Oregon & Stanford: Two Teams, Two Favorites, Mirror Images
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 1, 2011 10:15 AM PDT
in Pac-12 Football
Email
PrintThe Oregon Ducks and Stanford Cardinal rocked it up in 2010. And it appears that everyone is forecasting them to titanically clash for the Pac-12 North, which would ultimately lead to glory as the Pac-12 overall winners. On paper it makes sense. You've got both quarterbacks coming back, both running back corps coming back, and a host of talented individuals on both sides of the ball that can complement them well. The biggest challenge apparently will come from each other.
However, is the gap as wide as people are making it out to be?
Blocking. Oregon didn't have an elite offensive line in 2010, but they got the job done. Stanford got job promotions--they were so, so good at everything on the field, and made Andrew Luck's performances all the more outstanding.
Stanford loses three of their starters and the heralded fullback Owen Marecic; Oregon loses three of their starters. Based on how Oregon has down with replacing linemen, the Ducks should be able to plug and chug most of their losses with former backups. How Stanford will do with their new guys (and how Luck will adapt to greater pressure) remains a big unknown, perhaps the biggest unknown.
Receivers. Oregon doesn't rely much on recievers running traditional routes, but they do need WRs to stretch things out for their RBs; having Josh Huff back for LSU is a needed personnel boost that opens up the Oregon playbook. Oregon could be relying more on their running backs to take over receiving positions to alleviate those concerns. Expect doses of David Paulson as well until Oregon knows the options they have on the outside.
For Luck, it might be a challenge trying to get new guys to learn the system on the go, so Chris Owusu and Griff Whalen might have to handle the load. Stanford will probably have to rely on their arsenal of tight ends to keep opposing teams honest, but this isn't as deep a corps as Luck as had to work with the past two seasons, so he'll have to make adjustments.
Revamped front sevens. Oregon and Stanford are both powered by their offenses, but let's give credit to the defenses, which did pretty well themseleves. Oregon lost five of their starting front seven, Stanford lost four. Usually you can survive three losses or less. Any more and it's danger zone territory.
If the defenses end up dropping off and the offensive lines can't hold up, then the losses are inevitable in college football. It's just a matter of when and to who.
The rest of the Pac-10 was really bad. Arizona was the runner-up to these two teams. Arizona lost by four scores to the Cardinal and three scores to the Ducks. USC had the offense to keep up with both teams, but their defense was atrocious and got massacred for 90 points total against both teams. Washington was the only other team that made a bowl in the conference. Washington was outscored by 77 points by the two teams.
It's not to say that the conference will be eons better than they were last year, but the defenses on several squads have improved and a lot of top-notch players are back on various teams. Both teams still play nine in conference (and both will play USC, Washington and Arizona), one more than the SEC and the Big Ten, which lowers their odds of getting through the conference slate unscathed.
Luck (the one where you flip a coin, not the one where Brent Musburger starts drooling). Both Oregon and Stanford notched 30+ turnovers in 2010, good enough for top 15 in the country. In terms of overall margin they were both top 10. And unsurprisingly, turnover margin in the current year doesn't correlate to good turnover margin the year after (indeed, look at Stanford and Oregon in 2009, and they were far closer to the mean). In other words, both of the top two teams benefited a great deal of mistakes by the other team, and it could've helped boost their records a little higher.
That doesn't mean either can't win the conference. Their November game in Palo Alto is likely to be the deciding game for the Pac-12 North bid. And they're still both the favorites to be hitting up Pasadena New Year's Day.
Just don't expect perfection to come the way of either team.
9 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Why not perfection?
Especially for Stanford. The only real glaring matchup on the schedule is Oregon. Besides that? An iffy USC, an overrated Notre Dame and several 7-5 Pac-12 squads.
For Oregon: Same goes, save the LSU game, which is sure to challenge.
While I get the points about potential weaknesses above, I actually think the conference’s middle is worse this year than it was last year. Arguably, Arizona St. and Utah are the third and fourth best teams in the league and I don’t think either are better than 8-4 at best. Also don’t think either could beat last year’s Arizona squad. But that’s just me.
Have you heard? The Big East is overrated. And doesn't deserve a BCS bid. And is too bloated in basketball.
If you go by Sagarin’s ratings, last year the middle of the conference was very strong, I think. Stanford and Oregon were the #1 and #2 strongest teams by the predictor rating, with ASU, USC, Cal, OSU, UW, AU all among the top 36. Even UCLA at 63 wasn’t a complete cupcake.
As for this year, what I’d point out is those 7-5 Pac-12 squads are typically very dangerous for an upset. Getting through the Pac-X undefeated, especially in 9 games, has historically proven to be difficult. If it were me, my money would be on it not happening.
by Missing Barry on Sep 1, 2011 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly. It’s more important to have multiple threats rather than one or two formidable challengers. It’s hard to see any team being a guaranteed victory for Stanford or Oregon.
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 1, 2011 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, having one or two formidable challengers is exaclty how you do go undefeated. It’s the SEC formula – have 2-3 legitimately really good teams, a couple extra overrated teams, and then a bunch of “meh” or worse, and you’re almost guaranteed to have one of the really good teams come out of that mess looking shiny.
by Missing Barry on Sep 1, 2011 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Definitely agree it’ll be no cakewalk, but when they beat most of those 7-5 schools by 20 or 30 points every week last year, it’s tough not to see them do similarly this season with the main offensive weapons back for both squads.
Have you heard? The Big East is overrated. And doesn't deserve a BCS bid. And is too bloated in basketball.
People overrate stars
And forget about the personnel around them. Happens every year in college football. Those O-line/front seven issues will not go away until they prove they can deal with it on the field.
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 1, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
There's a twist to that story, though
Both Stanford and Oregon switched out linemen on a consistent basis the past two years (Stanford from play to play, Oregon from series to series). Neither line is as inexperienced as some people are making them out to be.
Possibly. But the front-line players lost were pretty good, particularly for Stanford. These second-unit guys will probably be a step down.
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 1, 2011 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Of course, with Stanford, the two guys coming back are more than just pretty good….
by Missing Barry on Sep 1, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions
