FishIceCream

I think Kayvon has about as much chance of winning the Heisman as I do of spreading my arms and flying up from Cali to Eugene to catch a game next year haha. But, serious respect and NFL draft buzz close to what Sewell is getting this year is well within his reach. Everything I ever hear or see from him, game play or interviews, is so impressive. And in the end, that's probably the best respect!

Thanks for the great article coach Boles. I have a fond spot in my heart for the five man front because that was what I was taught in high school (so I have a good understanding of it!) I was the second-string "anchor" end, or strong side linebacker, and often got lined up in practice across from my friend, who was our biggest tackle and was a walk-on for the ducks for a few years. A few times, after a scrimmage play, he would bellow at me G** D****T!, Stop pinching me! I told him - I'm not pinching you, I'm holding on so you don't knock me on my rear! This is why I was NOT a walk on Duck!

My comment. This has no connection to who my first Duck QB was, though.

Hi - good comment. I too have fond memories of Haloti and Igor! I am no expert, but I can say this about landing elite mammoth defensive linemen: I remember many years ago reading a quote from a coach about that type of player, in which he said it was the aircraft carrier principle. The idea was that, looking at the navies of the world, there are thousands of frigates and patrol boats, hundreds of destroyers and cruisers, but only a few big aircraft carriers. Haloti, especially, was one of those few, but they are hard to get because there are not too many of them. I'm guessing every team in the country would if they could, though. Oregon is doing well recruiting high-level, athletic, but not huge DL IMO. I'd love to see them convince a few aircraft carriers to sign up though.

One more for Musgrave. The one who was too smart to go into coaching!

The only reason why the Pac 12 is left out of the playoffs is EAST COAST BIAS! *sees the statistics.* *slinks away*

I would say that if Brown comes back for another year and everyone else stays, it would be a really full QB room for this day and age. And all of the young ones were fairly highly rated coming out of high school - Millen would be the lowest. I can imagine that once the pecking order gets sorted out, there will either be a couple transfers or position changes, as NogerO mentioned.

Looking at sports-reference.com, over the last five years their record is .4833 by my math. If you are going to engage in massive cheating, at least show some results on the field. I guess USC could teach them something there! A joke indeed!

Great article and so many good comments which left me saying - I was going to say that! I'd add my wholehearted support that the weak leadership of the PAC 12 was on full display this last season, and essentially made it into an 'exhibition season' as far as any chance of playoff consideration. Not that I think any of the teams would have been worthy even if they'd played 12 games. But who knows, with opt outs and all the rest. A final thought is that, IMHO, whether you win or lose a bowl game really doesn't have much long-term effect on national perception. There can be exceptions: a massive blowout loss or win; a loss that establishes a trend, such as a team that has lost 4 bowl games in a row, or the opposite. However, outside of getting into the 'final four,' I just have never seen the evidence that it makes all that much difference for people outside of the fan base. People have short memories, even high school recruits, and playing in the game is the more important fact. I could be wrong, but I just have the sense that the fact you won by a couple touchdowns or lost by a couple is largely forgotten after the next season.

I was a few years younger and sitting with my parents. The only things I remember are 1. I felt really, really cold by the end, 2. A couple drunk guys got in a fight one section over, and 3. nothing memorable happened in the game.

This made me almost snort coffee out my nose: "and even in my youth a flat-out Troll. (How else would I know so much about Trolls?)" Good job, Mr. FishDuck! You could have been responsible for a ruined keyboard! But, of course, I think if anyone says they have never engaged in troll-like activity, about some topic, at some point in his or her life from birth until now, they are probably suppressing bad memories! As I've said before in my short time on the site, I am one who did sit through the Toilet Bowl, and many more bad experiences. It's not because of any great moral virtue; I was born to Duck fanatics, who took me to the games, and instilled in me a lifelong passion for the school's athletics, even though I am in fact a Viking alum. I remember sitting in Autzen on the NE quadrant well before the game started in '86 and watching the Arizona State team warm up. We were right above the linemen, and they looked huge - and in the game they played like they were huge. The Ducks played well, but they just seemed over-matched on the line. When push came to shove, our Ducks got run over. Even back then, I could still be a (growing) lifelong fan, but also make that simplistic critical analysis. So, I guess I'd say it's important to be a fan and stick with it. But, it's also fine to give your honest critical analysis. Sometimes (as in the ASU game I mentioned) there is nothing you can do about it. We just didn't have the big players to match up that year. Other times, it might be more of a coaching or scheme issue, and it's fine for fans to point that out.

