Pac-10 Week 3 Notes and Observations: Oregon State Beavers
Oregon State Beavers 2-1 Overall (0-0 Conference)
This Week’s Score: Cincinnati 28 – Oregon State 18
Next Week’s Opponent: Arizona
This was a disappointing loss for the Beavers but not a devastating one. Cincinnati is a good football team (the class of the Big East for sure), and the Bearcat offense could give any defense problems. I was also impressed with the size and physicality of Cincy’s D. Still, the Beavers had their chances to win against what I believe to be a legitimate Top-20 team.
I was actually very impressed with Mark Banker’s D. Giving up 28 points to that team is nothing to be ashamed of, and had it not been for a bogus fumble call (really bad by the refs in my eyes) the defense could have held Cincy to 21 points (and maybe even less if not for some unfortunate Beaver penalties). The only disappointing part for the D for me was the lack of consistent pressure. Tony Pike doesn’t need much time to hurt you out of that spread, but I felt like the Beavers didn’t fluster him enough with the pass rush.
Offensively, I saw mixed results for the Beavers. The OSU D put the offense in position to win this game, but sloppy play (particularly in the second quarter) kept the Beavers from capitalizing on some scoring opportunities. It’s always disappointing to come away with field goals rather than touchdowns when the offense is moving the ball pretty well, and I thought that was a deflating feeling for Mike Riley’s club (especially that 1st and Goal from the 5-yard line that resulted in only 3 points).
I am also a bit concerned about the predictability of the offense. Look, the Rodgers brothers are excellent and everyone knows it, but this offense cannot rely solely on their production. I like some of what I saw from Damola Adeniji, but for the most part, the offense only goes as far as James and Jacquizz take it. Canfield continues to be OK but also relatively underwhelming. I still think Canfield has the arm to make some big plays downfield with the long ball, but he has to find a reliable deep threat (Adeniji, Catchings, or someone else maybe?).
Now the Pac-10 season starts and it maybe time for the Beavers to start their annual win streak. Arizona is a good team but also a vulnerable one so OSU should be feeling pretty good about their chances in Corvallis this Saturday.
Oregon State Beavers
| 
Damola Adeniji, Football, Jacquizz Rodgers, James Rodgers, Mark Banker, Mike Riley, Sean Canfield
One side of the offensive line is not as good as the other. Why can’t that be exploited with more screens, misdirection plays, and play action passes?
Very disappointing Saturday, opportunities to win the ball game and we can’t seem to move the ball at crucial times. Bad job by the officials on the fumble but that does not win or lose games, Riley needed to call a time out and settle the players so they can get a stop on 3rd and 13.. Gotta be able to put it in from the 5 and gotta take more shots down field. Should be a feel better game Saturday, Go Beavs!
against a team like cinci, you need every break. cinci deserved the win but that so-called fumble really hurt. both O & D lines need to age quicker before we start saying wait til next year a lot. go beavs!
The success or failure of the Beavers’ season rests with the offensive and defensive lines. Not the Rogers brothers, not the quarterbacks, not with the young receivers. As early as the Portland State game, it was obvious that the defensive line was not getting pressure on the opposing quarterback. Apologists made excuses: “The Beavers were playing a vanilla pass rush. Wait until they start blitzing!” Against UNLV, still no pressure on the quarterback. The game against Cincy simply has proven what any objective observer could tell from the beginning, the Beaver’s young secondary was going to be exploited because the defensive line was not doing its job.
On the offensive side of the ball, the line can neither open holes for Jaquizz or protect the quarterback. Again, this was predictable when Philips was declared as a starter. The biased optimists saw this as a positive: “Wow we have a freshman starting on the offensive line for the first time in twenty years. He must be really good.” The opposite was true of course. We have a freshman starting on the offensive line, a position that normally takes two years to develop. It just showed how poor the line was.