Hercules

Apparently. Q dropped those catches last week.

jesus, enunwa.

2 guys went after the QB.

Michael Rose. Thank god.

48 seconds to go in the first, Michigan has -21 rushing yards.

4:45 in the first quarter, and we're tired? Need new strength and conditioning coach.

And that's just sheer toughness. Pathetic.

Need more blitzing.

Colter won't make a play like that again today. Keep swarming.

I'd only argue that if Taylor does see the field again, they better be willing to use the QB run game like they just did. That's the thing Taylor has run scared every time he has the ball since the middle of last year Tommy runs into contact better than Taylor, if that's what you're saying. But Taylor popped off for 35 yards on his first carry last week, which was in the 3rd Quarter. Today, we come out on the first drive and call 2 read options and a speed option. BIG difference in game-planning and play-calling. Dunno why. Maybe it's about Taylor, maybe it's about Beck. But I wa

I'd only argue that if Taylor does see the field again, they better be willing to use the QB run game like they just did.

GREAT first drive by Tommy Armstrong. That is the best he's looked running the ball, in my opinion. Fantastic decisions in the option game, and more explosive he looks. Gotta make sure takes care of the ball going into contact, but other than that, excellent drive.

Tommy Armstrong doesn't have to break long runs, that's not his game. Taylor Martinez has to because that's his game. All of it. No one is afraid of Martinez throwing the ball down field. Not Wyoming, not Minnesota, nobody. No one is really afraid our our dink and dunk game either, because we're not all that good at it, and they'd rather be playing closer to the line of scrimmage to stop Abdullah anyway. What defenses used to be afraid of is him taking it to the house from anywhere on the field. Now that's out of the picture, well. . . I don't really disagree with any of

The uber-stress on the D hasn't shown up this year. It has in other seasons and other games. Not every game, we all know Taylor's been inconsistent. But we also know he's good enough to terrify even the best defenses in the country (like Michigan State). I don't know if it's the injuries or what, but obviously he can't be that guy if the coaches aren't going to demand that he run the ball. There hasn't been any epiphany about what Taylor can and can't do as a QB this season, we all knew that going in - but he's not running the ball anymore, not even trying to, and that makes him as useful as E

Not if the opponent barely has to worry about any of the receivers. Minnesota played with 1-deep safety and dared us to pass, but we couldn't. It hasn't been the first time this has happened. I don't know how healthy or not Taylor is. He claims he's not, but we saw him bust the run. He didn't look on his game and there were one or two occasions where it looked like he had trouble planting and taking off. Whether it's Taylor's fault, his injury's fault, Beck's fault or the aquarium guy's fault, we tend to not succeed at making the opponent defend all 11 guys with Taylor at QB, and at this p

I actually prefer using a QB-run game. It forces the opponent to defend all 11 offensive players. I don't think the staff has any idea what they want to do, though. They start Taylor, then don't use a QB run game and throw the ball over 30 times when the RB is averaging nearly 9 ypc. It makes absolutely no sense. If you're going to play Taylor, he better run the ball (especially the read option, where he's most dangerous). If you're not going to run the QB, RKIII is the best passer on the team and he knows the whole offense. If you're not willing to run Taylor because of some made-up e

Good points, but what I don't get is, we have 3 perfectly capable RB's, so we don't need to run our QB, unless we want to throw a wrinkle into the offensive playcalling. I actually prefer using a QB-run game. It forces the opponent to defend all 11 offensive players. I don't think the staff has any idea what they want to do, though. They start Taylor, then don't use a QB run game and throw the ball over 30 times when the RB is averaging nearly 9 ypc. It makes absolutely no sense. If you're going to play Taylor, he better run the ball (especially the read option, where he's most

I haven't read the whole thread, but have seen a lot of people saying that Taylor's not capable of running the ball right now. On his first designed rush attempt last Saturday, he went for 35 yards. So, was that just a fluke? I'm not sure Tommy Armstrong has gone for more than 20 yards in his entire collegiate career. A lot of people are also conveniently forgetting that even with Taylor's interception at the end of the MN game, Tommy has still thrown more interceptions this year than Martinez. Like I've said in other threads, I care about who's starting at QB way less than I do about

Fair enough.

I don't disagree with the notion that if coaching changes are made, the expectation should be for the program to improve immediately. I'm not interested in watching someone come in and overhaul the offense like Callahan did, putting players in a position to fail and leading us to a 5-7 season while they try to get "their players" in place. However, I disagree with the idea that the only way to measure progress is through wins/championships. I want to see a team that plays hard week in and week out, that doesn't take games off, that plays smart and aggressive and fundamentally sound, that d

Oregon DC Nick Aliotti disagrees. After the Washington game, he said, "Scott is driving that car real fast and it looks real pretty. Scott Frost, I'm tickled for him, a young rising star."

I understand the concept of what you're saying, but if Bo is fired, it's not for what he did in 2008-2010. It's for 2011-2013. Similarly, if a new coach is hired, his progress wouldn't be measured in comparison to where Bo had the program in 2009. It would be measured with where he had the program in 2013. Then that's completely ass-backwards. You looked at it this way yourself. When you talk about Bo, you said, "Bo took a team that lost 7 games the year before and then won 9 and then 10 and played for a CC." You don't compare Bo to Callahan's best year, you compare him to the seas

I understand that it's Chip Kelly's system, and that it's Kelly's players. It's still Frost's responsibility to get them to play at a high level, to make key in-game decisions and calls in order for those players to be successful. It's possible to recognize that his current position inherited a ton of advantages without completely disregarding his success.

I understand the concept of what you're saying, but if Bo is fired, it's not for what he did in 2008-2010. It's for 2011-2013. Similarly, if a new coach is hired, his progress wouldn't be measured in comparison to where Bo had the program in 2009. It would be measured with where he had the program in 2013.

This idea that Frost is only "OC-in-name" is just flat-out incorrect. He's the offensive coordinator. He's calling the plays, not Helfrich. It's a fact. Notwithstanding rumors that he isn't anymore, not only did Frost not design this offense he is in year 1 of having the OC title under, neither did Helfrich. Look at it this way. Bo was a superstar coordinator when he arrived here, and look where that got us. Bo could have let Carl or JP call the plays if he wanted, and that decision wouldn't have changed the reality of what Carl and JP are. Even Beck is his own OC, as his career in