Saw this Canzano article which raised some good points, including what the NCAA is doing to their overall brand with the current playoff format. Interesting op-ed.

In my most honest opinion - Having a good community that reports inappropriate content which has been added is your best bet. I mentioned to you privately how Reddit is set up. Obviously you can find some horrible communities on Reddit, but also some very nice ones. I tend to join and stick with the nice ones. Nothing to do with sports, but people are legitimately nice and most people follow the rules; there are methods to report to a moderator; they will actually down-vote nasty responses, report them to moderators, and even reply personally by telling people to shape it up. I am an optimist. If I didn't think that this is already a nice community, I would not have signed up for the forum. I almost didn't, but I really enjoy the people contributing here. So, I say give more time. At least an hour. Make sure people know the rules and how to report violators. See how that goes. I think it will be OK. My TWO CENTS!

I have a feeling that the Wazzu game was an aberration - maybe he and Leach had a side bet? Haha. But yes, I guess since the USC game was the last one I watched - I didn't see the bowl game, thankfully - I really liked what I saw there through large stretches of the game. Lots of shotgun, seemed to be very disciplined in clock management. The first long drive of the second half was beautiful and I think won the game right there. I hope we see more of that next year.

Just to put a contrary idea out there - I think the Chip/Mark offenses were more like the Loyola Marymount offenses in basketball back around the late 80's - pick the pace up so much and outscore everyone to the point where they can't keep up. If you are shooting at the basket every 5 seconds, you will obviously end up with more baskets per game and points than a team that slows it down and runs time off in the half court. But I think there can be advantages to both ways. When I watched the USC game this year, I thought it was a good example of how running off clock in a disciplined way gave our team a better chance to win. Which is not to say I would not like to see some changes in the offense, or more production! However, I do think there are times when the Chip way is not best. Referencing that Wazzu game last year - I think? Where he tried to keep outscoring Leach and ended up losing, when he could have just run some clock and won.

My only issue with this is that it doesn't seem like there are enough independent teams these days to really make that work. Who is there other than N.D. and BYU? And I'm not even sure if BYU is still independent right now? It seems like that would essentially make a playoff system where one of the 8 would always be N.D.

Haha - they were not ALL my most hated, but I get your point. I tend to be very regional in my preferences for games in which I don't really have a team that I follow. Pac-12 north over south. Pac-12 over anyone else. West over East. Midwest and West over East and Southeast.

I think that making the time frame short (i.e. five minutes) is probably designed to limit people getting in heated arguments and then going back to modify a previous comment. So they can say "See, I never said that!" In the setting & community that you have created here, I doubt that's much of a problem. So maybe err on giving more time to edit.

I vote for Cale Millen, and if he gets hurt, Bradley Yaffe! Granted, this might be just because I like to root for the underdogs. But remember - who has the second-longest scoring run by an Oregon QB in school history? Don't shade the walk ons! More seriously, in my heart of hearts, I would like to see our offense either feature a "pro" style QB (who can scramble or bootleg on occasion) or a "dual" style QB, who truly puts the defense on the horns of a dilemma with his legs. Herbert just put together - arguably - the best rookie season ever for the Chargers. They were not using him as a "dual" QB. If you can get that style of QB, who I am guessing would fit Shough, Butterfield, and Thompson, work all season on an offense that focuses more on the passing + handing off than on the QB running. Does not mean the QB can't run, but focus on the passing + handing off. If you can get dual QB's, which I would guess fits Brown, Thompson, and Ashford, then work on an offense that focuses on that style. Maybe Shough is a tweener who can do both. Point being - maybe I am totally off base here - figure out which type of QB you are able to consistently get, which type are the best on your roster, then tailor the offense to fit that type. This day and age, you will probably lose a couple to transfer after you make that decision, but it still seems like it would be better.

