo?

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -4 (from 4 votes)

            You go ahead and don’t read what’s printed above. Now go and pull quotes that actually support your incorrect fallacy. Let’s see you PYHOOYA on this one.

            I’m not confused by this one. Some of your other “humors” are whackadoodle spittles in type. But this one is clearly linear and wrong… and just a major fail in a post where you were not trying to be humory.

          • BeavItOrNot says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

            Two ships passing in the night. Well, mine is a ship. Yours is a dinghy with a crazy bearded man howling at the moon.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -4 (from 4 votes)

            I knew you would run away from that challenge. It’s what you do.

          • BeavItOrNot says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

            That’s what I do? The last time you think you issued me a challenge (giving yourself far too much credit), it was to dig up Angry’s quote picking Vaz over Mannion. I responded with the quote. You went noticeably silent. You should do the same here.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -4 (from 4 votes)

            He didn’t, and you failed there as well. It didn’t need my follow-up as much as it didn’t need yours… which it never got also. You were silenced by others. Am I supposed to come in after the kill and stomp on your carcass to prove your current point?

            Still waiting on the current one. We can only hope you come up with “evidence” more compelling this time around.

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

            I fear you actually think that’s what happened.

            As far as the current discussion, only one of us has incorporated quotes/references in our argument. Hint: It’s not you.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -5 (from 5 votes)

            You’ve not incorporated quotes. I haven’t either, but the burden isn’t on me. Still, I have taken the time to at least paraphrase.

            Since you brought it up, you go find the “argument” and read it again. You can try to break down your awesomeness once you put fresh eyes on your silliness. Show me the exact challenge you gave to me and how I failed to meet it.

            Go ahead… I’ll wait.

            Meanwhile, your diversions don’t let you off the hook for the one I gave you. I know… your logic will dictate that the burden is on me to link this specific challenge. You are very original when it comes to stuff like this. Do you need me to link it for you?

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

            Jack,

            I am not sure that BeavItOrNot realizes that he is tangling with one of the greatest minds to ever grace the OSU campus!

            LP

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

            I wouldn’t say what I did on that campus was anything approaching grace.

            But you guys are waaaaaaayyyyy out of your troll depth here.

            In a future discussion, I’m going to steer the yutz into a talk about the space shuttle program of the 90’s. I think you will all enjoy that thread much more than this one.

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

            Jack,
            A discussion on the space program would be fascinating. While most of my work is on the molecular and sub-molecular level, much of the complex mathematics can be applied to the universe as a whole. My research in molecular orbits is especially interesting when applied to planetary and lunar orbits. Excellent suggestion Jack!!

            LP

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

            Excellent segue!

            Gotta give props for this one.

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

            Thanks Man!!

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

            BeavItOrNot, still saying I liked Vaz over Mannion, huh? This based on a quote where I said neither guy distinguished himself and you’d have to go with Mannion if Vaz’s arm strength was a liability that cut the playbook in half. A comment also influenced by PLAYERS, via Mamma Machado, preferring Vaz’s leadership. I see you’ve taken the “if you say it enough it will come true” approach to trolling. Let me guess, you think you’re keeping it real and holding me accountable? That would be cool if you were good at it. Gotta go, I reformed the band, and my lady groupies just knocked.

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

            I only referenced it as a response to Jack. Of course, it still absolutely applies to the extent you pat yourself on the back for player evaluation (which is not germane to the inane discussion going on now).

            I don’t think anyone can hold you accountable. Accountability is clearly not your thing.

            Say hello to the groupies for me, the 90% of OSU cheerleaders you think would “bang” you, and all the other characters that exist only in your head.

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

            OSU cheerleaders are pretty gnarly this year.

            I’m getting older, so I don’t think 90% would bang me anymore. Maybe 45% now. Gravity is a bitch.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -4 (from 4 votes)

            This is your inane discussion BION. You didn’t start it, but you decided to carry its baggage. I’m just enjoying watching you squirm while trying to justify your troll.

            I challenged you to support it, and you ran away even after I said you typically run away from such challenges. Your argument was “I know you are, but what am I?” And I challenged you to prove that as well since you wanted to deflect.

            This is your work of troll art. Don’t go complaining about it now.

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

            That makes you the baggage, correct?

            None of the things you say are happening are happening. You’re way too much effort – try not to take that as a compliment.

          • whiskey soaked napkins says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            the goddamn germans got nothin to do with it!

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

            Just run away.

            It’s what you do.

          • mckalk says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

            Isn’t there some high school coach who never punts, always onside kicks and goes for two’s and claims the percentages support his strategy? I guess he wins his fair share of games. I’ll have to do some research. But back to the topic, Riley has shown some interesting moxie on the offensive side this year, but there’s a time and place for it. He seemed clueless to that fact on Saturday night.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

            It’s still better than punting from there. But taking some points in a game like this would have been nice too.

      • VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +1 (from 9 votes)

        You guys just can’t seem to grasp the concept of this whole blog. Being critical doesn’t mean you hate the program. Angry is very critical because that’s what it takes to be a winner. This applies to life moreso than foot all. Think critically! That’s different from criticizing everything just to be negative.
        Anybody with a decent amount of football knowledge would say that you take the points early in a low scoring game, especially when your defense is playing effective.
        When you idiots say things like, “Yes, Angry has absolutely been that guy” why don’t you dig up a post(s) to back your accusation?

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

      I’ll be the first to admit that I have bitched about Riley being too passive, but again nobody other than ignorant duck fans think it’s smart to go for it on 4th down when you’re in field goal range.

      My biggest bitch about Riley is his habit of downing the ball and letting the clock run out before half with three timeouts and 45 seconds on the clock. That’s a tail between your legs, I don’t trust my players not to fuck up pussy move. And he does it religiously.

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

        I have been watching OSU football for quite a few years and I have never seen Riley do what you say he does religiously. That’s quite the exaggeration.

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

          When is the last time riley took a couple deep shots at the end zone at the end of the half instead of downing the ball and trudging off the field?

          The answer is never. I’ve been watching Beaver football for 40 years including both of Riley’s stints. And I can’t recall him ever being aggressive and trying to score before halftime. I have seen aggressive winning teams score in the waning moments before halftime.

          • WFO WFO says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

            For a fresh example:

            Stanford took over the ball with 46 seconds on the clock before halftime. Rather than run a couple of safe plays, downing the ball and moping in to the locker room trailing like Riley historically would they mounted a 39 second scoring drive for a touchdown to take a lead and momentum in to halftime.

            Riley has never done this.

  • helicopterbeav says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

    We were pitching a shutout. Field goals would have won the game. Right from the get go it was obvious that every yard and every point would count. Take the points. Plus, why try to ram it down their throat when they were obviously the more physical team? Play action, a screen pass, or an off tackle. Anything but up the gut.

    Mannion played tight. He never let the ball go. He was too risk adverse. The one time we stretched the field, Cooks was open. Why not try it a half dozen times?

    Worse than anything was he poor clock management. They were huddling up with five minutes left down two scores. That was terrible and it cost us at the end because we could only throw to he end zone.

    Stanford is very good, but this was a game that we had the horses to win.

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

      And with our guy nailing a 50 yarder early on, you can think he is “on”, so take the FG’s….

      LIke folks say, low scoring game, every point counts. Hell, that missed/blocked extra pt could have been critical, had we got a closing td. But with another FG in the pt column, a td wins it, pure and simple.

      Riley seems a good overall coach, but in the critical moments of a game, he seems …. elsewere.

      Yes, a winnable game, down the drain….

  • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 11 votes)

    The Qb sneak on 4th and 1 was fucking ridiculous. That is way too far to sneak it. Where was Tyler Anderson on 4th and 1? I agree that the coaching staff lost this game.

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

    The Beavers matched up with Stanford just fine. Yet it was evident that Stanford had OSU well scouted and was able to use instant analysis to adjust their approach in real time. Over the years OSU has exhibited little ability to analyze themselves and the opponent in game and have shown little ability to react and make instant adjustments. They need this more than four star recruits and bling.

  • FedUpBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -1 (from 5 votes)

    Can’t win a game with anything that actually matters at stake. May beat USC just cause it means much less now. I was generous saying he is 0 for 12 in big games that matter. It may be 0 for 13 or 14. You would think after 13 years he would have something better than mediocre wins that mean little. Every single time he gets to the point of just one big win needed that is the game he falls flat and mind fucks himself into a team loss. Its a shame for a great player like Cooks or Wheaton. More chances will be blown in future years and it is a good bet now that Riley will never make a BCS Bowl or Playoff.

    • BeavItOrNot says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

      If only Bob D had chosen those orange uniforms, right…?

      • Jack says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)

        Missed the forest for the Charlie Brown Christmas tree… again.

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

          Aha, forgot that specificity is your enemy. Continue on with your non-sequitur generalizations.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -5 (from 5 votes)

            When you hyphenate non sequitur, does that make you feel more intelligent?

            Specificity kills your humorosity and your arguments overall because this one is all about a general culture at OSU instead of your misapplied target. Like you, I don’t know if I agree with it. At least I assume you don’t agree with it. I could be wrong here, and you could be just trying for humor and losing because you’re failing to come from either side, let alone failing to understand only one side.

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

            Excellent explanation Jack!! Only guys like us should attempt to use big words.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

            Heh heh….

            You think I’m a guy?

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

            a light in the loafers one

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

            Shhh… you weren’t supposed to tell them about us.

            Remember that we’re supposed to be at each other’s throats as a guise. Do it right and I promise you can be on top once.

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

            for once? I recall making soup out of your insides. You sure you want that again?

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

            You make soup out of my insides? That’s kinda gross to collect the insides I give you.

