Five candid concerns headed into Oregon

[KingDavid]

I'll put these in some sort of order, starting with the biggest concerns. And rather than focus just on the concerns, I've provided some commentary on what might be some solutions/answers.

1) CONCERN - Lack of experience on the road. Lack of experience on offense, in general. We had 5 line of scrimmage penalties on the OL . . . and we were in our own stadium. Those first two penalties killed our first drive, squelched any mojo we had from the crowd, and gave the ball back to UW with field position that arguably allowed for their score on the first play (if he starts that run from the 20, we'd have caught him and held them to a FG, perhaps). These sorts of penalties do not bode well for what we might do in the Autzen cauldron of fire. Add to this that this game will (arguably) be ENA's first real test: top 20 team, on the road. I don't want to take anything away from his first two games (well done, PT!), and I expect he'll come through this test doing great . . . but we have to own this as a legitimate concern. And if he gets injured???????? Yikes. We need the line to do a much better job of protecting, against a much better DL with more speed.

ANSWER #1: Is it too much to ask ENA, in his first road game of the season, to step up and be the calming force in the huddle? I don't think so. He's already shown the poise to come from behind in these first two games. You could argue that playing in front of the home crowd, given all of the talk about his play, was perhaps even more pressure than he'll have on the road this week. I think it helps him to look on the bench and know that if he doesn't get the job done, that we're hosed. He can't afford to have a pity party - and I don't believe he would, anyway. He's a cool customer. I look for ENA to further establish himself as the leader of the offense this week. That being said, the OL MUST SHOW MORE POISE this week. Even a cool-headed ENA will not be enough to overcome regularly starting with 1st and 15's and 2nd & 20's all day long.

2) CONCERN - Boundary Corner play (or lack thereof). We all know Oregon is going to challenge Lendy/Walker early and often.

ANSWER #2: I don't think it's honest to say that a player change is going to fix this problem. I think we need a combination of a few things. First, I think we need to see more from the pass-rush this week, and I think we will. Birdine is starting to get in his groove. I think that will help the DB's out. Second, I do think that Lendy has a better skill set (physical ability) as a cover corner than DJ, and that will help. He turns better and can recover faster. He won't allow for as much separation as did DJ. The downside is that I don't think he'll be as strong from the blitz as DJ or Walker. Third, I think we're going to see more help given to that side of the field. Smith has not been tested for a reason. I look for Venables to trust Smith even more this week by shading the safeties over another a yard or two to help out.

3) CONCERN: Run defense. no way in Hades we should be giving up 180 yards to Washington, at home. I was beside myself when K Clayton did that turf dive on the first play that UW took to the house. He might as well have had no arms at all. I was encouraged by the play in the second half. But folks, it's still Washington we're talking about. Is it just me, or does it seem like we're not the intimidators we usually are? I've seen one inspiring hit so far (the one where Rufus put the UAB QB out of the game). But even Rufus seems to be missing some of the intensity, and he's whiffed several times this year. Where's the swagger, fellas? This should be ranked in front of the boundary cover issue, on second thought.

ANSWER #3: I think most of the answers were provided in the second half. Better tackling. Granger stepped up. Also, I think we're going to see a LOT more creativity on the defensive side of the ball this week. Lots of shifts, blitzes. More of Nic Harris blitzing. I really like the package when he's in there. He's showed up much better than Pleasant & Lofton so far, IMO.

4) CONCERN - Bad case of the Dropsies. We have had too many drops . . . and not just from the receivers. I hope the receivers (and AD) have gotten it out of their system. No dropped passes this coming week, fellas.

ANSWER #4: Kelly was responsible for two of the big drops . . . but this was his first game to really have the ball thrown his way consistently. I bet we don't see more than one or two drops from him the rest of the season. Plus, ENA's accuracy and touch continues to improve, and with it, the receivers can focus more on the catch and less on wondering where/when the ball will arrive. In the end, there is no real "answer" for curing the dropsies except to just catch the freaking ball. We did better this week than against UAB. We'll continue to improve this coming week.

5) CONCERN: Lack of turnovers & negative turnover margin. What are we, -4 in the +/- column? After two games at home against sub-par competition, we should AT LEAST be positive in the turnover margin. Speaking of the dropsies, we have had stone hands on several interceptions, too.

