|
Post by nabeav on Sept 11, 2019 18:13:56 GMT -8
If I recall, there were quite a few people calling for Canfield’s redshirt to be pulled given Moore’s struggles in 2005. It’s not surprising Hass thought the senior qb he already had rapport with was better than the true freshman.
|
|
zzufrevaeb
Sophomore
Not beaverfuzz
hi
Posts: 1,500
|
Post by zzufrevaeb on Sept 11, 2019 19:12:38 GMT -8
October 29, 2005. I was there. Arizona 29 - Oregon State 27 Mike Stoops burned Willie Tuitama's redshirt the previous game and Tuitama was making his first-ever start. Tuitama went 13/22 for 335 yards and two touchdowns, a 217.0 rating. Pac-10 Freshman Player of the Year Mike Thomas had four receptions for 162 yards and a touchdown. Moore threw four first half interceptions, including a pick-6 to future Super Bowl Champion Michael Johnson to dig a 23-10 first half hole. Moore settled down in the second half to lead Oregon State on three scoring drives to pull within 29-27. However, each of the next three drives ended in Moore turnovers: a fumble at the Arizona 24, an interception, and an interception to end the game. Bernard finished with 192 yards on 35 carries and two touchdowns. Mike Hass ended with 11 receptions for 190 yards en route to the Biletnikoff. Matt Moore finished 32/43 for 436 yards, one touchdown, and six interceptions. He ran nine times for 26 yards with a fumble on the lone sack. The 462 total yards ranked second at the time in total yards in Oregon State history, only 18 yards behind Erik Wilhelm's 480-yard performance against Akron. It remained the most total yards against a Pac-10/12 opponent until Sean Mannion's 487-yard performance against Washington State in 2013. Only 5 of Moore's the 43 passes hit the turf. What is crazy is that Moore only had six interceptions the entire 2006 regular season in 324 passes, including 182 consecutive passes without an interception between Arizona and Missouri. Arizona was the only team to be able to intercept Moore more than once in 2006. props to beaverzuff for being right this time. Wilky next time dont answer me if i am wrong. Just stay out of it. In my defense Matt Moore did throw 3 interceptions in 2005 against Arizona State. Luton is pretty cautious with the ball, comparatively, that is a mature quality in your qb. Incompletes beat interceptions by a mile. The problem is, you referenced the Arizona game in your response to me...which is the one we were all talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 11, 2019 20:08:06 GMT -8
That interesting because Hass never played with Canfield. Mike played from 2002-05. Canfield redshirted in 2005, then played from 2006-09. I supposed MH saw Canfield as a true freshman on the scout team (Gunderson was the backup QB). But obviously Canfield got much better and sure completed a lot of passes, to a lot of receivers. f acts are facts but that's a heavy dog on targ. Are you saying Hass never said such a thing? It seems he would not have, given your assemblage of the facts. No, just said that it was interesting, since their careers barely overlapped.
|
|
|
Post by tnarg33 on Sept 12, 2019 4:36:30 GMT -8
I just asked a football player, who would obviously know better than me, who was a better QB because as a Beaver fan I was curious. That’s the answer he gave.
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Sept 12, 2019 7:12:04 GMT -8
I just asked a football player, who would obviously know better than me, who was a better QB because as a Beaver fan I was curious. That’s the answer he gave. BUT WHO ORDERED THE CODE RED??? WAS IT CANFIELD OR JESSUP?