  • Connor says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

    Oregon State hoops preview: http://rushthecourt.net/2013/10/26/pac-12-team-preview-oregon-state-beavers/

    • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +4 (from 10 votes)

      no one gives a shit about hoops anymore. call me when we actually have a real coach

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

        No kidding. When the preview article states best case scenario of: losing opener, best non conference games, and a 4-8 conference start. Geez, best case scenario? No wonder no one gives a shit. They’ve got a long way to go.

        • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +6 (from 8 votes)

          apathy has completely set in with me. Don’t give two shits about OSU hoops anymore. Not going to any games this year either and no plans to. I am done spending my money on a program with a loser mentality

          • Numbers says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)

            Again, just like football, I blame Bob DeCarolis. Robinson has a huge recruitment advantage but can’t figure the X&O’s. A sharp AD would insist on supplementing such a head coach with an assistant strong in the Xs & Os. I can’t wait for that worthless waste to retire. (which he has zero intentions to do, and hence we are stuck with him just cause he has an awful disease). I don’t blame you for not attending at this point.

          • ReBEAVchainsaw1 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

            I agree, coach Rob should be winning the Pac12 every season if it wasn’t for BDC. He is the presidents brother in law now that’s not even cool with Obama care. But clearly he is a really, really bad basketball coach and needs someone to do the actual basketball stuff for him. This again falls on BDC. Of all of the major traditional power basketball schools, most experts and recruits still think we trump fUCLA, Kansas, Indiana, etc but I think we may be starting to slip in some minds unless we can start winning at least half our games within the next 5 year’s under coach Rob. I still think we need to be sending recruits signed head shots of president Obama with Thanksgiving invitations attached to the offer letters, but that is another topic.

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

            Thanks for reminding us again that you blame Bob DeCarolis. I wonder on a weekly basis whether you still blame him or if you have shiften your blame to someone else.

            Cheers

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

            Right or wrong, it does get old. It’s approaching Byte levels of spam-ism.

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

        Real talk. Should I even make basketball threads this year?

        • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -5 (from 5 votes)

          its your blog and site. do what ya want. But i have no plans to even watch our joke of a hoops program this year. And it sucks cause I am a big college hoops fan.

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

            I’ve never read basketball threads; I’ll check in on the site in January/Feb./March for football recruiting news and the start of baseball season.

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

          There is plenty of excitement every time a season starts, no matter how bleak the prognosticators sound. But once the novelty of this season dies off, then I’d understand less threads on them.

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

            I’ll be watching every game on the tube, and so will some fairweather angrybeavs if they’re winning.

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

            I’ll be watching

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

          I’ll be watching as well.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

          I’m excited for this year. To be honest, I like that Moreland is suspended as well… on two fronts. The first is that discipline is intact. That should be the way it is. Nobody should get to be an important player on a team and get away with breaking the rules. Second is that I disagree that Moreland is one of our best defenders. He’s situational at best, and that situation is as a lane defender. I keep hearing how he can cover on the perimeter and in the post. But he can’t cover the perimeter, and he needs to work on taking the blocks away from the opponent.

          Angus does the latter much better, as did Gomis in HS. And Gomis showed he could body up on defense and alter shots. Gomis and now N’Diaye get to form their games in Moreland’s absence. And even though all we’ve seen from both is their potential, I think both solidify our interior defense and show Moreland how it’s done. They both also know their limitations on offense, so they can develop there and make the rest of our interior offense better as well as relieve perimeter pressure. It’s going to be a tall order for any team to try to beat those three plus Collier and an improved Reid.

          Our guards will be a better group than we’ve seen in forever. It’s going to be the improvement from LMW, Robbins and Olaf that makes a difference this year. All three bring vastly different skill sets to the floor. And all three can score in bunches… and have shown this already. Even Olaf with his quick trigger will be scary. He is a sociopathic shooter because he knows he can make the trey. But he was a frosh who wasn’t used to the next level last year. Expect him to look unconscious this year.

          I’m not thrilled with the schedule though. I think we could have done better there. I like additions like DePaul when trying to travel or get “name” games. They, like us, are a historical program who has just been sucking eggs for years. But purists remember the names, and they pay attention in the box scores if nothing else when they look at the names of the teams who play. Even the elites have fan bases who gripe about having to buy season tickets for a spate of directional cupcakes. Why should our fans be any different?

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

    Stanford does do a good job with in game analysis, I saw the article on Connor McFadden and I’m a believer in him and his little white board. He’s about to graduate and will have no Playing future. Any chance we can pick him up as a grad assistant or assistant coach? Pit would be very nice to have some fresh intellect on staff.

    • VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

      That’s not a bad idea but it will never happen, way too progressive for Riley.

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

        It won’t happen because the guy has a photographic memory and a degree from Stanford. I’m sure he can find a better place to focus his skills than on a college football sideline.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

          It’s such an easy paycheck though. Why would you slug your way through life for comparative peanuts and pass up executive money to be an assistant for life (taking the “worst case” here)?

          I know… people have passions and follow them. But if football is one of his, he has an easy row to hoe if he chooses do do so.