ANSWER #5: As far as eliminating OUR turnovers goes, it seems to me that a better pocket presence from ENA would have eliminated both turnovers last week. That takes time to develop, and you can't do it in practice when you're wearing a blue jersey. I expect, with two games of live action under his belt, that we're going to see more effective pocket movement & scrambles out of the Ebony Ninja Assassin this coming week. And for our fumbles . . . I think we've seen AD's last fumble as a college player (the one against UAB). As far as creating turnovers goes, we have to put more pressure on the QB . . . and as noted above, I believe we can and will. Here's an early bet that either Birdine or Nic Harris will create a turnover this week by putting serious heat on Dixon. Here's hoping they throw a couple balls to Smith's side of the field. Not only do we know the guy can cover . . . but perhaps just as important: we know he can catch!!! We will not be able to create many turnovers through fumbles until we start wrapping up on the tackling better. As we saw this week with Stanback's fumble on the goal-line, it's almost ALWAYS the second defender that creates the fumble AFTER the runner has been controlled by the first hit/tackler. I look for our work at tackling to pay at least one or two fumble "dividends" this coming week.

PREDICTION:
I look for us to overcome a half-time deficit and pull out a close one.
Sooners: 24
Ducks: 23

P.S. If we address these concerns effectively and consistently, is there any reason we will not contend for #8? I know the odds are against us - they are against everyone. But I think we have reason for a lot of optimism. Our major concerns are on the defensive side of the ball . . . and they all can be fixed with hard work, discipline, and hustle. That's what the N/C schedule is for, IMO. Even if, God-forbid, we should lose this game, I really like our chances to win the Big XII this year, especially having seen the struggles of Dolt McCoy last week against a real defense.

P.P.S. Forgive the long post - it's Monday, I'm self-employed, and procrastinating in a major way on a big project!

[KingDavid]

I'll put these in some sort of order, starting with the biggest concerns. And rather than focus just on the concerns, I've provided some commentary on what might be some solutions/answers.

1) CONCERN - Lack of experience on the road. Lack of experience on offense, in general. We had 5 line of scrimmage penalties on the OL . . . and we were in our own stadium. Those first two penalties killed our first drive, squelched any mojo we had from the crowd, and gave the ball back to UW with field position that arguably allowed for their score on the first play (if he starts that run from the 20, we'd have caught him and held them to a FG, perhaps). These sorts of penalties do not bode well for what we might do in the Autzen cauldron of fire. Add to this that this game will (arguably) be ENA's first real test: top 20 team, on the road. I don't want to take anything away from his first two games (well done, PT!), and I expect he'll come through this test doing great . . . but we have to own this as a legitimate concern. And if he gets injured???????? Yikes. We need the line to do a much better job of protecting, against a much better DL with more speed.

ANSWER #1: Is it too much to ask ENA, in his first road game of the season, to step up and be the calming force in the huddle? I don't think so. He's already shown the poise to come from behind in these first two games. You could argue that playing in front of the home crowd, given all of the talk about his play, was perhaps even more pressure than he'll have on the road this week. I think it helps him to look on the bench and know that if he doesn't get the job done, that we're hosed. He can't afford to have a pity party - and I don't believe he would, anyway. He's a cool customer. I look for ENA to further establish himself as the leader of the offense this week. That being said, the OL MUST SHOW MORE POISE this week. Even a cool-headed ENA will not be enough to overcome regularly starting with 1st and 15's and 2nd & 20's all day long.

2) CONCERN - Boundary Corner play (or lack thereof). We all know Oregon is going to challenge Lendy/Walker early and often.

ANSWER #2: I don't think it's honest to say that a player change is going to fix this problem. I think we need a combination of a few things. First, I think we need to see more from the pass-rush this week, and I think we will. Birdine is starting to get in his groove. I think that will help the DB's out. Second, I do think that Lendy has a better skill set (physical ability) as a cover corner than DJ, and that will help. He turns better and can recover faster. He won't allow for as much separation as did DJ. The downside is that I don't think he'll be as strong from the blitz as DJ or Walker. Third, I think we're going to see more help given to that side of the field. Smith has not been tested for a reason. I look for Venables to trust Smith even more this week by shading the safeties over another a yard or two to help out.

