Connor's thoughts on the Arizona Game
by ConnorOSU on Sep 28, 2009 8:30 AM PDT
in Oregon State Football
Email
PrintThe Wildcats defeated the Beavers 37-32 on a brilliantly sunny day in Corvallis. Here are my thoughts on the game.
Quarterback
Sean went 31-47 with 2 touchdowns and 2 intereceptions. But once again, Sean did not have a good game. His throws were not sharp and forced too many balls. He was lucky that only two got picked off. He did a better job this week of throwing the ball away, but still took too many sacks.
Look, Sean is a fine QB, and if he was our only choice we would be thrilled to have him as our starter. But, we've got better, and his name is Lyle Moevao. And anyone in Reser Stadium yesterday could see that Lyle is the right choice. When they brought in Lyle for one play, the crowd gave him a standing ovation, and his teammates jumped around him in the huddle. I don't think I was the only one who got goosebumps when he went under center for that one snap.
Moevao provides a spark we need, and I know I sound like I'm jumping ship a little early but, if we want to go to a Bowl game and save our season, we need to have Lyle under center. Argue with me if you want to, but first watch a little of yesterday's game, then watch a game from last year in which Moevao played in. Then we can talk.
Running Back
Jacquizz Rodgers had 16 carries for 85 yards yesterday. He broke off a couple of good runs including two touchdowns, but mostly had antoher day of grinding out 3 or 4 yards at a time.
Recievers
Jacquizz also had a good day catching balls through the air. He was mostly effective through the screen pass collecting 70 yards on 13 catches. James Rodgers had another great day with 8 catches for 119 yards. Damola "Microwave" Adeniji had a great game as well, with 6 catches for 70 yards. He also had the Beavers first touchdown of the game on a twice tipped ball.
Aaron Nichols had a 13 yard touchdown catch across the middle for the Beavers. That was his only catch of the day. Darrel Catchings had one reception for 6 yards before leaving the game due to injury. Overall, it was a pretty good game for the wideouts, even though it could of been better.
O-Line
The O-Line struggled for the second straight week in a row. They didn't open any good holes for Quizz and didn't give Sean any time to throw. And I don't want to harp on them because they probably wouldn't of mattered but, the blocking on our three final plays was absolutely terrible. There were defenders rushing at Sean a half second after they snapped the ball.
I said it last week and I'll say it again, our season hangs on the play at those positions, and if they don't improve, we might be in for a long year.
Defense
Once again, the defense had a rough game. Mark Banker's bunch gave up 35 points against a QB that had never started a college game before, was missing their best player, and had to play their third string running back for the entire second half.
We also need to create turnovers. Our defense's in the past were very good at creating turnovers, but this year we usually only have one or zero a game. We will definitely need to improve in that aspect.
Usually our defense is the one thing we can rely on. It's not looking that way this season.
Once again, our Special Teams unit was very good. Kahut knocked in two field goals and four extra points, and all of his kickoffs looked good. Especially the onside kick, we might need one of those later this year so it's nice to see that we are good at those.
Also, James Rodgers did a pretty good job recieveing punts and kickoffs, so overall a pretty good day for him.
Arizona
I thought the Wildcats played a great game, especially on offense. Nick Foles had a great game, throwing for 254 yards, three touchdowns, and no interceptions. I wouldn't be surprised if they contended for the top half of the Pac-10 this year.
The Crowd
I thought the crowd of 42,120 was very loud, but I don't understand why we aren't getting at least 43,000 for a Pac-10 game. If we want to start expanding our stadium again, we are going to have to start selling out or at least getting close to it.
Overall, the crowd was pretty loud and drew a couple of false starts for Arizona, so that is all that matters.
Short Pac-10 Recap
Washington-UW looked terrible at Stanford in a classic let down game. They take on Notre Dame next week.
Washington State-Surprisingly, the Cougs didn't look terrible at SC, losing 27-6. They play at Oregon next Saturday.
Oregon-The Ducks are back again, defeating Cal 42-3. They're just in time for their annual October/November slide!
Oregon State-The Beavers just didn't have enough to beat Arizona, losing 37-32. They go to Tempe next week.
California-Tedford poops the bed again in a big game. Cal has to bounce back quickly as they play SC next week.
Stanford-The Cardinal are on top of the Pac-10 after their win over Washington. They play UCLA next Saturday.