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

    Angry, did you mean to write “steal-toed in the sack”? Perhaps, steel-toed in the sack or steel-toed in the back? I dare not ponder Beaver fans stealing toes in the sack.

  • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

    8 fucking sacks and 13 tackles for loss. Unfuckingbelievable. Also here’s a real gem of a quote in here by our own Brandin Cooks that I think our coaching staff needs to hear

    “They’re a smart defense,” Cooks said. “Their coach put them in the right position.”

    http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/10/oregon_state_football_stanford.html

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

      What what what??? I thought that If players are in the correct position or not, that’s all on the players and not the coaches/schemes. Blasphemy.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

      Sounds like a backhanded insult by the cookie monster.

    • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -4 (from 6 votes)

      forgot to add this

      “They’re a smart defense,” Cooks said. “Their coach put them in the right position.”

      Said no one about an oregon state football coach. ever

    • ReBEAVchainsaw1 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -10 (from 10 votes)

      Mannion was scared out of his mind, there’s no way he was going to avoid any sacks, most people were right by calling for Vaz. And Cooks better watch out, he is turning into a cancer like Stevenson. Typical diva WR just complaining because he never got the ball more than 9 times. I just hope the suspension next week will shut him up and get him focused again.

      • Jack says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

        This doesn’t even make sense. If rocks were blue, then light switches would be deciduous?

  • ObjCritic says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

    From a viewing interest standpoint, that was probably the top game of the season; highly ranked opponent, another chance at OSU’s first 7-game win streak (last chance was at UW last year), and the rest just don’t seem as meaningful. USC is not what they used to be, and Stanford is going to be the highest ranked opponent after Oregon, and I don’t see OSU being within 21 points of UO in this year’s CW.

    I thought the D came to play, but was surprised at how intimidated the offensive line seemed. Getting false starts in your own stadium? I recall one play where the left tackle, and a RB or HB (?) just let the DE in come in untouched and sack Mannion, it didn’t even look like they tried.

    As silly as it seems, I thought the orange uniforms might have been a “positive distraction” from the pressure for the team, and they should have broken them out last night. The offensive line has to regret not playing with focus, controlled aggression.

    Riley’s clock management would have been frustrating if it wasn’t so predictable. This team supposedly worked on no-huddle or hurry up paces to its offense this past off-season, has it been used yet? Maybe against EWU?

    Riley’s proud of his kids and the effort, and he his contract is extended another year, what’s a couple of damn minutes anyway.

    • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

      proud of his kids and the effort. Yeah, that’ll get you to a BCS bowl game coach

      • angry angry says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

        The BCS deep throats goat sack, to be fair.

      • ReBEAVchainsaw1 says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -5 (from 5 votes)

        Angry is right. WE don’t even WANT to go to BCS games cause the BCS sucks anyway. Glad Riley still preaches that in practices.

  • JD says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

    BDC needs to go. It all starts from the top.

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

      The top is Ed Ray.

    • ReBEAVchainsaw1 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

      Totally agree. I bet BDC can’t even throw the ball 20 yards. How can we expect to win all our games with a jerk off like BDC hamstringing the shit out of us all the time?

  • silverstream055 silverstream055 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +5 (from 7 votes)

    I was at Reser last night, and left the stadium feeling dejected about OSU letting a very important and very winnable game slip away. Watching the game again today on DVR, that feeling was intensified. It wasn’t so much OSU’s questionable fourth down strategy calls as it was the failure of OSU and its coaches to make in-game adjustments to take advantage of a Stanford team that clearly didn’t bring its “A” game to Reser last night.

    Stanford did not play well on offense. Kevin Hogan was inaccurate with his passes all night, missing open receivers, and ending up a lame 8 for 18 with a total of 88 yards passing. Just about the only times Hogan came through were when Banker stupidly chose to go with a 3-man rush, giving Hogan time to scramble around, and giving Stanford receivers time to get so wide open that even Hogan could hit them. Stanford only had 13 first downs the whole game, was a paltry 2 for 9 on third down, and was relatively one-dimensional on offense (it was pretty much the Tyler Gaffney show and not much else).

    On the other side of the ball, Stanford’s heralded secondary did not play well. OSU receivers were getting open all night (including our 3rd and 4th string tight ends). When Mannion had time to pass, he completed a lot of passes (the one obvious exception being that bad overthrow to a wide open Cooks that may have cost OSU a touchdown). If OSU could have provided Mannion with better pass protection, Mannion and his receivers would have picked the Stanford secondary apart.

    But of course Mannion rarely had much time to pass. Not only was Mannion sacked 8 times (!), but he was hit and hurried on many other pass plays (and somehow avoided sacks on a few other plays where Stanford pass rushers were in his face as soon as he completed his dropback).

    Stanford’s Trent Murphy repeatedly went right by Michael Philipp on outside/upfield rushes, leading to sacks. (Sidenote: this year, I was expecting a lot better out of Michael Philipp — given that Philipp was a highly-recruited high school star, a starting tackle and Freshman All-American as a true freshman at OSU, and is now a 5th year senior.) Terron Ward and Storm Woods also failed on multiple occasions to pick up or block the most dangerous rushers, leading to other sacks. As for the OSU coaches, why didn’t OSU employ max protect schemes at least once in a while, after it became obvious that our usual pass blocking schemes weren’t working? Did they not remember the Alamo?

    With all the mistakes committed by OSU players and coaches last night (including of course the fatal miscues at the end of the first half and the start of the second half), OSU still was in a position to tie the game in the last minute and go into OT against the #6 ranked team. That’s partly a testament to OSU not giving up (for which OSU does deserve a lot of credit). But I think it’s also because Stanford truly didn’t bring their “A” game last night. Too bad the Beavs’ players and coaches couldn’t make pretentious/smug Stanford pay for that….

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

      Here’s the answer to the protection SS, from OregonLive:

      “Schnell: Was it a hard game to call, because of Stanford’s front seven?

      Riley: “Oh yeah. I always felt like I had to be really careful with protection calls and adjustments. You’re behind, so you need to throw, but you can’t throw all the time because they just tee off on the pass rush. It becomes a real big cat and mouse game of how to call plays in a game like that.”

      Adjustments! He had adjustments in mind!

      I also wondered about having Bays in AND putting Harlow in as an extra offensive lineman or h-back type role? If Stanford can go with extra offensive lineman, why not OSU? God knows Phillip could have used the help.

      Did he learn from the Alamo bowl? No, Riley is one of the slowest learning coaches out there. Has he learned to manage a clock? Get his offense to move quickly between snaps and still execute?

      This team has players that make one optimistic, but then the coaching staff reminds us that it’s the same ol’ Beavers…

      • silverstream055 silverstream055 says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        ” …also wondered about having Bays in AND putting Harlow in as an extra offensive lineman or h-back type role? If Stanford can go with extra offensive lineman, why not OSU? God knows Phillip could have used the help.”

        I agree. Bays. Gavin Andrews. OSU had big blockers available. Line them up at h-back to neutralize the pass rush (especially the outside speed rush). It’s not rocket science.

        OSU should have figured this out after last year’s Alamo Bowl debacle (10 sacks). OSU should have added this to the playbook, and worked on this during 2013 Spring and Fall practice sessions. But Riley failed to plug this hole, and so on Saturday it was deja vu all over again, with Trent Murphy playing the role of Alex Okafor, and Michael Philipp playing the role of Colin Kelly. Fool me once….http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A

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

      Deja vu with your post. Started reading and got a flashback to UW last year. Same vibe. Let a winnable game slip away. Sat. night was an insight why all the other schools recruited Phillip as a guard. He does not have the foot speed to handle good edge rushers. Murphy was beating him like a drum. We really missed Hamlett and Smith on that last series.

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

    Attended two games this year, both losses. Thinking about making the trip to the USC game, so hopefully a win for once.

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

    Quit complaining. There are lots of programs that would love to be in OSU’s place. Think about it. Football goes to the prestigious ADVO Care 100 Bowl and the basketball team, with a little luck, may be hosting another BCI Tournament in March.

    We’re in the post-season in both major sports! The tickets are easy to get and the venues aren’t crowded. Beats a stupid BCS game or March madness any day. JB

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

    USC will be similar….very good to great defense — but overall the team is mistake prone, and wounded with Lane Kiffin gone. I see a similar game — let’s see if Rily learns his lesson (even though he claims to have 38+ years of coaching), and gets the W.

    OSU wins at home — 23 — 17

  • silverstream055 silverstream055 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Another comment from watching the game at Reser on Saturday, and then re-watching the game on Sunday via DVR.

    OSU’s recruiting from junior colleges is paying dividends.

    I love the competitiveness of Steven Nelson. He plays with a big chip on his shoulder (perhaps a result of the JuCo path he traveled — or maybe just his nature). SN does a better job of getting into the face and arms and legs of receivers than do other OSU cornerbacks. SN often gets tangled up with receivers. He’s already been busted for PI a few times, and I’m guessing we’ll see more PI calls against Nelson. But usually SN gets away with it, and as a result he makes a lot of plays.

    If Siale Hautau can stay healthy and on the field, he is going to help the Beavers down the stretch (and next season, too). In the fourth quarter, SH was getting a lot of reps, sometimes lining up at nose guard, other times in A or B gaps. SH fired out strong and more often than not won his individual battle against the opposing Stanford lineman. Rarely did SH get pushed back (although I do remember one play where a Stanford lineman grabbed SH by the jersey and twisted him to the ground — one of several flagrant holding calls that the refs failed to make against the Stanford O-line).

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

      If I recall, Stanford was not flagged for holding once the entire game.

