Oregon Football: Ducks' High-Octane Offense Makes Them Title Condenders
The Oregon Ducks were at it again, beating down Colorado by a score of 70-14. It was a typical performance for the Ducks, who are averaging 53 points per game this season.
They had 618 yards of total offense, and rushed for 439 yards on 57 carries.
The two-headed monster of Kenjon Barner and De'Anthony Thomas were terrific. Barner rushed for 103 yards and two touchdowns, while Thomas rushed for 97 yards on only five carries and a touchdown. He also returned a punt 73 yards for a score.
This is nothing new for the Ducks, who are fourth in the nation in rushing yards per game. Thomas and Barner have already rushed for almost 1,500 yards on the season.
Their passing offense isn't nearly as good, but they do average 212 yards per game through the air.
While Alabama's defense gets a lot of national attention, and rightfully so, they have not faced an offense like Oregon's. There is no other offense like Oregon's anywhere in college football.
No team features an offensive attack that's so diverse. Against Colorado, Barner and Thomas ran for 103 and 97 yards, respectively. Bryan Bennett, a quarterback, ran for 73 yards and three touchdowns. Byron Marshall, a freshman, ran for 67 yards. On three carries, sophomore Ayele Forde ran for 41 yards.
That's five runners who made a significant impact on the game. All told, Oregon averaged a whopping 13.7 yards per carry. There is no team that has that kind of depth, at any position. The Ducks have a stable of runners, all of whom can break a game open.
No defense is prepared to face that kind of depth. A defense can adequately prepare for two, maybe three runners. But five? No way.
If Oregon wins out, they should find themselves in the BCS championship game. They are currently 8-0, and upcoming tests against USC, Stanford and Oregon State will have them primed for whatever Alabama or Florida throws at them.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?