I agree with that. Although I will say that upsets DO happen in football, even if they might be rare compared to basketball. And if you aren't playing, you don't get that chance.

I have more than a little contrarian in me, which I blame on my father - the patriarch of the Duck fans in my family! Once I decided some years ago to cut cable, I was quite insulted when ESPN took over most of all college playoffs, and made it so hard to watch without paying through the nose or illegally streaming the games. I have not watched a CFP game in quite a while, out of spite more than anything else. I'll make an exception if the Ducks get in next year, obviously.

I agree they won't drop the total number - not sure if you saw that in my proposal, but they would still have 12, it's just that the last one is against the corresponding team in the other division, so the opponent is not known until the end of the regular season. Of course, I am only thinking about the PAC-12 here. I like that last idea - I am sure it would not happen every season, but imagine how everyone else around the country would howl if the SEC, for example, got 3 out of 8 teams in some year.

I would rather get rid of divisions too, but my guess is that they are here to stay. I think if there does come a time when divisions are eliminated, then it could be a very different setup from what I am proposing above. I sort of feel like in the end, if you really wanted the most fair system, it would just become the NFL without huge player contracts. But that system is best. If you don't care about that and want to preserve 'student athlete' as a thing, go back to 12 games and a bowl game. Let the fans argue about who should have been ranked #1. The old way never really bothered me, honestly.

I was just imagining this during my morning routine today, and so I figured why not put it on Our Beloved Ducks forum for other people to get in on my madness? Here is my premise: Expansion is coming - I am getting this sense that it's getting close to that tipping point where the desire and financial arguments are making it inevitable. I am old-school enough that I am not sure that's a good thing; also, I have no idea how fast it will be. 3 years? 6? Still, my premise is that it WILL come, expanding to 8 teams every year, with at a minimum all of the power 5 conference champions in the 'dance,' with another three chosen by some formula. If that is true, and if teams are still limited to a maximum of 15 total games in one season, then the obvious sticking point is the conference championship game for conferences like the PAC-12. Our champion would end up playing 16 if they played 12 regular season, one championship game, and then three playoff games. So, here was my idea: Drop the number of regular-season conference games each year from 9 to 8. Five games against your division foes, three against the other division. All of these universities have math and statistics departments, so they should be able to create a schedule that keeps the home and away balanced over the long haul! In what would currently be the slot for the final game of the season - game 12, game 9 of the conference, turns into a 'final jamboree!' Team 1 North vs. Team 1 South, 2 vs. 2, all the way to 6 vs. 6. I know a similar idea was proposed for this COVID-19 season, but I am thinking of making that an every year thing. There could be a lot of special features to make it special. Maybe the North hosts all the games in even years, while the South hosts in odd. That way schools can plan more easily. The top teams in each division could get a bye week and play in the neutral stadium, just as the championship game is now. Maybe expand that to include the number 2's. Number 2's play in a neutral stadium also. Hype it up with ads and put it on TV - it's like two mini bowl games for the top four in the conference before the actual bowl season starts! Obviously, I am ready to go in to pitch it to the Shark Tank - I just need my posters and info-graphics! So, what do you all think? Something that could work? Or maybe there is a better idea!

And as a PS when I go back up to look at Charles' original question, my guess is that IF football gatherings were allowed by the state/county, there would be no liability to the University as long as they followed public health guidelines. Maybe a waiver of some sort would be included with the purchase of tickets. I am not a lawyer though. What I don't see is the government allowing huge gatherings without some sort of rules in place, which would essentially let the organization off the hook for liability. But might delay when things open up again.