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

      The Hogan scramble that led to a first down on their drive at the end of the first half there was a blatant hold on Stanford where he grabbed and took our D line player to the ground after he was beaten. Several of us saw it and no call. Stanford was also grabbing and holding our receivers and TE’s all night long as well.

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

        Apparently that’s how the game is played now. College football is becoming unwatchable by not enforcing the rule book. The nba didn’t enforce their rule book and by the mid/late nineties it became unwatchable to many loyal fans.

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

          NBA is the WORST example…calls for all-stars different than for journeyman different than for rookies. I had a friend that was a basketball referee he called it “WWF” and said it was unwatchable.

          • Dwill03 Dwill03 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

            Just go look at the ESPN short highlight reel of the game. Both of Gaffney’s Touchdowns in the clip are courtesy of major holds on players stepping into the lane to tackle. On the big run receiver #9 looks back for a flag before Gaffney even crosses the line. Not saying the Beaver would have made the tackle but the opportunity was taken away before they got a chance.

            And I’m not that the Beavers deserved to win the game, but Stanford’s TD’s weren’t exactly legit. Looks like they’re starting to get Duck treatment by the officials.

            http://espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=332990204

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

      There’s a great photo somewhere on OLive of a stanford Olineman tackling an OSU D lineman and taking him to the ground…you’d of thought the OSU D Lineman was advancing a fumble.

      We’ll see more of this against Oregon, and they’ll get away with it.

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

    big money on the beavs this week opened 3.5…already now 5…(missed the early action, darnit!)

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

    Kevin Bacon moment this morning. My receptionist says, “Conner’s team beat yours.” I had no idea what she was talking about. Finally seeing the puzzled look on my face, she says, “didn’t Stanford beat your team?” Conner McFadden is her daughter in law’s nephew and has been in my office a few times when he was in high school with her grandsons. Forgot all about him.
    BTW, forget about coaching. He apparently wants to go into politics. YUK!

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

      by the way, I note, just as someone had predicted here a year or two ago, Minnesota will be good by the time OSU plays them in ’17 and ’18. It’s amazing to look at the season records and see what Boise, Cinci, TCU, Penn State records are now, versus the years we played them. This is DeCarolis king Midas touch. Whoever he schedules out of conference is guaranteed to be gold by the time we line up with them.

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

        Luck O’ The Beavs is all this is…..come to expect it.

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

        I don’t think it matters if they’re hot or not. It’s not like Eastern Washington is having a great season. Sac State lost several Big Sky games after beating OSU. The main problem is, OSU makes mediocre teams look good in the non-conference.

  • wannabeav says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

    Perhaps I should have offered this comment way up top in this thread re: “critical” thinking and strategy: Like many I have been frustrated by Riley’s refusal to go for it on 4th down and by either punting at mid field and going for field goals when in or near the red zone. But here’s the thing: Riley seems tone deaf as to when to be aggressive or not. You don’t punt the ball or go for three when, for example, you are playing Oregon and are already down, say, 21-3. In that situation you MUST go for the 7 instead of availing yourself of 3, or go for a first down on 4th rather than punting when you are near mid field. As someone said in the game thread, it was clear by half way through the first quarter that the Beav D was going to be competitive which argued for a low scoring game. Riley should have taken the points. I felt that in real time while at the game when the outcome was in doubt. One other thought: two years in row we’ve given away against Stanford with a stupid ass fumble; and who knows how the game in 2011 might have gone if that stupid call hadn’t been made on Poyer. Frustrating.

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

      My two cents on the forth down calls. I certainly had my reservations about the 4th and 3 call (and still do) but I was comfortable with the 4th and 6inches call, or whatever it was. Maybe these were bad calls and Romaine hits both field goals, and then hits another on the last drive to win it (if it were possible to just go back and change two plays like that without altering the course of the rest of the game).

      But, the calls were not obvious stupidity to me as they seem to have been to so many here. Our D was also playing well, but I don’t think it was at all obvious that it was going to be able to keep that pace the entire game. I can’t be the only person who was afraid Stanford was eventually going to grind us up and the defense would break. That is my memory of how the UCLA game went the week before–3-0 at halftime, but Furd continued to do what they do and broke the Bruins down, 24-10.

      And with a close game, Stanford can continue to play to its advantage and do what it likes to do. The thinking may have been, we need a 10 plus point lead at half time, force Stanford to play from behind and to its weakness (i.e. make Hogan do it). Because if we continue to let them play their game, it’s only a matter of time before we get smothered up front and they kill us with the run. Field goals weren’t going to disrupt Stanford’s game plan.

      I don’t know what Riley was thinking (for all I know he just flipped a coin), and maybe he turned out to be wrong, and maybe the entire analysis above wrong, but people are acting as if this was a complete no brainer. I don’t see it as so clear cut.

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

        Not to mention there have been issues with the long snap & hold on kicks (or at least one kick where it affected the kick).

        I didn’t have issues with going for it so much as how he went for it and the lack of execution by the offensive line, the latter of which was a theme the entire game.

