dksez

Hey, here's one good thing about all the bad blood caused by UO leaving home and abandoning their in-state sibling, followed by said sibling keeping the entire cookie jar, sharing it only with their nearby cousin who feels similarly aggrieved. We can go back to calling our annual rivalry game a "Civil War."

This will be a contrarian view. (At least I hope so!) I think Sedona added a "me-first" element to the team that Kelly didn't know how to assimilate. It's telling that Sabrina's employment with the Ducks was announced within days of Sedona's departure. (Look it up.) Not to put too fine a point on it, but Sabrina used her talent and determination to better her (and her teammates') lot by working within the (admittedly failed) system. Sedona called it out, in no uncertain terms! (And good for her.) These are two VERY different cultural positions -- and we can say, at least for WBB in the 21st century, they are worlds apart. I add this to the mix only to suggest that Kelly Graves may have had the fortune/misfortune or coaching the ultimate retro WBB player in Sabrina and the cutting edge of forward progress in Sedona simultaneously.

Quarterback is a uniquely central position. If a baseball pitcher could start every game, that would be close, but still not as important. The QB controls the points on the board, but also the tempo of the game -- which, in turn, influences heavily the opposing offense who is not on the field. With the advent of RPO, the quarterback is a real-time strategist -- a coach on the field. This experience cannot be replicated in practice -- only game reps count (and garbage time doesn't.) This will evolve into exactly what another poster (sorry I don't know who) posited: mid-level teams (like OSU) will become equivalent to JuCo teams -- feeders to the elite teams, where NIL and national exposure can be secured by top performers, not to mention professional draft preference. The rich will get richer. Sad but true. (Aside: Bo Nix was a best case scenario. His connection to UO coaching staff amounted to 2.5 years. He was recruited and learned under Dilly, came to Eugene with two more years of eligibility. And he's using it all the way to the end, Good Gosh bless him. That's what we should be looking for in a portal transfer -- somebody with two years of potential playing time, already familiar to Stein or Lanning, thanks to the recruiting process.) There is a way to avoid a steady diet of starting-QB-via-portal, and Kenny Dillingham is experimenting with it. Use more than one QB, depending on the situation. This gives real-time, meaningful reps to more than one player. I've said this before on this forum, but I see a Chip-Kelly-like disruption opportunity for the Ducks here. 75+% of extra points are not expected to meaningfully affect the outcome of the game -- it's gonna be a blow-out or one team is just clearly better from the start. So why not go for two in those situations, using the back-up QB who trains primarily for short-yardage situations? Those are real-time experiences with game-score consequences, even if they won't determine the final outcome. The QB-in-training would be working with the best supporting skill players, who get extra reps in short-yardage situations. The lofty goal is only 50% success, but every rep prepares them for replacing the starting QB. Be honest! Does a placekicker really benefit from all those PATs? Not as much as the next-in-line QB would from regular 2-point attempts! Plus it could make us the national darling again -- it might even get us a Sports Illustrated cover! (Better Lanning than Sanders, right?)

Coach to kid: "If we had one more stud on the field, that play would have sealed the game and our victory. We think you are that dude! (By the way, Mrs., these butterscotch bars are delicious!)"

You miss my point. Every 2-point conversion is a 4th-and-short play, but without the turnover downside.

I'm just putting this out there because I haven't seen it asked anywhere else. Our current and former head coach have each shown themselves to be premier recruiters. Is it possible that they take unnecessary risks in games because they know how good those decisions will sound in a high schooler's living room? Related query: Who will be the first head coach to make 2-point conversions their team's default? I know it might not "pencil out" directly, but the point differential won't determine the outcome of most games. (Kick the PAT when it looks like it will.) What about the extra benefits of having dozens of live ball reps of 4th-and-short? Wouldn't THAT sound different and aggressive and intriguing in that high schooler's living room?

At some basketball arenas, home team fans stand for the tip-off and don't sit down until their team scores. It's a simple thing, but it allows us to "participate."

Football coaches never had to worry about motivating players before. The scholarship money came with golden handcuffs. In this new era, small and symbolic rewards will build the culture and make the portal less tempting. Players now have to earn a single digit jersey number. (Some coach will someday dole out prime number jerseys only to high academic achievers, making their mothers proud!) I'm not saying that being in the starting lineup is becoming ceremonial, but wouldn't a coach use that detail like every other? Student athletes are still awed by the experience of being watched by 50,000 people. (Taylor Swift has nothing on them!) Whether it's a story to someday tell the grandkids, or what earns you an extra helping of turkey at the next family dinner, the coach has that to offer. So why wouldn't he?

Triple Crown Sports owns the WNIT tournament. Home teams for the first two rounds have to pay TCS a guarantee of approx. $7K. After that, the games go where ticket sales are likely to be highest. Because of the NCAA, there are lots of basketball fans in Seattle this weekend. If the Huskies had lost on Friday, today's game would have been at MKA.

Has anyone else noticed that the Ducks always play poorly on sod? They can't go as fast as they want to, especially after the ground gets torn up.

Has anyone else noticed how the team jelled after Sedona retired?

How many seasons have been lost because our starting QB got hurt? Dixon, Adams, Herbert, Nix. There are probably others. But how can we get meaningful game reps for a second QB before it becomes an urgent need? Here's how. Stop kicking extra points. Go for two points, almost every time (unless it's late in the game and a single point will make the difference.) Do it with a short yardage team, including the second QB, who specializes in getting just a few yards more than 50% of the time. It was almost a decade after the NBA added the 3-point line that any teams were built around it. The "two-buck Ducks" could revolutionize football in the same way. And it fits the brand immediately. Lanning has already fielded a special personnel unit for short yardage gains. He just hasn't inserted a second QB into that package. But think about the fits that would give defenses if he did. And, of course, TV commentators would love the innovation. (That helps recruiting!) As the season progressed, the playbook would expand. The second QB would start with only two-point conversions. Then goal line punch-ins. Then 4th-and-short around midfield. Then short-yardage must-haves anywhere on the field, on 3rd and 4th downs in quick succession. Eventually, wouldn't it be fun to see both QBs on the field at once? No one but the center and the offensive line would know whether the ball is going to the QB calling the count or to the second guy as a wildcat. Every point-after opportunity is a valuable and meaningful game rep for a second QB, and it can be done without interrupting the flow of our starting QB. Then the assignment to immediately replace the starter becomes less daunting. Instead of going for two yards, they are going for three or four. Over the span of a season (or several seasons), it makes our team more resilient and harder to defend.