3) CONCERN: Run defense. no way in Hades we should be giving up 180 yards to Washington, at home. I was beside myself when K Clayton did that turf dive on the first play that UW took to the house. He might as well have had no arms at all. I was encouraged by the play in the second half. But folks, it's still Washington we're talking about. Is it just me, or does it seem like we're not the intimidators we usually are? I've seen one inspiring hit so far (the one where Rufus put the UAB QB out of the game). But even Rufus seems to be missing some of the intensity, and he's whiffed several times this year. Where's the swagger, fellas? This should be ranked in front of the boundary cover issue, on second thought.

ANSWER #3: I think most of the answers were provided in the second half. Better tackling. Granger stepped up. Also, I think we're going to see a LOT more creativity on the defensive side of the ball this week. Lots of shifts, blitzes. More of Nic Harris blitzing. I really like the package when he's in there. He's showed up much better than Pleasant & Lofton so far, IMO.

4) CONCERN - Bad case of the Dropsies. We have had too many drops . . . and not just from the receivers. I hope the receivers (and AD) have gotten it out of their system. No dropped passes this coming week, fellas.

ANSWER #4: Kelly was responsible for two of the big drops . . . but this was his first game to really have the ball thrown his way consistently. I bet we don't see more than one or two drops from him the rest of the season. Plus, ENA's accuracy and touch continues to improve, and with it, the receivers can focus more on the catch and less on wondering where/when the ball will arrive. In the end, there is no real "answer" for curing the dropsies except to just catch the freaking ball. We did better this week than against UAB. We'll continue to improve this coming week.

5) CONCERN: Lack of turnovers & negative turnover margin. What are we, -4 in the +/- column? After two games at home against sub-par competition, we should AT LEAST be positive in the turnover margin. Speaking of the dropsies, we have had stone hands on several interceptions, too.

ANSWER #5: As far as eliminating OUR turnovers goes, it seems to me that a better pocket presence from ENA would have eliminated both turnovers last week. That takes time to develop, and you can't do it in practice when you're wearing a blue jersey. I expect, with two games of live action under his belt, that we're going to see more effective pocket movement & scrambles out of the Ebony Ninja Assassin this coming week. And for our fumbles . . . I think we've seen AD's last fumble as a college player (the one against UAB). As far as creating turnovers goes, we have to put more pressure on the QB . . . and as noted above, I believe we can and will. Here's an early bet that either Birdine or Nic Harris will create a turnover this week by putting serious heat on Dixon. Here's hoping they throw a couple balls to Smith's side of the field. Not only do we know the guy can cover . . . but perhaps just as important: we know he can catch!!! We will not be able to create many turnovers through fumbles until we start wrapping up on the tackling better. As we saw this week with Stanback's fumble on the goal-line, it's almost ALWAYS the second defender that creates the fumble AFTER the runner has been controlled by the first hit/tackler. I look for our work at tackling to pay at least one or two fumble "dividends" this coming week.

PREDICTION:
I look for us to overcome a half-time deficit and pull out a close one.
Sooners: 24
Ducks: 23

P.S. If we address these concerns effectively and consistently, is there any reason we will not contend for #8? I know the odds are against us - they are against everyone. But I think we have reason for a lot of optimism. Our major concerns are on the defensive side of the ball . . . and they all can be fixed with hard work, discipline, and hustle. That's what the N/C schedule is for, IMO. Even if, God-forbid, we should lose this game, I really like our chances to win the Big XII this year, especially having seen the struggles of Dolt McCoy last week against a real defense.

P.P.S. Forgive the long post - it's Monday, I'm self-employed, and procrastinating in a major way on a big project!

Re-rank on second thought:

1) Lack of experience (on the road)
2) Run defense
3) T/O Margin
4) Boundary Corner
5) Dropsies

[David Earl]

Nice write up. Thanks.

[rhombic21]

I agree, good points all around.

But I'd put road experience at the bottom.

Actually, I'm not concerned about it at all. This team has a ton of road experience.

