Man, this DP thing...

[UOducksTK1]

Try #2. Name calling is for Huskies. Believe me, I've wanted to call people idiots before, but it's so fruitless and rude. We are Ducks fans, and while we might disagree on things, please be kind.

Anyway, back to DP. Cal's offense statistically is right there with Oregon's, so I think the fact we gave up almost 600 yards, 30 first downs, and 41 points isn't as scary as it looks. We also turned the ball over twice, including a gift (one which we held them to 4th down before the scored on the 1). DP is definitely not the best DC out there, that's for sure. But we've played much better defense the last 3 games then we did against Arizona and Wazzu. We pressure the QB so much more, and put players in better positions to make plays. Our LB play is still pretty weak. Malone/Hardrick really are bad. 7-1, just keep on scoring more points than the other team and we'll be in the playoffs. Go Ducks!

[lukeyrid13]

I want to support DP because he is our DC, but we could have had Clancy Pendergast, he was practically begging for the job. Let's hope though that DP is learning as he goes and that our young LBs step up in the coming years.

I do wonder though if we should not have considered switching our defense to fit our personnel. A 3-4 usually has great MLB play but that is without question our weakest position.

[mm55]

Pendergadt was not begging for the job. He did not want to coach in college again due to the constraints recruiting puts on personal time. Stop
With this- I know from a very very reliable source he did not want the job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[buckmarkduck]

I want to support DP because he is our DC, but we could have had Clancy Pendergast, he was practically begging for the job. Let's hope though that DP is learning as he goes and that our young LBs step up in the coming years.

I do wonder though if we should not have considered switching our defense to fit our personnel. A 3-4 usually has great MLB play but that is without question our weakest position.

What are you talking about, he was never begging for the job? First off he's not that good, he would be better than DP but not as good as others we had a shot at, and 2 he sucks at recruting.

[MFRDuckFan]

So here are my questions.........I understand DP is ultimately held accountable, but let's talk specifics about the defense. There is more than one defensive coach on the staff so let's pinpoint where the issues lie and see what kind of a solution you would come up with. It's easy to just say replace DP, but you have to be careful what you ask for because you may just get it AND make it worse. So let's talk about solutions.

Obviously tackling is an issue (according to the comments on this board) - which coach handles this directly?

Game plan - (totally on DP?)

Complaints were about sending only 3 in the past - and I saw 4 + last night, so what are your thoughts on that?

Linebackers - tons of criticism about the "horrible" linebackers - and I see Chinander & DP handle these areas. Specifics about what needs to happen to fix this. Is it guys just being out of position or lack of skill?

I'm a detail person & before anybody jumps on the bandwagon of getting rid of a coordinator, I'd love to discuss specifics.

[fpsduck]

I'm still ready for him to go back to coaching LBs only.


I realize that Kal has a potent offense, but come on, UDuh held them to 7 points.

[justducky0]

Honestly sometimes I think you guys forget that Oregon is the hunted. Which game do you think Cal would get up for ...Washington....or #6 Oregon

[pezsez1]

Have you guys seen how many points Cal has put up on other Pac-12 opponents? We played Cal better than most of them, and I'm guessing we gave Cal more plays to rack up yards and points, too (between our turnovers, special teams gaffe, third-quarter offensive woes and usual fast pace of play).

Seriously, that offense is legit... can't say that enough. It's WSU with a running game.

[buckmarkduck]

Have you guys seen how many points Cal has put up on other Pac-12 opponents? We played Cal better than most of them, and I'm guessing we gave Cal more plays to rack up yards and points, too (between our turnovers, special teams gaffe, third-quarter offensive woes and usual fast pace of play).

Seriously, that offense is legit... can't say that enough. It's WSU with a running game.

They are avg 41 a game and 498 on O. We allowed them to score thier avg, and get more yards then they avg. Is avg the goal of out D?

[Duck07]

So here are my questions.........I understand DP is ultimately held accountable, but let's talk specifics about the defense. There is more than one defensive coach on the staff so let's pinpoint where the issues lie and see what kind of a solution you would come up with. It's easy to just say replace DP, but you have to be careful what you ask for because you may just get it AND make it worse. So let's talk about solutions.

Obviously tackling is an issue (according to the comments on this board) - which coach handles this directly?

Helfrich is ultimately responsible as he's the HC and is responsible for what goes on in practice (or doesn't go on). Pellum can go to MH and say we need to work on "this and that" more in practice, but if the coaches might not want to disturb things for fear of messing something else up. There isn't a specific tackling coach who goes from group to group and a lot of the tackling drills are called "thud" where you wrap up and hit but don't go to the ground as part of regular practice sessions. Full-contact practices have also been reduced by conference rules (2 a week iirc)

Game plan - (totally on DP?)

Complaints were about sending only 3 in the past - and I saw 4 + last night, so what are your thoughts on that?

Again, Helfrich is ultimately responsible as he can't be isolated to just what the offense does but it is largely a result of what DP wants to do and whatever thoughts the other defensive coaches have.

When we did bring pressure with more than 3 we saw some success. A large part of the success the poodles had against them was a result of creating pressure which leads to bad passes. Sometimes on those rushes when nobody got there or Goff would roll out, you would also see a lot of passes miss their mark from that pressure and when he did run, he got laid out after only a few yards. What I didn't like and what I'll add to the next question was the reliance on keeping 4 LBs on the field against an 11 set (1 back, 1 te, 3 wrs) when we needed to bring an extra DB on the field instead imo. The reason for this is that if you're going to keep 4 LBs on the field in your base 34, they better be effective at stopping the run and they weren't, so you might as well put a better cover guy on the field if those OLBs aren't going to be great in the run game.