        I think when the team is playing at home, for its first 7-game win streak ever, with an experienced line of 300 pounders, they should be able to get one yard up the middle whether with your 6’5″ QB (who practically just has to fall forward if you move the pile at all), or your FB. The problem is though, that expectation is put on the OLine UNTIL it’s absolutely needed. The whole “Passing-is-our-game-we’re-not-a-good-run-blocking-team-yet” approach caught up with them.

        I still say Cav is way overrated.

        • whiskeysoakednapkins says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

          Spot on about Cav

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

          Unfortunately, the various pundits who predicted Stanford’s front would control the game, pressure Mannion consistently, and finally make us pay for being one dimensional were correct. I think it really hurt us not having Smith or Hamlett. We really need all the various weapons at our disposal if we’re not going to have a running game, at least against a team with a D as good as Furd’s. Credit to Mannion for not giving up the ball. I keep waiting for there to a be a game where he gets hammered and reverts back to a pick machine, but he held it together. He did have some bad throws, but his composure was good.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

            I agree. This was the first time Mannion has had quick pressure and responded with composure. Last year it was Vaz in all those situations. There’s not another team that will beat our Oline like that on our schedule. ASU might be decent, but only a smidge better than Utah was.

          • mckalk says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

            You throw 57 times with no interceptions, you’re doing something right. I just wish Riley would have helped him out with a few more runs to slow down the rush and didn’t it seem like Mannion was behind center more than any of the other games? Had to have been a reason for it?

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

            Stanford’s pass coverage was so impressive too. Even if their guy got beat and a completion was made, he was still able to reach out for a 1 armed shoe string tackle to avoid letting OSU get yards after catch.

          • silverstream055 silverstream055 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)

            Agree. Not only did Mannion avoid throwing any picks against Stanford, but he also avoided fumbling the ball despite being sacked 8 times — sometimes from behind and often hard — and while operating under heavy pressure on many other plays. From what we all saw Saturday, it appears that Mannion’s days as a turnover machine are truly behind him.

            It also appears that Mannion is stronger and tougher than he used to be. Mannion took a serious pounding from Stanford, but he hung in there. Watching the game on DVR, I could see that, towards the end of the game, Mannion was flinching a bit before getting hit (he’s human after all). But I don’t think Mannion was getting “happy feet” in the pocket, rushing his throws to avoid getting hit, or anything like that.

            Nor did I see Mannion — after suffering repeated sacks and hits — express frustration with his linemen, or otherwise complain even once. He just kept getting up and going about his business. No doubt he will earn even more respect from his teammates for doing that.

            So all credit to Mannion for his performance on Saturday. But there is of course room for improvement. Reviewing the video of the game-ending series, Mullaney was open at the goal line on the 3rd down play and Mannion apparently didn’t see him. And the 4th down pass to Kevin Cummings was thrown a little behind the receiver — if Mannion had thrown the ball a foot ahead, KC would have been much more likely to have caught and held on to the ball for the TD. So it goes….

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

            Getting hit hard by a sack from behind is the worst. Mannion will be walking around like a cowboy all week after the abuse he took Saturday.

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

    In breaking news NOBODY saw coming, Hautau and some of the lineman are going to look like cheetos this weekend. The puffy kind:

    http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2013/10/oregon_state_will_debut_orange.html#incart_river

    Maybe Riley can get these and the black ‘hip hip hooray’ on whatever talk show he was allegedly skyping with…

    I hope they don’t put these on the field for the CW with whatever UO wears – talk about a garish viewing experience…

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

    I understand why we wouldn’t want to run between the tackles a lot versus Stanford, but on the two fly sweeps that I remember, we had good gains on both (+7 yds or more). Why don’t we run around the end more? Why not have a play around the end other than the fly sweep, which can be fairly obvious when Cooks starts running across the field? Any comment on this?? I think more of run game would have kept Stanf on their toes.

    • Dwill03 Dwill03 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      If you watched the Utah game, Erickson put someone in motion on almost play faking a WR handoff (even from shotgun) and it completely threw Stanford out of sync. I too was surprised with Riley’s play calling for much of the game. Nothing but 3-5 step drops and rarely a fly sweep. Stanford could just tee off. Bummer.

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

        The Beaver shorting passing game was almost a run game. I think Mannion averaged less than five yards per attempt, but they moved the ball except for the sacks. 23 first downs needs to get you more than 12 points. That’s why I think FG’s would have been the proper call and Riley didn’t have a feel for type of game that was going to play out. Hogan did not impress me and he wasn’t going to get Stanford 30 points.

  • silverstream055 silverstream055 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    OT — a reason why Mannion will probably come back for his senior season in 2014, rather than entering the 2014 NFL Draft: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1812877-2014-nfl-draft-why-quarterback-is-the-overwhelming-strength-of-this-class

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

    This writer is a Duck homer, and never has anything complimentary to say about OSU, but it’s funny to read through his logic in his twitter feed. Also, does anybody else think the article cited is way off base? They criticize Mannion for lack of arm strength and point to his 6.6 yards per completion average as proof. The fact that he made a ton of short dump off passes in the face of pressure means he has poor arm strength? I’d say it says more about the pass blocking than anything. It’s not like Mannion forgot how to throw downfield in this game.