Messner and Cooper both played in road games a year ago on the line. All of the receivers played significantly in road games against Nebraska, Texas Tech, and in the Bowl game.

Almost the entire defense has played in a bunch of big games, with the exception of Lendy Holmes. Even Jason Carter played last year at Tech. Many of those guys have even played in a few Texas games.

Paul Thompson lacks road experience at QB, true, but I really don't think that it'll be a major factor for him. Like you said, he's had so much pressure on him to play well, knowing that not only are Sooner fans going to be critical of his every throw, but that nationally people are paying attention to it. And he's a 5th year Senior, who did get game experience at WR a year ago, and who was part of some Sooner teams that went out and beat teams like Alabama, Nebraska, Colorado, Texas Tech, and Texas A+M on the road. I just don't see him getting flustered by it.

Oregon's team speed, on the other hand, is a concern for him. I don't know that PT has ever been under as much pressure, or been forced to make as many quick decisions as he will against the Ducks. Neither Washington or UAB are anywhere near Oregon's level in terms of defensive athleticism. It's one thing to look cool and calm in the pocket when you have time to set up and throw the ball. It's another thing to avoid making bad decisions when the game is moving at 100 miles an hour, and you have 2 seconds to make a throw.

[ultimatesooner1]

Nic Harris on the blitz reminds me of Brandon Shelby. Its great to see #5 sprinting into the backfield from all over the place

[KingDavid]

Nic Harris on the blitz reminds me of Brandon Shelby. Its great to see #5 sprinting into the backfield from all over the place

Only bigger and stronger. Dude needs to get over himself and ask for the start at LB. He's a freak.

[The Maestro]

Issue #6 - what do we do about those blinding yellow uni's for Oregon? It's a big week of preparation for our equipment crew to get shaded face shields on every helmet. Hope they have plenty of Phillips screwdrivers around the locker room.

[Ike]

Issue #6 - what do we do about those blinding yellow uni's for Oregon? It's a big week of preparation for our equipment crew to get shaded face shields on every helmet. Hope they have plenty of Phillips screwdrivers around the locker room.
I thought I read somewhere that the tinted face shields are illegal this year. Perhaps we'll be going with tinted contact lenses?

[mrowl]

one of the false starts can be blamed on the runnin' band near the s. end zone, so hopefuly they won't be going to Oregon.

[KingDavid]

one of the false starts can be blamed on the runnin' band near the s. end zone, so hopefuly they won't be going to Oregon.

??? What happened?

[mrowl]

??? What happened?

(I promised myself I wouldn't start a pride thread)

:mad:
:mad:
:mad:

So OU has the ball at the 10 yard line? And the runnin band decides they want to play boomer sooner right as the offense is starting to the line. So of course the whole south end zone stands up and starts clapping and cheering.

:mad:

false start. half the distance to the goal.

:mad:

[KingDavid]

(I promised myself I wouldn't start a pride thread)

:mad:
:mad:
:mad:

So OU has the ball at the 10 yard line? And the runnin band decides they want to play boomer sooner right as the offense is starting to the line. So of course the whole south end zone stands up and starts clapping and cheering.

:mad:

false start. half the distance to the goal.

:mad:

Maybe Stoops should invite them to practice all week and let them play right in the ears of the OL all practice long.

Nothing will compare to what they'll face this week. We need to grow up in a hurry.

[KingDavid]

Duke in particular - he's been responsible for most of the false starts. And he's right next to the QB.

[TrophyCollector]

I'll put these in some sort of order, starting with the biggest concerns. And rather than focus just on the concerns, I've provided some commentary on what might be some solutions/answers.

1) CONCERN - Lack of experience on the road. Lack of experience on offense, in general. We had 5 line of scrimmage penalties on the OL . . . and we were in our own stadium. Those first two penalties killed our first drive, squelched any mojo we had from the crowd, and gave the ball back to UW with field position that arguably allowed for their score on the first play (if he starts that run from the 20, we'd have caught him and held them to a FG, perhaps). These sorts of penalties do not bode well for what we might do in the Autzen cauldron of fire. Add to this that this game will (arguably) be ENA's first real test: top 20 team, on the road. I don't want to take anything away from his first two games (well done, PT!), and I expect he'll come through this test doing great . . . but we have to own this as a legitimate concern. And if he gets injured???????? Yikes. We need the line to do a much better job of protecting, against a much better DL with more speed.

