Oregon Blows Crucial Lead, and Crucial Play Call in Loss to Auburn

The Ducks led Auburn for over 55 minutes on Saturday, but when it came down to it, self-inflicted wounds and poor play-calling proved deadly once again.

I’m sick, again. This feeling — one that I share with every Duck fan still standing — is growing not just old, but ancient. Shooting ourselves in the foot in big games such as Saturday night’s against Auburn has seemingly become standard. One can call it pessimism, but from where I, and many others, are standing, this is mere reality. 

There are many kinds of losses in sports: blowouts, blown leads, and those that are close, but not close enough. They all leave us feeling some kind of crappy way. Saturday night’s loss was not only a blown lead, it was a game that was two plays away from being a potential blowout victory for the Ducks. Yet, again, we were left sitting “close, but not close enough” on the scoreboard. Hello darkness, my old friend.

With all big losses come the infamous “what ifs” and the “if only we had(n’t) done this” reflective questions, where the smallest decisions and scenarios are magnified. These head-scratchers are common in stadiums, and in living rooms full of sudden silence and empty hearts, with the wrong coach being interviewed on the tv. It really just never gets easier.

Of all the questions we can and should be asking, there’s one that I can’t stop obsessing over. It’s a question I asked last year; and the year before that; and the one before that; and, well, you get it. What I really want to know is this: Why can’t we run a QB sneak when necessary?

Forget the dropped touchdown. Forget the fumble on the Auburn ten-yard line. Forget the missed field goal. These things will happen, and are expected in a season opener. What I can’t accept, or even understand is the Ducks’ overly-apparent inability to execute a simple quarterback sneak on 4th & inches. Not just now, but then too: Chip wouldn’t try it, Helfrich wouldn’t even consider it; and now we have Cristobal, who clearly isn’t on board with the play either.

With a chance to secure a victory, our sophomore coach made a sophomoric call.

When asked about the sequence on 4th & inches with under three minutes to go and a one-point lead, Cristobal took full responsibility.

“We take it as a coaching staff. That's on us,” said Cristobal. “We had a few guys that obviously were down for the game, and then a couple guys that had cramped up during the game. So we were trying to make the pieces work for a certain play. And I'd rather be safe than sorry in that situation and use the timeout and give us a chance to run it. But it didn't work out.”

The classic QB sneak is the oldest trick in the book, and it has a 70 to 90 percent success rate according to The Ringer. What hasn’t been asked, or answered, for too long now is why the Ducks refuse to try it. With such a good success rate, it should be the obvious choice.

What maddens me most with the coach’s explanation is that he combines “rather safe than sorry” and, “a chance to run it” in the same sentence. If he’s being safe, he sneaks the ball there. All that was needed were a few inches and the game more than likely goes to the Ducks. It’s nice to hear him take the blame, but it’s just not enough.

As a fan, it helps to have a concrete answer for why our teams lose. It helps me, at least. Duck fans deserve answers to simple questions like these, yet here we are, sitting clueless. How do we mess that up? If someone (anyone) knows the answer, please alert the press ASAP. For now, all we can do is move on to next week and try to forget — though few of us will.