USC-The Trojans didn't look all that impressive against Wazzu. They will have to play a lot better next week at Cal.
Arizona-The Wildcats picked up a huge win in Corvallis over the weekend. They have a bye next week.
Arizona State-The Sun Devils played Georgia tough Between the Hedges, losing a heartbreaker 20-17.
Pac-10 Power Rankings
1. Oregon
2. Stanford
3. UCLA
4. Arizona
5. USC
6. Arizona State
7. Oregon State
8. Washington
9. California
10. Washington State
Final Thoughts
The Beavers are an interesting team right now. In one hand, you could look at it as the usual slow starting Beavers, and that they might upset a couple of teams down the stretch and finish with a 7, 8, or 9 win season. But on the other hand, you can see a team that is struggling a ton at defense and on the O-Line, and that they might only have a five or six win year.
I think it is too early to tell right now. We will learn a lot next week at ASU about our team as a whole and how they can step up in the face of adversity. We've got the athletes and the playmakers, we just need to put it all together and get some wins. Simple as that.
It might be a tough year for the Beavers, we just have to acknowlege that. And of course, that might all change when we are talking next Sunday. College Football is like that. All we can do as a fan is root our hardest, and cheer them on when we take on Stanford in a couple of weeks. We need to trust in Coach Riley that he will figure out the rest.
Today's Poll
Who will start at Quarterback next Saturday?
39 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
qb/line
Goosebumps is not a reason to start anyone. Moevao’s one throw was slow, and WAY off target.
I understand the qb is the one position everybody looks to, but the line simply isn’t good enough yet to judge Canfield. Yeah he makes mistakes but an honest look at Moevao’s past indicates a slow arm, and a lack of ability to get the ball downfield. Also he simply doesn’t read plays fast enough. With Quizz, this team needs a deep threat or we will see 8 or 9 near the line every frigging week.
You also have to look at how the qb situation has been handled. Canfield did not get all the reps that he should have because there were “two no. 1 qb’s”. Which was ridiculous.
The second string qb is always going to be the most popular person on the team. It’s time to improve, give the job to Canfield for good (for mental reasons and reps) and get this thing going. Lot’s of room to improve.
First of all
I never said that goosebumps was a reason to start him. I was explaning my feeling when he went under center. I don’t know how you classify as slow either. It was off target, but he was doing exactly what Canfield doesn’t do. Put the ball where only his reciever can catch it. We shouldn’t say that he shouldn’t start because his first throw of the season was a little off target. We’ve heard how he has been doing well in practice so I don’t think we should judge him on that one pass.
You are right in the fact that our line isn’t good, but I think that’s one of the reasons we need Moevao. He is more mobile. I agree that Moevao can’t throw the ball down field, but Riley hasn’t called any plays to throw downfield. The longest one he called was like a 30 yarder against PSU.
I agree that the 2nd String QB is always going to be the most popular player on the team. It’s like that in any sport. But when it boils down to it, do you want to have a backup QB’s head right or wins. I know I sound like an ass saying that, but I’ll take the W.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
Urph
When I saw Foles warming up I thought, “Oh, this hapless goof from the ’80s is gonna get crushed” and then he did exactly what I would like our QB to do.
I wasn’t maddest about the repeat of Tuimaunei’s inability to cover anybody, adding to it the inability to wrap up.
It wasn’t the missed tackles.
Not even the total meltdown of the O-line at the end just as the TV announcers were crowing about OSU’s vaunted two-minute offense like this is the thing we lick our chops for.
No…the most infuriating thing was five yard pass plays on third and long. Will somebody please, please enlighten me about whassup with that? Is it shite play-calling? Receivers not running correct routes? Poor math skills? It’s happening consistently and because of it my formerly clean act has me now workin’ blue in the family room.
Help me out, folks….five yards on third and 10. Christ on a bike.
by Joe A. on Sep 28, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I don't get that either
I was going to do another section on Coaching/Play Calling, but that was the only thing I could think of to complain about so I decided not to put it in there. But yes, that doesn’t make any sense.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
Quizz
I totally agree with those short passes on third and long. I don’t know about you guys, but I don’t like seeing Quizz with 13 receptions. When he catches those short passes in the middle there’s always a linebacker waiting to tee-off on him. It was a play like that against Arizona last year that put him out for the season. I want to see 20+ carries like last year. Canfield has a good arm but holding the ball for 5-7 seconds and then making a 2 yard dump pass kinda negates that positive aspect of his game.