ANSWER #1: Is it too much to ask ENA, in his first road game of the season, to step up and be the calming force in the huddle? I don't think so. He's already shown the poise to come from behind in these first two games. You could argue that playing in front of the home crowd, given all of the talk about his play, was perhaps even more pressure than he'll have on the road this week. I think it helps him to look on the bench and know that if he doesn't get the job done, that we're hosed. He can't afford to have a pity party - and I don't believe he would, anyway. He's a cool customer. I look for ENA to further establish himself as the leader of the offense this week. That being said, the OL MUST SHOW MORE POISE this week. Even a cool-headed ENA will not be enough to overcome regularly starting with 1st and 15's and 2nd & 20's all day long.

2) CONCERN - Boundary Corner play (or lack thereof). We all know Oregon is going to challenge Lendy/Walker early and often.

ANSWER #2: I don't think it's honest to say that a player change is going to fix this problem. I think we need a combination of a few things. First, I think we need to see more from the pass-rush this week, and I think we will. Birdine is starting to get in his groove. I think that will help the DB's out. Second, I do think that Lendy has a better skill set (physical ability) as a cover corner than DJ, and that will help. He turns better and can recover faster. He won't allow for as much separation as did DJ. The downside is that I don't think he'll be as strong from the blitz as DJ or Walker. Third, I think we're going to see more help given to that side of the field. Smith has not been tested for a reason. I look for Venables to trust Smith even more this week by shading the safeties over another a yard or two to help out.

3) CONCERN: Run defense. no way in Hades we should be giving up 180 yards to Washington, at home. I was beside myself when K Clayton did that turf dive on the first play that UW took to the house. He might as well have had no arms at all. I was encouraged by the play in the second half. But folks, it's still Washington we're talking about. Is it just me, or does it seem like we're not the intimidators we usually are? I've seen one inspiring hit so far (the one where Rufus put the UAB QB out of the game). But even Rufus seems to be missing some of the intensity, and he's whiffed several times this year. Where's the swagger, fellas? This should be ranked in front of the boundary cover issue, on second thought.

ANSWER #3: I think most of the answers were provided in the second half. Better tackling. Granger stepped up. Also, I think we're going to see a LOT more creativity on the defensive side of the ball this week. Lots of shifts, blitzes. More of Nic Harris blitzing. I really like the package when he's in there. He's showed up much better than Pleasant & Lofton so far, IMO.

4) CONCERN - Bad case of the Dropsies. We have had too many drops . . . and not just from the receivers. I hope the receivers (and AD) have gotten it out of their system. No dropped passes this coming week, fellas.

ANSWER #4: Kelly was responsible for two of the big drops . . . but this was his first game to really have the ball thrown his way consistently. I bet we don't see more than one or two drops from him the rest of the season. Plus, ENA's accuracy and touch continues to improve, and with it, the receivers can focus more on the catch and less on wondering where/when the ball will arrive. In the end, there is no real "answer" for curing the dropsies except to just catch the freaking ball. We did better this week than against UAB. We'll continue to improve this coming week.

5) CONCERN: Lack of turnovers & negative turnover margin. What are we, -4 in the +/- column? After two games at home against sub-par competition, we should AT LEAST be positive in the turnover margin. Speaking of the dropsies, we have had stone hands on several interceptions, too.

ANSWER #5: As far as eliminating OUR turnovers goes, it seems to me that a better pocket presence from ENA would have eliminated both turnovers last week. That takes time to develop, and you can't do it in practice when you're wearing a blue jersey. I expect, with two games of live action under his belt, that we're going to see more effective pocket movement & scrambles out of the Ebony Ninja Assassin this coming week. And for our fumbles . . . I think we've seen AD's last fumble as a college player (the one against UAB). As far as creating turnovers goes, we have to put more pressure on the QB . . . and as noted above, I believe we can and will. Here's an early bet that either Birdine or Nic Harris will create a turnover this week by putting serious heat on Dixon. Here's hoping they throw a couple balls to Smith's side of the field. Not only do we know the guy can cover . . . but perhaps just as important: we know he can catch!!! We will not be able to create many turnovers through fumbles until we start wrapping up on the tackling better. As we saw this week with Stanback's fumble on the goal-line, it's almost ALWAYS the second defender that creates the fumble AFTER the runner has been controlled by the first hit/tackler. I look for our work at tackling to pay at least one or two fumble "dividends" this coming week.

