QuackSmack wrote: This has gotta be a Whoosh...

phlduck wrote: Fewer closer games?? Oregon's MOV was more points than almost 3/4 of teams score in an entire game! LOL. The "boosters" who were unhappy with Chip's ability to call plays are idiots. Yep, because those plays work OVER and OVER and OVER, Chip should stop calling those ones!

Lakeforestduck wrote: I would bet our play will be a bit less conservative. Fewer huddles So we can snap the ball faster. Many Duck boosters were unhappy with Chips inability to call a whole game. He seemed to only want to use the same 3-4 plays over and over. I expect fewer close games.

Yep, shame on you phl! :)

claw22 wrote: You are assuming we ever throw an incomplete pass! ;-)

---------------------------------------------
--- InspectorVol wrote:

Wouldn't a deeper passing game reduce the speed at which your offense operates?

---------------------------------------------

Yes, good point and I agree with it.  I do think we will slow down slightly, if only because it would be hard to play much faster, but also because with more downfield passing the big uglies will have to run further to set up and might actually get winded! ;)

But seriously, I believe that Helfrich will throw more, slow down a bit, and take less risks as Marty mentioned.

---------------------------------------------
--- hawaiiduck1 wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr" ><strong>claw22 wrote:</strong> You are assuming we ever throw an incomplete pass! ;-)

---------------------------------------------
--- InspectorVol wrote:

Wouldn't a deeper passing game reduce the speed at which your offense operates?

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>Yes, good point and I agree with it.  I do think we will slow down slightly, if only because it would be hard to play much faster, but also because with more downfield passing the big uglies will have to run further to set up and might actually get winded! ;)

But seriously, I believe that Helfrich will throw more, slow down a bit, and take less risks as Marty mentioned.

---------------------------------------------

I know Oregon has plenty of talent and I assume as much depth as anyone, but do you think a slowing of the pace will negate that advantage? I ask because you guys train for and recruit linemen to play at that pace, but the longer routes take longer for everyone to get lined back up and will cause your guys to need subs too, and that of course allows the team to sub or just the few extra seconds between snaps may allow teams to sub even if you don't.

I know that is part of your advantage both physically and the mental toll it takes over the course of the game. Of course you don't know exactly what will happen and this is just speculating but I am curious as to what impact you all think that might have?

I have no idea what we will do, but I suspect we will play that way some too. I hope we can take better advantage of our o-line this year but we missed out on any stud rb's. Guys we have aren't bad they just aren't great by any means. We should have a really good o-line but everything else is a question on both sides of the ball. We have more overall talent and depth than our previous game but still not enough to compete for the SECC. I figure our ceiling is 8 wins and that means winning a couple games we will be dogs in. Oregon is not one of those we can win IMO. New qb, new wr's, new coaches, plus 1st road game = loss. Only way we keep it respectable is if our o-line mauls your defense. The talk is always about Oregon's offense but the defense is what separates you from the others who score a lot.

Kelly's offensive pace was not a constant. He varied it depending upon what he was seeing.

Despite Oregon's hyper-conditioning, he knew he couldn't operate at blur speed all the time.

But one thing was certain: after a turnover, Kelly would go for the jugular. Maximum psychological damage. If Oregon got any kind of yardage on their first down after a takeaway, here it comes. The scoreboard operator started warming up his fingers because he only had 2, 3 or 4 plays to get ready.

---------------------------------------------
--- InspectorVol wrote:



---------------------------------------------
--- hawaiiduck1 wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr" ><strong>claw22 wrote:</strong> You are assuming we ever throw an incomplete pass! ;-)

---------------------------------------------
--- InspectorVol wrote:

Wouldn't a deeper passing game reduce the speed at which your offense operates?

---------------------------------------------</ blockquote>Yes, good point and I agree with it.  I do think we will slow down slightly, if only because it would be hard to play much faster, but also because with more downfield passing the big uglies will have to run further to set up and might actually get winded! ;)

But seriously, I believe that Helfrich will throw more, slow down a bit, and take less risks as Marty mentioned.

---------------------------------------------

I know Oregon has plenty of talent and I assume as much depth as anyone, but do you think a slowing of the pace will negate that advantage? I ask because you guys train for and recruit linemen to play at that pace, but the longer routes take longer for everyone to get lined back up and will cause your guys to need subs too, and that of course allows the team to sub or just the few extra seconds between snaps may allow teams to sub even if you don't.

I know that is part of your advantage both physically and the mental toll it takes over the course of the game. Of course you don't know exactly what will happen and this is just speculating but I am curious as to what impact you all think that might have?

I have no idea what we will do, but I suspect we will play that way some too. I hope we can take better advantage of our o-line this year but we missed out on any stud rb's. Guys we have aren't bad they just aren't great by any means. We should have a really good o-line but everything else is a question on both sides of the ball. We have more overall talent and depth than our previous game but still not enough to compete for the SECC. I figure our ceiling is 8 wins and that means winning a couple games we will be dogs in. Oregon is not one of those we can win IMO. New qb, new wr's, new coaches, plus 1st road game = loss. Only way we keep it respectable is if our o-line mauls your defense. The talk is always about Oregon's offense but the defense is what separates you from the others who score a lot.

---------------------------------------------

Unless we have a lot of off-season injuries, I expect that our DL won't be mauled too much, especially early in the season. We are as deep as we have been, with experienced guys with size. 2014 may likely be a different story for us in that regard, however.

---------------------------------------------
--- Lakeforestduck wrote:

Sorry guys. I thought the "fewer close games" might give away a little sense of sarcasm.

"Easy Francis"

---------------------------------------------

Fewer close games, cued me in on the Whoosh. Nice off season post.

Looks like some people need to check the batteries in their sarcasm detectors!!!

Lakeforestduck wrote: I would bet our play will be a bit less conservative. Fewer huddles So we can snap the ball faster. Many Duck boosters were unhappy with Chips inability to call a whole game. He seemed to only want to use the same 3-4 plays over and over. I expect fewer close games.

I was just reading through the post and read this, cracked me up.  I love that sarcasm.  I kept reading and it seemd to confuse some, but I thought it was hilarious and a nice jab at the big wigs that got upset at chip.
Nominated and thanks for making my morning/day......just the kick I needed for a sunday morning

Lakeforestduck = serious sarcasm or one of dumbest posts ever.  Let's hope for sarcasm.  I'm giving him the benefit of doubt and will go with sarcasm.  How could it not be?