FishIceCream

Honestly, I think it's still too far away to have a reasonable guess about it. And for me, SADLY, all academic since the closest football stadium I can go watch PAC 12 games in is the Rose Bowl. Sad violin music. Anyway, I really think we are just too close to the beginning of the roll-out to know. IF the vaccinations proceed like the politicians and health officials have promised and want them to, we may get to a sufficient level of general immunity so that proof isn't required by early Fall. Maybe you have to sign a waiver going in that you won't sue if you contract the virus. That also assuming that the state and county governments have signed off on normal gatherings by that point. More likely in my opinion, unfortunately, is that we will NOT have reached that general level of immunity by that point, due to slow roll outs and typical issues in undertaking a massive, brand-new effort combined with bureaucracy. It may very well be that the government and health officials do not feel the general population has reached herd immunity until late Fall or even Winter. In that case, full stadiums may not even be an option. If they are, they may require some combination of social distancing and vaccination records, required by the govt. even if the school does not. But the school would probably require them also. So that is my guess. Option 1 - most likely IMO - some combination of vaccination proof / distancing to go to live games. Option 2 - less likely because money talks - no fans for one more football season, but games go on the regular schedule at least. Option 3 - our dream, but unlikely - back to normal, no proof needed and full stadium.

Ha - alright, how about the Oregon coaches over the last 70 years? I think we can all agree that comparing different eras of football is apples and oranges, but I will do it anyway. Len Casanova '51-'66 = .529 Jerry Frei '67 - '71 = .431 Dick Enright '72 - '73 = .250 Don Read '74 - '76 = .273 Rich Brooks '77 - '94 = .455 Mike Bellotti '95 - '08 = .678 Chip Kelly '09 - '12 = .868 Mark Helfrich '13 - '16 = .698 Willie Taggart '17 = .583 Mario Cristobal '18 - '20 = .735 Another counter-point to people doubting Cristobal there, I'd say. Obviously time will tell.

I always chuckle to myself, having grown up like many of us back in the tough days of Oregon football, because every time I see an article about a fantastic recruit wanting to come to Oregon, the back part of my brain says "wait for the NCAA recruiting sanctions to come down." Different times, different expectations. Given the way this group of coaches is getting top-level recruits to commit to Oregon from all over the country, and assuming they are not cheating (knock on wood) I am not surprised to see so many assistants on that list. Remember back when Notre Dame was the main school from east of the Rockies poaching top West Coast talent? That seems like a thing in my memory anyway. Now we are poaching other people's players!

I felt like with him that he was bend, don't break, but was also take some risks to get the turnovers - including in that sacks/tackles for loss that might get the other team off the field. If the other team got down into the red zone, then it would go back to a more conservative style. I get the sense right now that linebackers are the strength of the defense, so whatever system comes in should take advantage of that.

Thanks for the various replies re: the 3 vs. 4 man front. It's probably just so obvious that I shouldn't even bring it up, but I feel like there should be a balance between what coaches like to run, and what recruits they can get. If that makes sense. If you only rarely get top quality 'big' defensive linemen, use a system that works with smaller, faster guys. It seems to me that our current recruiting bonanza has been netting a lot of solid O line guys, but few of those big D line types. Obviously it's not something you can order on Amazon, but I wish they could address that issue. If they can't, I hope the new defensive coordinator can use a scheme that takes advantage of smaller/faster men in the box. My sense is that Avalos' system was designed specifically for that, especially coming from Boise St. where you would rarely get really big D linemen.

Definitely agree with that last point! My point is more looking at programs which can't put that many solid D-line on the field. 4-3 lets you put two with two tweeners, sort of like that. That's my impression of our D this year.

I think I agree, pointing out that I said it's ideal for the very top programs - i.e. every one of the three can command double teams, which frees up the linebackers etc. And assuming teams who can recruit at that level have good linebackers too. Thanks for the reply!

I do understand that. I did not see the bowl game (thankfully, I think) but I watched the PAC 12 championship game, and I was really struck by what seemed to me like a new scheme - starting empty backfield, then motioning into a typical shotgun/spread type look. I would really like it if that became our normal look. I would like it even more if we went old-school and had the QB under center running a pro-set, but I am probably hopelessly behind the times as far as that goes.

I loved Aliotti and would love to have him back, personally. But is that an actual option or just a fun idea?

Great article, thanks! Here is an open question to the more knowledgeable folks in our community. Does my following theory make sense? My theory: If I were an Alabama/Ohio State, and could essentially draft the best players in the nation, I'd go with a base 3-4. Three defensive linemen who could truly be two gap defenders and get some pressure on the QB. Sort of like what we had back with Buckner, Armstead, and our nose guard whose name I forget. (To my shame!) That much talent on the line lets you get fancy with the linebackers. At the next level, I'd go with a base 4-3 style defense. Maybe only two 2-gap types and the others try to penetrate or go around the edge. This is about where I think we are now, recruiting-wise. At the level below that, if I could only get one 2 gap type reliably through recruiting, I'd go back to the 3-4 and put that one at nose guard. Summing up: 1. Reliably able to recruit enough good DL so you can field 3 good ones all game, go with the 3 up front. 2. Only able to recruit enough to reliably field two, you go with the 4 up front, maybe moving around where they line up. 3. Only able to recruit enough to reliably field one, back to the 3 and put him in the middle. This might be the dumbest post in the short history of this forum, but I am curious what people think about it! As for the new DC, I think all of those seem pretty good to me.

Hello all - first foray onto the new forum. As always, I greatly appreciate the writing and perspective, but I will respectfully disagree with the premise of this article. First, though, I will concede that this season was a dud (outside of USC!) But remember, there were many extenuating circumstances this season. That's been discussed in great detail already, but just remember new OC, QB, OL + no Spring, limited Fall! Second, being one bad game away from running the conference last year does not seem to evidence Oregon being held back from putting a stranglehold on the PAC 12. Or did we not win the Rose Bowl last year? I am still grinning, so I know we did! Many of our missing players this year are either earning money in pro football or are projected to be doing so next year. So I'm not sure player development is that big of an issue either. Finally, a more general note about our talent level. If you go by 247's talent composite rankings, over the last four years, Oregon looks like this: '20 = 12, '19 = 17 , '18 = 25 , '17 = 23. That's not bad, and we can see the trend of improvement. But not as good as USC over that time either. In fact, if you look at the CFP over those years, only only one team has made it in that was ranked outside of the top ten in talent composite. Oklahoma in '17 and '18, ranked 11 and 16. Both times led by a pretty good QB. So for me, I'd council patience. We are building talent, but it's still not quite up there with the biggest of the big boys. It will get there. We had a massive overhaul of offensive system and players, with limited time to do it. I think the results may be a pleasant surprise next year.