Very good points firewood
I totally agree with them.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
I'm leaning the same way
when Quizz carried 20+ last season it really worked. Now it seems that Canfield is using the dump off as a crutch. Shouldn’t he be making the longer throws to the spot where a receiver will be, instead of staring down the receiver until he completes the route. I know that is an over-simplification, but he’s telegraphing the play and the receiver never gets a chance to get open….. hence the dump off or sack. Why is everyone aprehensive about using the word “Rebuilding”. Does any one think that maybe the Beavs have come to a plateau with Sean and Lyle? They both have their +’s and -‘s and are great guys, but you’d think that they would be a little farther along after 4 or 5 years. Maybe the time off with surgery has somewhat stunted their growth. Looking forward I’m anxious to see the competition between Lalich and Katz, and put the 1A and 1B QB situation behind us. GO BEAVs!!
Personally
Why is everyone aprehensive about using the word "Rebuilding". Does any one think that maybe the Beavs have come to a plateau with Sean and Lyle?
I don’t like considering it “rebuilding” because that implies to me that we are settling for less than we should be settling for. Riley has been in place long enough now that he is totally dealing with players he has recruited and ones he thinks fit his coaching staff’s systems. We should not have to rebuild, we should be “reloading” every year.
As for Lyle, and Sean too, those two in combination last year brought us to almost the Rose Bowl so they should be able to do it again with even a new batch of key players (though Quizz and James have returned), I don’t like the implication that maybe we settling for second best and let’s wait until next year to see if can get better. For me personally, at this stage of the program’s development, I just think that is a losing mind-set to get into and means we’ll always be waiting. Yes, to be honest I will say that next year with James as a senior and Quizz as a junior, along with these other younger players getting experience, should stack up really nicely. But again why settle for a 7 and 5 or 6 and 6 record this year when the team can do better? The team didn’t settle for it last year when the talk was all about “rebuilding” and how much the team loss.
Rebuilding is when you have a deal like when Riley came in after Erickson left and Riley had to slowly “rebuild” the program to his system.
Sure we lost some key position players but this program is established enough where people need to step up, we’ve done it year after year now, this year should be no different. Should being the key word/idea here though, and will it? Don’t know, just my thoughts.
-RVM
Totally agree
On your points about rebuilding. I hate that word.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
Isn’t this the first year of all Riley recruits?
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
I don't think so
I’m not 100% sure though.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
According to Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_State_Beavers_football#Season_Records
Mike Riley took back over for the 2003 season. If you count redshirts (I don’t think you guys have anyone there in their 6th year do you?), then 2008 should have been the last season that anyone from the Erickson regime would be on the team. In my mind, this year and next year are big tests of the recruiting and coaching strategies of Riley because there shouldn’t be any hold overs talentwise from the previous administration.
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
Can't quite tell if this helps or hurts my argument
But we should not be rebuilding either way! We should be winning!
Or otherwise stated as agreement with this: “In my mind, this year and next year are big tests of the recruiting and coaching strategies of Riley.”
-RVM
I’m not sure if it helps or hurts, maybe just more a statement of fact.
--Dominic, Addicted to Quack
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
I think though, even with some hold overs,
that Riley basically established his system on the program really around 2006, maybe for the sake of argument I would go so far as saying 2007. So any rebuilding should have ended then, if not before.
Oh, and yes I also dislike that label.
-RVM
That battle between Lalich and Katz should be good
I’ve been looking forward to that ever since Lalich transfered.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
Lalich=Matt Moore
It will go down the same way—he’ll struggle, we’ll groan, but ultimately he’ll be the best guy on the roster and OSU will be better for it. I just have this gut feeling that he’s going to be good.
In my heart, all I want is to see Katz tear it up though. I hope he can be the guy. Cody Vaz is apparently a great athlete, so we can look to that name in a few years hopefully. Either way, as much as I like Lyle and to a lesser extent Canfield, I’m anxious for the young ones to come up. We need some new faces in the backfield.
What’s truly disappointing about the Arizona game is that Senior leadership at the quarterback position was supposed to be our huge advantage over other P-10 teams this year, so for Canfield to be outplayed by someone starting his first college game on the road gives me pause for concern.