|
|
|
Post by biggieorange on Sept 12, 2019 8:15:07 GMT -8
And what's so "mysterious and romantic" about continuing to play an ineffective QB when you have a chance to win a game (finally). Luton was killing us in the 2nd half. So even if he sits for only a series or two, what's the harm? Smith needs to wake up and start looking at his own role in the loss. JMHO but the failure of our OC to adjust to Hawaii's defensive adjustments in the 2nd half probably had more to do with the outcome than JL's play..... Go Beavs!! The only thing the passing game could do against that defense would have been to rely/focus on more short intermediate timing routes, I'd be shocked if a screen or two is probably in the game plan this weekend just to keep corners honest. This passing game and WR's don't seem to run that sort of stuff as much as teams did back in the Riley days. I understand why, I mean they don't move the chains as much and one mistake leads to a likely INT or and un-catchable ball. With the way this offense has moved the ball on the ground, there hasn't been a good reason to have a ton these sorts of high difficulty, high risk/ low reward plays. UH secondary adjusted well and for whatever reason, either our Offense isn't used to doing that or the OC didn't feel confident calling it. I think mostly #17 has been able to still make plays even when they put a safety over the top. Mainly due again to the respect the play action has garnered.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 12, 2019 12:16:24 GMT -8
JMHO but the failure of our OC to adjust to Hawaii's defensive adjustments in the 2nd half probably had more to do with the outcome than JL's play..... Go Beavs!! The only thing the passing game could do against that defense would have been to rely/focus on more short intermediate timing routes, I'd be shocked if a screen or two is probably in the game plan this weekend just to keep corners honest. This passing game and WR's don't seem to run that sort of stuff as much as teams did back in the Riley days. I understand why, I mean they don't move the chains as much and one mistake leads to a likely INT or and un-catchable ball. With the way this offense has moved the ball on the ground, there hasn't been a good reason to have a ton these sorts of high difficulty, high risk/ low reward plays. UH secondary adjusted well and for whatever reason, either our Offense isn't used to doing that or the OC didn't feel confident calling it. I think mostly #17 has been able to still make plays even when they put a safety over the top. Mainly due again to the respect the play action has garnered. The Presidents are great RBs but seem to be poor receivers. Smitty seems to be trying to play with the hand that he has been dealt.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 12, 2019 15:46:48 GMT -8
Read an interview with Smith on OLive this morning where he laid a bunch of blame on players and none on the coaches. He was especially harsh on Togia ? Said hes a good guy and hard worker but cant catch a pass. Sound like Andersen 2.0 ? I was caught up in other stuff and didn't get on the boards... so I am sorry I am late to the party on what is possibly the single most offensive thing I have ever read in my entire life. How...DARE.... you ever utter such words about Niner. I can think of like 5 people in the world... Hitler is on this list... that you can use the phrase Andersen 2.0 with.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Sept 12, 2019 23:04:40 GMT -8
Read an interview with Smith on OLive this morning where he laid a bunch of blame on players and none on the coaches. He was especially harsh on Togia ? Said hes a good guy and hard worker but cant catch a pass. Sound like Andersen 2.0 ? I was caught up in other stuff and didn't get on the boards... so I am sorry I am late to the party on what is possibly the single most offensive thing I have ever read in my entire life. How...DARE.... you ever utter such words about Niner. I can think of like 5 people in the world... Hitler is on this list... that you can use the phrase Andersen 2.0 with. And there it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 8:30:02 GMT -8
I was caught up in other stuff and didn't get on the boards... so I am sorry I am late to the party on what is possibly the single most offensive thing I have ever read in my entire life. How...DARE.... you ever utter such words about Niner. I can think of like 5 people in the world... Hitler is on this list... that you can use the phrase Andersen 2.0 with. And there it is. OrangeThunder on duk mole watch list?
|
|
|
Post by biggieorange on Sept 13, 2019 9:57:15 GMT -8
The only thing the passing game could do against that defense would have been to rely/focus on more short intermediate timing routes, I'd be shocked if a screen or two is probably in the game plan this weekend just to keep corners honest. This passing game and WR's don't seem to run that sort of stuff as much as teams did back in the Riley days. I understand why, I mean they don't move the chains as much and one mistake leads to a likely INT or and un-catchable ball. With the way this offense has moved the ball on the ground, there hasn't been a good reason to have a ton these sorts of high difficulty, high risk/ low reward plays. UH secondary adjusted well and for whatever reason, either our Offense isn't used to doing that or the OC didn't feel confident calling it. I think mostly #17 has been able to still make plays even when they put a safety over the top. Mainly due again to the respect the play action has garnered. The Presidents are great RBs but seem to be poor receivers. Smitty seems to be trying to play with the hand that he has been dealt. Which I for one greatly appreciate. THE ONLY criticism I ever had of Mike Riley's Offense is a ton of "round hole square peg" development issues. Riley is sort of right and wrong at the same time here, ever notice the teams always developed a ton of great players but often it seemed to the detriment of good results on the field. It felt at times he was running a AA minor league team where player development>wins. He had his system and even if the QB (for example) wasn't a great fit, well we would still run the same offense and just throw 4 picks and get sacked all day. Of course Riley would argue with the talent on the field, the ONLY way OSU was competitive was if guys like Lyle developed into running his Offense during games to be legit players even if it cost us. My counter is throwing Ryan Gunderson out there to try and run the Matt Moore Beaver offense was tantamount to treason.
|
|
|
Post by fisher47 on Sept 13, 2019 10:19:21 GMT -8
I was caught up in other stuff and didn't get on the boards... so I am sorry I am late to the party on what is possibly the single most offensive thing I have ever read in my entire life. How...DARE.... you ever utter such words about Niner. I can think of like 5 people in the world... Hitler is on this list... that you can use the phrase Andersen 2.0 with. And there it is.