    Anyway, feel free to harass Casey Holdahl if you have twitter. He doesn’t handle criticism well and will likely get butthurt.

    Casey Holdahl ?@CHold

    This is why Mike Riley is a great coach: he makes QBs look NFL caliber … until they actually get to the NFL http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/nfl-draft-scout/24143898/nfl-draft-notes—-oregon-states-sean-mannion-fails-to-deliver

    https://twitter.com/CHold/status/394885744138780672

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

      Sounds like the writer watched some of the Stanford game highlights and hasn’t watched any other Beav games. If he had, he’d know Mannion can sling it. If anything, the number of short passes done under pressure shows he also has touch on the ball.

      • Jack says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

        Mannion also made some big boy throws which only went for five or so yards.

        I wonder if this guy thinks Mariota has a better arm than Mannion. He most certainly doesn’t have nearly the strength or accuracy Mannion does. He’s a second level arm right now. But I’m sure he thinks his guy is just awesome despite never making any of the throws Mannion makes in his sleep.

      • Jack says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

        Question:
        If I start a sentence with “Ironically enough,” would you all laugh as hard as I would for making you read it?

        I just finished reading this because I was bored. Now I’m laughing my metaphorical ass off. This dude doesn’t have a clue.

        Compare all Mannion’s throws to all the throws made by the first three QBs mentioned in this article this past weekend. Mariota was wildly inaccurate long in the first half, and UCLA was spying him well, taking his legs away. That’s why he was just made to manage the game in the second half with short pass after short pass. It’s not like he throws the ball on a bead anyway. So I’m not sure why this guy referenced him other than hype for Mariota is out there, and he is just a parrot.

        Hundley and Hogan? Are you kidding? Both have regressed this year. And it’s not even close.

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

    Still not sure why all the focus here and on the radio has been the 4th down calls? To me Boldens fumble is what cost us the game. 3 points instead of going for it on 4th and coming up short would made the score 15-20 and we would have still needed a touchdown. You can’t defer the kickoff to the second half so you can take control of the field and then instead give them the ball at the 11. 13-12 game we would have only needed a field goal to win on the last drive and not have to throw into crowded endzone.

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

      I think the main botched 4th down play was towards the end of the 1st half. Beavs tried the QB sneak, Stanford held and took over near midfield, then marched downfield and scored the TD with 7 seconds left. Had the Beavs punted it away, Stanford would likely not have gotten that TD to end the half.

      The Bolden fumble is just plain stupidity. The ball was caught at the 1 yard line. If he lets it land, it bounces into the endzone and Beavs start the half at the 25 yard line. Instead, he tried to get fancy and leaves his feet while running East–>West, and loses the ball at the 12. Easy score for Stanford in a game where scoring didn’t come easy.

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

        I am skeptical that any coach would coach his players to let kick-offs hit the ground on purpose unless the player is in the end zone or the kick is obviously going out of bounds. I am not convinced that 100% of the time a ball that hits at the 1 will go into the end zone.

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

          Are you convinced it will get fielded safely and not result in a turnover 100% of the time? Play the percentages.

          • BeavItOrNot says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

            Of course not. But you’re not accounting for returns that go for more than 25 yards or even TDs. Have you ever seen a player let a kick drop on purpose short of the end zone?

          • ReBEAVchainsaw1 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

            This is a great idea for returning kickoffs. I wonder why nobody has ever done that? Just let it bounce, don’t even attempt a return because of the 1.2% of the time the returner fumbles. Like you said, play the odds. The only negative thing I can think of is kickoffs are live, not immediately blown dead like a punt. So if it happens to bounce the wrong way, then you would have a clusterfuck of players scrambling to dive on it. On second thought BeavBlazer, that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard. Your Beav Card has been pulled until you start making some damn sense again.

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

            Yeah, you really can’t let it bounce on the ground like that. And it seems like most teams are still choosing to return kicks from inside the end zone even with the rule change.

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

            I stand corrected. Still don’t understand taking it out of the end zone.

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

            I agree with you there. Unless you have a special guy returning kicks, seems you should take the 25 yards unless the kick comes up short.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

          I don’t think I’ve ever seen a KO travel 65 yards then bounce backward. It could be because you’re right about how players are coached to field them. But the only ones I can clearly recall not being fielded in play are ones near the boundary. So that’s probably also a coaching decision.

          Are there any kickers out there who can tell us how you get an end over end kick off to go 65 yards?

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

    So now all we need is OR to beat Stanford and win out. Bada bing we are hosting the championship. Doesn’t get any easier than that. Maybe Beaver nation can come up with the funds to send the coaching staff on a 2 month vacation, starting now..

  • Recruiting Updates

  • Categories

  • Archives