PREDICTION:
I look for us to overcome a half-time deficit and pull out a close one.
Sooners: 24
Ducks: 23

P.S. If we address these concerns effectively and consistently, is there any reason we will not contend for #8? I know the odds are against us - they are against everyone. But I think we have reason for a lot of optimism. Our major concerns are on the defensive side of the ball . . . and they all can be fixed with hard work, discipline, and hustle. That's what the N/C schedule is for, IMO. Even if, God-forbid, we should lose this game, I really like our chances to win the Big XII this year, especially having seen the struggles of Dolt McCoy last week against a real defense.

P.P.S. Forgive the long post - it's Monday, I'm self-employed, and procrastinating in a major way on a big project!

Too long for me to read, but Boomer Sooner!

[KingDavid]

Too long for me to read, but Boomer Sooner!

I'm good to publish an essay at this site at least 3 or 4 times a year.:)

[sooner94]

Good stuff. Thanks for posting.

I'm concerned with the run game in between the tackles. Yeah, we can run AD outside against anyone, but on short yardage situations it would be nice to get some yards on the middle if we need to. Not much of a push up the middle so far this year. I think we will have a few short yardage situations that will be key situations in the game on Saturday.

[KingDavid]

Good stuff. Thanks for posting.

I'm concerned with the run game in between the tackles. Yeah, we can run AD outside against anyone, but on short yardage situations it would be nice to get some yards on the middle if we need to. Not much of a push up the middle so far this year. I think we will have a few short yardage situations that will be key situations in the game on Saturday.

Good point. We've not established much between the tackles. In fact, you could argue that we've been pretty soft at the LOS this year so far, on both sides of the ball. Not good thing to say.

I think the defense is going to have its best day of the year against the run this week.

[soonercody]

Good points. Another concern I have is the deep ball. Paul can chuck it a long way, but not with much accuracy so far. Without that, stacking the line and playing man or a 1 safety zone will be the strategy, leaving 8 in the box to try to contain AD.

[KingDavid]

Good points. Another concern I have is the deep ball. Paul can chuck it a long way, but not with much accuracy so far. Without that, stacking the line and playing man or a 1 safety zone will be the strategy, leaving 8 in the box to try to contain AD.

I think he made some big strides with the deep pass. Three passes in particular were right on target: the 35 yard TD to Kelly. The post/corner route to Finley. And the deep fly to Kelly would have been a TD if the defender didn't interfere. David Earl made this point in his game summary.

But . . . I suppose you could say that none of these were true deep patterns,, in terms of launching the ball 40+ yards before the catch.

I think ENA showed enough progress to where Oregon cannot forget about the deep patterns.

[sooneron]

If you can consistently throw the ball 25 yards downfield. Teams won't stack the box. You don't have to chuck it deep but 3 times.

[KingDavid]

If you can consistently throw the ball 25 yards downfield. Teams won't stack the box. You don't have to chuck it deep but 3 times.

precisely my point.

[1991SOONER]

I think we are going to expose Oregon and smear the ducks by 12 or more. I won my last two bets, so mark it down;)

[Readyfor8]

Burton - I'm not going to quote your whole post again :)

Point #1) I agree that the penalties have to go, but look to those drives that do have penalties to cause a punt and those that dont we capitalize on. OU has improved on Third Down Conversions from 2-11 to 5-12 between the first two games thats 18% to 41% improvement. We can afford some penalties if we continue to improve 3 down conversions.

I don't feel our penalties hurt us as much as they would a team with average special teams. Don't get me wrong the penalties have to be fixed, but we will win the field position battle if our defense plays up to par.