Also, I’m glad others are frustrated by the 4 yard dump off throws on third and long. What I don’t get is that either the plays are not designed to hit Jacquizz in stride or they are not being executed correctly. He basically goes down a couple of yards, curls and sits and waits while a LB has time to tee off on him. He doesn’t even have time to make anyone miss a tackle. I’d rather see an incompletion 15 yards downfield than that play.
Well I don't know about the incompletion
But I agree with most of your points.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
Well, at least with a downfield incompletion
…there was an opportunity for a first down there. With the feeble short pass, there’s scant possibility of a first down. So yer doomed from the time the play is called in the huddle. I don’t understand that. Don’t. Understand. It.
I’m not talking about the middle pass to Quizz….he’s running a slant and it’s been an effective play and allows him to find some space, and it’s usually thrown to him about eight yards deep. But running directly across the field perpendicular to the LOS with a ‘backer draped all over him…that is not an effective play. But don’t get me wrong, I’m all about long drives consisting of five yard plays all the way there. This is an ok play on first down. Or second down. Just not third and long.
On an unrelated note, even though our D-line wasn’t putting a ton of pressure on Foles, he was a VERY accurate passer. Our D-backs weren’t doing a terrible job in coverage (TACKLING, a different matter), the dude was just hitting guys in stride NICELY. We had ample opportunity to do the same thing…guys were getting open, the ball was thrown over their heads. It’s fun to bat around the emotional arguments like QB changes and so forth, but the fact is this dude Foles is a player who didn’t get rattled and executed nicely. Not the most mobile chap, but he played like a much more mobile guy in that he didn’t lose his sh*t when getting chased out and found the open guy nicely.
plus
Foles just did those floater jobs too that are very hard to defend in one-on-one coverage. If the receiver is playing it correctly and not giving it away the d-back can’t turn around to look because they will lose their man and this is a sure way in getting burned for long TDs, and then the back has to time it perfectly (which they actually did in the game of some great plays). But to also critique the backs yes they need to tackle better and also need to get those mid-red zone passes covered MUCH better. But that all said QB pressure though will help a lot in the near future.
-RVM
There were too many plays where our guy just got flat out BURNED on loose, weak-ass coverage. They have the speed to stay with these guys, they just appear to lack the intelligence to actually defend them.
I’d say there are at least two guys who are quickly playing themselves OFF the field. There needs to be a better option somewhere on that bench…
One thing though is that it just isn’t the backs fault for they can make the plays, and I think this all comes back to the defensive line not getting to the QBs and also the linebackers don’t seem to be mixing up pass rushes very well right now. All of the weaknesses and inexperience are playing off of each other in not pretty ways.
I don’t know it just all has to come together more, this team is not really clicking well as a team (both sides of the ball), so the question becomes how many do we want to see replaced with bench players? I’m of the mind-set that sooner or later we are going have to settle for more building game experience versus keep rolling the dice on the instant fix off the bench.
Yes I know this is not the best scenario with the team now in the thick of the Pac-10 season, but for as deep as Riley has made this program it still is not that deep.
But we’ve been down this road before and it just frustrates the heck out of me with these slow starts, I know I should be patient but still the season is too quick to always start in a hole. Bench play the answer? Who knows.
-RVM
I agree with the DL underachieving. It’s painful. What I had thought of as a bright spot on this roster has turned out to be yet another struggling unit. People seem to have Paea figured out for the time being and the young ends aren’t providing the speed or contain that we’ve enjoyed in years past. The DL needs to step up and take some pressure off of that secondary without a doubt.
As far as sticking with guys simply to get game experience I think I disagree. I think that if guys aren’t performing early in the season they should know that they need to perform and open the lineup to competition. This is also an experiment in chemistry, seeing how certain lineups look and shaking things up until you get a good mix out on the field. So far, chemistry also seems to be a pretty big issue.
This is the week they fix it though, right?
I actually do agree about shaking things up a bit, but there is a point though. That’s all. I mean right now who would the coaching need to pull to make it work? Seems like it isn’t clicking in a lot of spots. It’s just a fine line between forcing the issue and making people sit and gambling too much and really getting burned. Personally I’m not sure where we are at though (why I’m staying out of the QB debate for the moment).
