#6 Oregon vs California (Levi's Stadium)

[Duck07]

I can see arguing that the performance wasn't that bad, but to now be making the argument that allowing them to do what they've normally done is now a sign of good performance? WTH?

I think we have a misunderstanding...

I'm not saying our defense is good. I'm just saying it's not bad. There's room for improvement, but people are really going over the top with their reactions here.

I don't think its anything but a below-average unit. Its not the passing yards that was the issue but what they did on the ground. We know Stanford isn't going to pass the ball very effectively against us, but they are absolutely going to use the ground and pound and gain first downs. If Stanford comes out and runs for 250 and passes for over 200, I think most people are going to be upset about the passing yards and not the rushing yards. Its one thing for an offense to do what they love and are built for, its another to let them do what they're not good at.

[buckmarkduck]

I can see arguing that the performance wasn't that bad, but to now be making the argument that allowing them to do what they've normally done is now a sign of good performance? WTH?

I think we have a misunderstanding...

I'm not saying our defense is good. I'm just saying it's not bad. There's room for improvement, but people are really going over the top with their reactions here.

I don't think its anything but a below-average unit. Its not the passing yards that was the issue but what they did on the ground. We know Stanford isn't going to pass the ball very effectively against us, but they are absolutely going to use the ground and pound and gain first downs. If Stanford comes out and runs for 250 and passes for over 200, I think most people are going to be upset about the passing yards and not the rushing yards. Its one thing for an offense to do what they love and are built for, its another to let them do what they're not good at.

If I'm Stanford, I would line Montogomery up in the backfield, and force Malone to cover him in the flat.

[pezsez1]

I don't think its anything but a below-average unit.

I disagree. I think we're inconsistent, but we're not below average.

What I see is a defense that struggles when we scheme against pass-heavy teams, but otherwise we're pretty solid. We stuffed MSU, UCLA and UW, and two of those three teams are very dangerous on offense.

Our biggest struggles were against WSU and Cal, both which run pass-heavy offenses.

If we were a below-average unit, then we'd struggle against everyone, but clearly that hasn't been the case. In fact, we played flat-out good for our previous two games.

[Duck07]

What metric makes this an average unit then? I just don't see them being good at anything on defense.

[pezsez1]

What metric makes this an average unit then?

There's really no point in me explaining the same things again and again and again.

But if you refuse to read anything I've said, why not just post this question on a Michigan State forum?

[QuackininBama]

What metric makes this an average unit then? I just don't see them being good at anything on defense.

Your so wrong. I just checked. CLEARLY we are better then Middle Tennessee and UNLV who are ranked 123rd and 124th.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/sta ... on/defense

[pezsez1]

Why do people always trot out the totally pointless total yards statistics?

You do realize that until we're one of the leaders in TOP, those stats really don't mean anything, right?

[fpsduck]

What metric makes this an average unit then? I just don't see them being good at anything on defense.

Your so wrong. I just checked. CLEARLY we are better then Middle Tennessee and UNLV who are ranked 123rd and 124th.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/sta ... on/defense

Something is strange about those rankings...where is Kal on the list?



Anyway, our D does suck but not as bad as that makes it appear...

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/ ... team/22/p3

[Duck07]

What metric makes this an average unit then?

There's really no point in me explaining the same things again and again and again.

But if you refuse to read anything I've said, why not just post this question on a Michigan State forum?

Pez, I enjoy our arguments and I'm not trying to be a jerk but your argument that you've said again and again is basically to ignore certain parts of the game because it was an adverse situation for the defense and bring up how the fault lies instead with the offense.

If our Yards Per Play and 3rd down defense were great as an example, that would be pointing to something that says, "hey, here are some actual things this defense does well." We don't have something we can point to that shows we're excelling at something.

[fpsduck]

Why do people always trot out the totally pointless total yards statistics?

You do realize that until we're one of the leaders in TOP, those stats really don't mean anything, right?

While I see your point, let's look at Oregon's past rankings:

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?y ... =IA&dest=O

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?y ... =IA&dest=O

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?y ... =IA&dest=O

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?y ... =IA&dest=O

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?y ... =IA&dest=O

[pezsez1]

I'm not saying to ignore anything.

Fact is, our defense only let Cal into the redzone four times. Against the no. 17-ranked offense in the nation, that's pretty good. Cal is very, very good at converting inside of the RZ. In fact, if you look at this season's stats, only two teams in the entire country have scored MORE touchdowns than Cal... one of them is us, and the other is Baylor. Just looked up the stat, and Cal is tied with Texas A&M for 30th in RZ offense... 24 RZ TDs and 6 FGs, so once they get in there, they usually get six. Sucks we couldn't get a field goal out of 'em (we did get them to fourth down at least once, and one of their TDs also came very late in the game), but really, our results weren't bad considering the opponent.

What I'm seeing in this forum though is a failure for people to understand how much blame should be placed at the feet of the defense.

I'm simply not going to blame the D for being put in two horrible positions against one of the very best redzone offenses in the country. That's on our offense/special teams for not doing their jobs.

When the offense/special teams wasn't committing blunders, our D actually did a pretty decent job against Cal.

[pezsez1]

In response to annual defensive rankings, I'm going to repost this info that I just posted in another thread.

***********************************************************************************



Something to consider in all of these stats, which, again, is something EVERYONE seems to be overlooking...

The conference this year is far more lethal than it has been in a long time.

At random, I just looked up total offense stats for the 2012 season. Listed below were the conference leaders for that season:

No. 5: Oregon
No. 7: Arizona
(and now, a big dropoff outside the top 20...)
No. 24: UCLA
No. 25: Arizona St.
(and now, an even BIGGER dropoff just to find a fifth team for this list...)
No. 43: Oregon State

Now, let's look at this season's total offense rankings for conference teams:

No. 4: Arizona
No. 8: Oregon
No. 9: Washington State
No. 13: Arizona State
No. 17: Cal
No. 20: UCLA
No. 29: Colorado

Three top-10 offenses, six top-20 offenses, seven in the top 30... and with four games left, we've already faced four of the teams on that list.

Opposing offenses in the Pac-12 are just way more dangerous than they've been in recent years. Yes, we're certainly having more defensive miscues than we've had in the past, and clearly our personnel is lacking in places where we've traditionally been strong. But some of this is simply a result of the conference being stacked with potent, high-octane offenses.

COLORADO IS THE WORST TEAM IN THE CONFERENCE, AND EVEN COLORADO'S OFFENSE IS BETTER THAN THE PAC'S FIFTH-BEST OFFENSE IN 2012.

[rockthief]

Then it is time for defenses to improve as well. Offenses change, so why not defenses. Where are our LBs on those runs up the middle and there is no Duck withing ten or more yards. Everyone is in pass coverage? That makes no sense. Someone needs to be in the middle.

[pezsez1]

Offenses change, so why not defenses.

It's not so much about schemes changing as much as it's about tempo, conditioning and mismatches. Defenses are becoming better conditioned (which is why we can't just show up and blow people out as easily as we used to), but defenses will always be at the mercy of offenses built around tempo and mismatches.

Another interesting thought... five years ago, at the peak of the Blur offense, I actually remember our defense regularly wearing down opposing teams' offenses. Prior to that, you never really saw defenses wearing down offenses... usually it was the other way around. But now that most Pac-12 teams are conditioned to have high-tempo offenses, our defense no longer has that advantage.

[pezsez1]

COLORADO IS THE WORST TEAM IN THE CONFERENCE, AND EVEN COLORADO'S OFFENSE IS BETTER THAN THE PAC'S FIFTH-BEST OFFENSE IN 2012.

Quoting myself, because Colorado is currently making my point about how offenses in this conference are just way more lethal than they've been in recent years.