Point #2) Don't shoot me, but I think we should start DJ Wolfe at the corner. He plays the run better than any other corner we have. The problem is that Wolfe put on weight this year and lost speed, a burner down the sideline is going to get a few steps on him, and that causes a big play.

A big improvement may be to stop playing the nickel and dime packages and play 3 LB's. Watch our LB's in the second half vs. UW compared to the first half. They are out of position and Wolfe is cheating up to play the run. If we start Lindy like in the second half we should be playing a 4-3 or a 5-2 front. We won't rattle Dixon, but we can force them to pass if we play solid run defense which should shut them down to being one dimentional.

Point #3) Like I said Run Defense is going to be key vs. the Ducks. Run Defense forces them to throw the pass, and thier recievers aren't nearly as talented as they were going into the Holiday Bowl last year. Thier top 3 recievers have very little experience catching the ball. Force that young recieving core to beat us by shutting down Snoop, and we win this one going away.

Point #4) I totally agree here. What happened to a recieving core that spent thier free time catching tennis balls? Joe Jon, Malcom, and AD are our top recievers at the moment. But Fred Strong seems reliable on 3rd downs. Get more balls to 81 for the "dink and dunk" plays and we can keep that Oregon Offense off the field.

Point #5) Oregon is +1 in Turnover Margin while we are -4. I think only two of those are forced turnovers. Better OLine play and better WR play can eliminate those TO's. And some stickum for #6 please!!! :D

Overall good info, great job mburton

[sooner94]

I think we are going to expose Oregon and smear the ducks by 12 or more. I won my last two bets, so mark it down;)

If we tackle the way we should I think we can do it. I think we will be able to move the ball well. The D just needs to play the way it is capable of playing.

[QuackAttack]

Insightful post. Well done.

For me, Defense is key. I believe both teams will be able to score, especially in the second half once defenses tire. Turnovers, Special Teams, and critical defensive stops will be the difference.

It could come down to whomever has the ball last.

[sooner969]

IF the defense finally comes to play, and that is a big IF, but if they do OU will win going away. I think the offense will continue to improve exponentially.

[KingDavid]

IF the defense finally comes to play, and that is a big IF, but if they do OU will win going away. I think the offense will continue to improve exponentially.

I think you're right . . . as long at the offense doesn't wilt. It's a lot to ask for that much improvement (multiple fascets) on defense given their inconsistency thus far . . . but you're right, if it happens, it could get ugly for the ducks.

On the other hand, what if the offense gets jittery on the road - very well could happen with this line nad PT's lack of experience on the road. Then it's a close game again.

I can see a close OU win. I can see a big OU win. I can see everything in between.

I can see a close OU loss - down to the wire.

Fortunately, I cannot see a game where Oregon runs away with it. The ONLY way that happens is if we give them a plus 5 in the turnovers. Could happen, but not likely at all.

Eager to watch it unfold. Thank for he post!

[soonerfootball]

Good stuff. Thanks for posting.

I'm concerned with the run game in between the tackles. Yeah, we can run AD outside against anyone, but on short yardage situations it would be nice to get some yards on the middle if we need to. Not much of a push up the middle so far this year. I think we will have a few short yardage situations that will be key situations in the game on Saturday.


Yeah, you are right expecially after Oregon has lost Heloti Nata...they are weak in the middle now and I think that Fresno was trying to exploit that against Oregon last week they did ok with it to..only difference is we have AD ...Also, if we practice the run up the gut alot this week it will help our defensive tackles get ready for the run against Oregon so we can only hope for the best. I think we will see alot of runs up the middle since it seems to be a weak point of the oregon d.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Look, some of you are starting to overthink the Oregon game. These aren't the 1993 Dallas Cowboys, folks. They're not even near the best in the 2006 Pac-10.

I watched their game Saturday night against Fresno State and took these main points away from it:

1. Their run defense is as bad as ours. Fresno State's tailback had 150+ yards rushing.

2. The only defensive back with any Division I-A playing experience coming in the season broke his leg and is out for the rest of the season. So, their secondary is as suspect as ours.

3. Their quarterback is too little. I'd be shocked if the kid weighs more than 165. I fear we'll do him great physical harm.

Other than Texas Tech, we may not play a more overrated team this year than Oregon.