I think maybe in the secondary more rotation throughout the game, but I don’t know if I like the idea of totally sitting out the starters at this point. By game experience I mean more of pulling someone off the bench totally cold can really backfire too. The whole “feel” for actual game time stuff and if you keep flipping the starters I worry they will never get a good mental and physical rhythm to being in the game. But that said I do agree and if it ain’t working it ain’t working.
This week and fixing? Of course! They are just waiting to break the 40 years curse! Keeping us in suspense you know.
-RVM
I’m reluctant to curse Canfield only because I don’t think Moevao is our cure-all. I can’t even begin to think of who our best option is. I’ll leave that to the coaches.
We need more rotation on that D, that’s for sure. I say keep tinkering with it until things click into place. Something’s gotta give.
My point exactly
I was being a little sarcastic on incompletions, but Joe A gets my point. A three yard pass over the middle with the LB in poistion on third and nine has no chance. If you are running a 12 yard down and out or even a slant in stride at least there is a chance of keeping the drive alive.
I think we should probably start Canfield,
but I also think they need to get Moevao at least a quarter of action. Moevao didn’t do anything to lose his starting job he got injured. He deserves the oppurtunity to go in there and bang it out. If he comes in makes smart reads and crisp throws and Canfield isn’t getting it done I think it would be time for Moevao to be the starting QB.
by fishinbeaverguy on Sep 29, 2009 12:09 PM PDT reply actions
Mostly agree
But it sounds like you want a two-QB system. I really don’t ean that. All I want is a QB that will get us some wins.
Hi, my name's Connor and I am addicted to College Football
Sit em / start em?
One thing that compounds the issue that at some positions, there just aren’t as many viable options as at others.
The idea of sitting down players if there is something better on the bench works better with a USC-type roster, where there probably is a viable player waiting at any given position.
I’m concerned about the Beavers’ defensive line play, for example, but truly don’t see any better options. So you go with the best you have, and try to work with it.
QB is another matter, where there is a good starter (despite the noted problems), but there MAY be a better option that is not playing.
The secondary is really an upset stomach looking to happen, as that is a position that players need to play with some consistency to get a feel for the game and opponent. There may need to be a change or two, while we may need to ride things out with others. The early projected depth chart shows, for example, Suaesi Tuimaunei starting again. Not sure if that should be or will be the case. (This is the same depth chart that shows Darrell Catchings second at SE, even though he is out for at least several games.)
The linebackers I don’t think deserve too much heat for not applying pressure, because of the limited blitzing that has been called. They have been mostly deployed to help the secondary. That doesn’t relieve them all of the burden though. As Arizona demonstrated, keeping Keaton Kristick healthy is just a crucial as keeping the Rodgers brothers healthy.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
Go Beavs!
Is it possible
That the DL rotation may be too deep? Is it possible that a deep rotation hampers consistency? Is it possible for Coach Banker to move players around on the DL to give a different look? I agree with the sentiment from everyone that there are shortcomings that need to be repaired. I only toss these questions out there to stimulate the thinking process. GO BEAVs!!
DL
I think it’s also interesting that after four games there still haven’t been any sacks where someone completely beats his man and comes free on the QB. I don’t know if it’s a strength issue, talent, scheme or what, but compared to last year it’s a dramatic fall.
Another thought on the Zona game. If Jacquizz is completely healthy, 16 carries is not enough. i don’t mind the Bernard strategy of 30 carries and wear the opposition down. I loved some of those drives in ’07 where the Beavs would run the ball 5 or 6 straight times, fly sweep it and then hit a deep route or even look at the USC game last year basically the same type of attack.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Beavers Football Schedule
| Sacramento St. | Sat 09/03 | L 28 - 29 |
@
Wisconsin
|
Sat 09/10 | L 0 - 35 |
|
UCLA
|
Sat 09/24 | L 19 - 27 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Sat 10/01 | L 20 - 35 |
|
Arizona
|
Sat 10/08 | W 37 - 27 |
|
BYU
|
Sat 10/15 | L 28 - 38 |
|
@
Washington St.
|
Sat 10/22 | W 44 - 21 |
|
@
Utah
|
Sat 10/29 | L 8 - 27 |
|
Stanford
|
Sat 11/05 | L 13 - 38 |
|
@
California
|
Sat 11/12 | L 6 - 23 |
|
Washington
|
Sat 11/19 | W 38 - 21 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Sat 11/26 | L 21 - 49 |