|
|
|
Post by abureid on Sept 13, 2019 12:30:29 GMT -8
Smith is not Anderson 2.0 He was recruited by Riley, shaped by Erickson as a player and then taught how to coach by Peterson. I admit, I don't know much about Peterson's style but I can speak to Erickson and Riley.... Erickson told it like it is. He didn't polish much or try to hide much. And why are we assuming the coaches haven't talked to Noah about making the catch? If you don't think the coaches are talking to him and coaching him up on that outside of the media..... I can't help you. How about this... ask Noah if he should make those catches and I'll buy ya lunch if he doesn't agree. The truth is the truth... hopefully it is shared with scenarist and wrapped in care/love. But don't be afraid of the truth. Some people say the truth will set you free! “Talked to Noah about making the catch” “coaching him up”. Luton hit him between the numbers... multiple times... no talking anymore. It’s swearing, yelling, and a little riding the pine. Freshmen and Sophmores can be coached on catching the football, seniors can either catch the ball or carry a clipboard and chart plays
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 13, 2019 12:33:50 GMT -8
The Presidents are great RBs but seem to be poor receivers. Smitty seems to be trying to play with the hand that he has been dealt. Which I for one greatly appreciate. THE ONLY criticism I ever had of Mike Riley's Offense is a ton of "round hole square peg" development issues. Riley is sort of right and wrong at the same time here, ever notice the teams always developed a ton of great players but often it seemed to the detriment of good results on the field. It felt at times he was running a AA minor league team where player development>wins. He had his system and even if the QB (for example) wasn't a great fit, well we would still run the same offense and just throw 4 picks and get sacked all day. Of course Riley would argue with the talent on the field, the ONLY way OSU was competitive was if guys like Lyle developed into running his Offense during games to be legit players even if it cost us. My counter is throwing Ryan Gunderson out there to try and run the Matt Moore Beaver offense was tantamount to treason. You sort of pivoted. I think that Riley is a guy, who believed that developing good players would cause good results. At times, he played guys with high ceilings, because he knew how good they could be. At the same time, at other times, he played players at seniors, who had topped out a year or two before, because they deserved to play. I think that playing seniors hurt from time-to-time. 2013 is a great example. And playing seniors in 2013 did not ultimately do him any favors. Riley would tweak the game plan around quarterbacks to an extent. Oregon State with Moevao behind center had a different look than with Canfield under center. And then he drank the Kelly Kool-Aid tried to rewrite the playbook for Katz. And terrible 2010 and rock bottom 2011 (oh, to have a season with three conference wins be rock bottom!) were the results. I tend to think that Oregon State was great when Riley recruited Riley players to run the Riley system. Too much scheming around players ultimately led to terrible results, which, in turn, led us to Head Coach Gary Andersen.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 13, 2019 14:33:37 GMT -8
Which I for one greatly appreciate. THE ONLY criticism I ever had of Mike Riley's Offense is a ton of "round hole square peg" development issues. Riley is sort of right and wrong at the same time here, ever notice the teams always developed a ton of great players but often it seemed to the detriment of good results on the field. It felt at times he was running a AA minor league team where player development>wins. He had his system and even if the QB (for example) wasn't a great fit, well we would still run the same offense and just throw 4 picks and get sacked all day. Of course Riley would argue with the talent on the field, the ONLY way OSU was competitive was if guys like Lyle developed into running his Offense during games to be legit players even if it cost us. My counter is throwing Ryan Gunderson out there to try and run the Matt Moore Beaver offense was tantamount to treason. You sort of pivoted. I think that Riley is a guy, who believed that developing good players would cause good results. At times, he played guys with high ceilings, because he knew how good they could be. At the same time, at other times, he played players at seniors, who had topped out a year or two before, because they deserved to play. I think that playing seniors hurt from time-to-time. 2013 is a great example. And playing seniors in 2013 did not ultimately do him any favors. Riley would tweak the game plan around quarterbacks to an extent. Oregon State with Moevao behind center had a different look than with Canfield under center. And then he drank the Kelly Kool-Aid tried to rewrite the playbook for Katz. And terrible 2010 and rock bottom 2011 (oh, to have a season with three conference wins be rock bottom!) were the results. I tend to think that Oregon State was great when Riley recruited Riley players to run the Riley system. Too much scheming around players ultimately led to terrible results, which, in turn, led us to Head Coach Gary Andersen. Who were those seniors he shouldn't have given as much time, and who were the youngerkids who shouldhave had more PT? I could argue Vaz in the bowl game, other than that I'm having a tough time figuring it out
|
|