Guest Post by Robert “Stroupinator” Stroup
“Bullets beat bowling balls” used to be a famous saying for Oregon. “We base our recruiting, we base everything we do on speed,” Chip Kelly once said. “We do live in Tracktown, USA.” In the late 2000s, one could argue that Oregon’s penchant for shooting “bullets” became sort of a rallying cry. The Ducks wisely, methodically and in a workmanlike style used speed and conditioning to gas opponents, no matter the size. Teams with the bulk of USC, Tennessee and Michigan all succumbed to the tempo, which at times was dizzying.
It’s odd. We don’t hear those four words that begin with “B” anymore. Why is that?
Photo at left: The critics point to three games to negate the successes of 22. Bullets? Bowling Balls? What about two straight conference titles and 47 points a game? Something’s working, but to Stroup, the gun isn’t properly loaded-editor.
A short bit of credit is due first before answering that question. Largely, “bullets beat bowling balls” was a highly successful mantra. Oh, it definitely worked. In Mike Bellotti’s final two years, the Ducks went on to amass a 19-7 record, winning both Sun and Holiday Bowls with relative ease. While this cumulative record to any current Duck fan might seem trivial and like low expectations now, after the lowlight of a 30-point drubbing by BYU – not what you call a legitimate power by any means – the “bullets” helped establish the foundation for what we currently see under Chip Kelly. And when this statement has been uttered in the past, the overall success it has seen has been attributed to one coach in particular – Jim Radcliffe – whose pioneering work in plyometrics enabled athletes in all sports at Oregon to overcome nagging injuries and maintain a constant level of health. Plyometrics truly is the secret force differentiating a school like California from Oregon. There’s a reason why Oregon is deeper later in the season, and it’s largely because the underlying infrastructure that Radcliffe laid down remains somewhat intact.
You only need to win one game. Why can’t Oregon “win the day?”
Somewhere, transitioning between the time when Oregon was gaining steam toward its first conference championship in years and now, “win the day” overcame the lure of “bullets beat bowling balls.” Players, when asked by the media as to the obstacles ahead, repeatedly mentioned how important it was to “take one game at a time.” To the date, it remains this way, and that’s largely a good thing. If Arizona State is the next team up on the schedule, Arizona State is all that matters. If it’s Colorado, then it’s all about Colorado. Over the years, it has become difficult for members of the press to catch a sound bite from the Ducks due to this obsessive internal focus. It’s why they cling so desperately to Cliff Harris and Willie Lyles.
I’ll be the first to admit, with the help of these governing philosophies the Ducks have morphed into a first-class program. But even with the subsequent strides, the trophy room showcases only in-conference achievements. Nothing more. There’s an answer as to why, but it’s not what Duck fans want to hear. Or more importantly, it doesn’t embody the tenets Duck fans have embraced wholeheartedly.
As I’ve mentioned on this blog before, it’s about the things that are simple. As long as Chip Kelly runs Zone Read, or as long as FishDuck continues to gain more footage and more material for the most in-depth analysis of the most unique offense in college football (like the pitch, Chuck?), Oregon will struggle in big games. And yes, the three games constantly mentioned – soon to be four – count here. Why are they chosen? Because they were games that all involved the same component – marquee teams with more than ample time to prepare.
Out of all four of these teams – Boise, Ohio State, Auburn and LSU – only one can be considered a better-coached team than Oregon (Boise). Auburn, in particular, was evidence enough that even a mediocre power could beat the Ducks with time to prepare. The Tigers dubiously featured a poor secondary that was picked on so often it earned War Eagle the distinction of being the only National Champion in the history of the BCS without a top-50 defense. Furthermore, how embarrassing was it to admit that Nick Fairley won the game? One player – no matter the skill or size – should never determine the outcome of a game. Football is a team sport, always, so the fact that Fairley was so capable of interrupting the game perhaps laid the death knell to “bullets beat bowling balls.” With an offensive line that emphasized speed and execution over size, Oregon lost the physical match-up in the trenches and eventually lost the ability to execute as well. In the end, it seemed, one player didn’t beat Oregon. Rather, Oregon became lost in a philosophy.
Ironically, it’s why I will never buy the line of thinking that Oregon is a dirty program. No, they’re just smart. And to a fault, as well. A couple of days after the three-point loss to Auburn, the Opelika-Auburn News mentioned that as long as the Ducks remained “tricky” they would not return to the championship game. (As an aside – for a number of reasons, I laughed at this. To think that Auburn knew football better or is a better program than Oregon is laughable. Even ESPN’s Insider nailed the difference between Auburn and past national champions. They were an average team statistically (and poor defensively) with a quality defensive line. The only difference between 2010 Auburn and 2010 California was that California missed the field goal.)
But perhaps the Opelika News was right. It would be lovely for the Ducks if they were to play LSU in the fourth week of the season, or if bowl games were played every October instead of every December and January. But, for obvious reasons, those possibilities will never materialize. So in the end, logic – and not size or physical ability – is the true determinant for Oregon’s success. With time to prepare for Oregon and athletes with size on the front, teams can beat Oregon at the point of attack by maintaining gap responsibility (which takes ample time to master). It seems that bullets only work from short range; from a farther distance they lose their speed. This is basic physics.
In the end, “bullets beat bowling balls” served to win a season, and not a day. Eventually, it was why the second philosophy overtook the first, and why there will continue to be more as the program continues to evolve. But if I had to proffer a third, and final slogan for the Ducks to use, it would be the following: “the silencer is the most effective gun of all.” Shoot from close range, Ducks, and win the line. Aim to kill.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