Linebackers - tons of criticism about the "horrible" linebackers - and I see Chinander & DP handle these areas. Specifics about what needs to happen to fix this. Is it guys just being out of position or lack of skill?

I'm a detail person & before anybody jumps on the bandwagon of getting rid of a coordinator, I'd love to discuss specifics.

Erik is the OLB coach while DP handles the ILB. The ILB are responsible for keeping the defense in the right sets and making reads. I noticed last night that the rotation inside where Walker/Hardrick were 1A and Malone/Mattingly were 1B inside. I feel this must be because the coaches feel Walker and Mattingly need another guy with more experience next to them on the field.

I'd say when a LB is 6 yards down the field and waits for the ball-carrier to come to him, that is being out of position. Some might disagree, I believe your LBs have to be the type who come forward to make a tackle, not be passive and let the action come to them. Last night we would put Washington or Coleman out in the flats to cover and I would have been fine with that except I didn't think they did a good job at all of playing the run. I get why you put them there because when Cal runs a bubble/quick screen there, you expect the LB to win that blocking battle and I didn't see that happen very often. Its one thing for a WR to block our CBs for a few yards, the OLBs shouldn't be giving up ground. One thing that can explain why the LBs are poor and timid in their tackling is that they are thinking way too much while the play is going on. I don't think I've seen a scaled-back scheme so far this year that makes things easier. Now they might have taken a few pre-snap reads off their duties, but its not making them play more aggressively.

I don't believe this is a skill issue, at all. I think we call the game on defense like we're scared. Why would I make that claim? I think we play far too passive in our secondary and instead of having them play tighter to the line and the box which would allow them to attack and give our LBs some more help. I think we need to be using more of our DBs on the field, especially against teams that are Top 5 in the nation at passing the ball. I haven't re-watched or tried to count snaps, but I know we had to have spent 3/4 of our defense in our base D with an OLB simply flexed out.

I don't recall seeing any Amoeba fronts last night, that was a step in the right direction. We saw more pressure brought on a greater % of plays, that was another step in the right direction.

As far as "this DP thing" goes, he absolutely gets the chance to finish the season (not that I believe there is any legitimate threat to his job this season) and it would only hurt us to can him before then. However, I don't think that Mark Helfrich is beholden to Don and if strides aren't made as the season continues I wouldn't put it past Mark to move in a different direction. Hiring a new DC is going to present issues with keeping some staff that you do like.

We have this amazing offense and you would think that a DC who knows his offense is going to score points would be willing to try some crazy, out-there things where he's not afraid to be aggressive on defense because of the offense. I just feel that when you've got an offense like ours, you can play aggressively and absolutely should play that way which is why I really haven't liked seeing how we've attacked offenses.

[pezsez1]

Is avg the goal of out D?

Of course it isn't, which is why nobody on this board is singing praises about our D right now.

But what the stats do show (thank you for presenting them) is that our D is statistically average.

Not bad, not terrible, not horrible.... just average.

That said, I believe when you look more closely at how this season has unfolded, it's easy to find reasons that help explain our defensive stats. I don't need to rehash them all here, again, for the umpteenth time.... we all know what they are.

Point is, this isn't a banner year for our D, but to say our D is terrible is ridiculous. At worst, we're average.

We have this amazing offense and you would think that a DC who knows his offense is going to score points would be willing to try some crazy, out-there things where he's not afraid to be aggressive on defense because of the offense. I just feel that when you've got an offense like ours, you can play aggressively and absolutely should play that way which is why I really haven't liked seeing how we've attacked offenses.

Totally agree with this, too.

[TualatinDuck]

Ill apologize for my comment last night.

For those green colored glass wearers, this is from ESPN and sums up why DP is a bad choice for our DC.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id ... -59-cal-41

Playoff implication: No change here. Oregon remains the Pac-12’s best bet at a playoff berth and is in good position as the top-ranked one-loss team outside the SEC. However, the Ducks' performance on defense will undoubtedly raise some red flags for the College Football Playoff selection committee.

The point is, it does not matter if the Pac 12 has good offenses or otherwise. The more Pac 12 defenses can not stop an offense, the more SEC pundits will point out the Pac 12 is weak and can not win a NC. Poor defensive performances will keep the Ducks out of the playoff if this trend continues.

[pezsez1]

The point is, it does not matter if the Pac 12 has good offenses or otherwise. The more Pac 12 defenses can not stop an offense, the more SEC pundits will point out the Pac 12 is weak and can not win a NC. Poor defensive performances will keep the Ducks out of the playoff if this trend continues.

I agree with this, and totally share those concerns.

However, just because those national pundits/SEC honks are uninformed doesn't mean I need to be uninformed, too.

Speaking of perception, the guys who were actually calling the game last night weren't echoing any of the dire concerns being voiced in this thread... they seemed to understand Oregon overcame some early mistakes to win a shootout, with the defense making enough big stops throughout the game to win.

[Duck07]

I will say that the SEC and their extra home game against the patsy does help their defensive #s. This is why TAMU and Mizzou were able to come in a be competitive right away because they had good offenses and exploit those "amazing" SEC defenses.

[TualatinDuck]

I would prefer everyone be informed, but bias being what it is, will always win out. Perception equals reality and we do not know what the committee's perception is at this point. Guess we find out Tuesday if we are cruising along just fine or completely hosed.