Charles Fischer

I have the "good-or-good" approach. If Utah wins--good for them and their fans. If USC wins--it helps the conference and can later help Oregon. It's good-or-good.

Me too. "I never said I was noble."

The article below just makes me ill, at how they are both playing good football for the first time in over 15 years--on the eve of leaving the conference? It is not right, and feels like either we have been delivered a dose of bad karma, or perhaps....Oregon is destined to spoil it for both? Unbeaten USC, UCLA driving college football resurgence in LA WWW.CBSNEWS.COM It's a vibe playing out across Southern California among families, friends and just about anybody who loves sports. Excitement is high on both sides of this crosstown rivalry for the resurgence of...

I disagree with the main premise that Alex suggests to win the game; in fact I believe we should do the opposite. He suggests we ball-control and keep the UCLA offense off the field. But as DazeNconfused and I revealed a few weeks ago here, here, and here....the Oregon strategy is be efficient in scoring, (Dilly said this) and make the other team work hard to try to score while burning up clock. It is the new updated version of Bend-But-Don't-Break, and I think that since Oregon does it well--we will continue to. The difference with the Aliotti days, is that when Oregon got a big lead in those days--Nick had quite a few blitzes that created turnovers. We have not seen many yet; could this be the game?

My concern is Flowe's inexperience, at how he could be learning contain speed and movement at the team's expense. Meanwhile Bassa has a ton more experience, and has already been playing Spy on a number of plays already. (I will be doing an analysis about Oregon's Spies in the future)

And a historical one. Time is a flat circle....

Wow! What a great report and now that explains how Waz had a "in-the-catbird-seat" kind of attitude when interviewed before. The question about Waz has been..."can he recruit?" It looks like he is!

I invite guest articles, appreciate all views and enjoyed chatting with Byron...but I disagree with him. Adding more teams and splitting the pie that much more lowers our revenue per school, and I think we have other options before it is over. Adding a streamer, and now the new 12-team playoff will be a boon to Oregon, IMHO, as we will have a much greater probability to going to it with what Lanning is building. Add to that a new revenue-sharing contract to where the team that goes to a bowl game or playoff gets half the payout, not a tenth. That alone will change Oregon's revenues and over a five year period could bring us into similar payouts as the B1G. I believe that Oregon could become the "Clemson of the West" where we dominate a conference, (or like Gonzaga in basketball in the WCC) go to playoffs often, and recruit well nationally on our status and revived national brand. And I do think adding San Diego State makes sense, and then that is it. "We are the Pac-12 with 11 teams?" Yep, since that is the trendy thing these days. The B1G is not ten teams, nor is the Big-12 a total of twelve teams...in fact are any named correctly? We would fit right in. It is still too early to tell, but we may end up being alright staying in the Pac-12, and adding only SDST.

Precisely my feelings; I don not want to play Iowa instead of Arizona, and if it is in the cold? Make it Pullman and not Minnesota...

Lost two games alone from him. Stanford in 2012, and USC in 2011...right in front of the goal posts with no wind inside 42 yards for the win.

Me too. I never said I was noble...

I'll go with that; I stand corrected.

Boy, is that the sad truth I've learned. No matter how clear I make it--there is always grey area. And then people will point to how it is grey, and how what they wrote is pretty benign. But yet reading it doesn't feel good... And often when I make a decision about a post--I know that a percentage of the time, I will lose the OBD member. Some people are quite sensitive and cannot even handle the thought of being called out, and that hangs over me as I wrestle with how I am going to approach this post. I should be paid big-bucks for the anguish I go through at times, but instead....I PAY big-bucks to have this forum! Ludicrous I know, but I do love this community of nice people.

That is very true. Dealing with 15 violations a month, over 700 in five years...changes you. On one hand, I want to make it easier on me, but that requires I be pretty cold with the process and you can lose good people that way. Yet at times--trying to cushion it or reason with some people has been a futile exercise in frustration. Something that this thread has confirmed is the wide range of judgments on this, as some said that none of the three examples bothered them, and others said that all three did. I had hoped there would be more consensus, and this muddies the water that much more. In the end... "there is no silver bullet for this, Charles." I came to everyone about this because it is hard, and it remains that way.

It is 49.8 points per game. Almost 50!

Fun article, and it reminded me what the "Grizzled Ol' Coach" taught me years ago before he passed--the difference between a "Jet Sweep" and a "Fly Sweep." A Jet Sweep is when you are in the Shotgun and the QB hands off or tosses the football to a flanker/receiver who has gone in motion and speeding across the LOS in front of the QB. A "Fly Sweep" is when the QB is snapping from center and hands off behind him to the receiver speeding past. When I saw that play with the tight end, I about went nuts. A "Fly Sweep" with a tight end? I love it!

I am taking this as a good-or-good result when the game is over. I will root for Utah because 1) their fans on this forum have been fantastic, and I want them to be happy for their team, and 2) to say that I loathe USC....it doesn't adequately describe my complete feelings of disgust for anything that is Troy. However if the Trojans win--it could help Oregon down the line. If we should enter the Conference Championship game against them unscathed, (as they could be) then beating a highly ranked, highly publicized team like the Trojans could help our Playoff chances. The key is how Oregon does; win and it is all solved. But there are advantages for Ducks with either team winning this weekend. What are your leanings, and why?

We have attempted major blitzes that yielded nothing. When you go all-out on Eastern Washington at times, and you get nothing from it? Not good. We call these clues.... Tomorrow we will have an analysis of some successful Fire Zone Blitzes that the Ducks have run, and hopefully will against the Bruins.

Two massive surprises for me: 1) I wrote in August how, "Oregon's defense will be the surprise of the conference." Well it has, but not the way I hoped! I am very surprised at the lack of sacks, and frankly the lack of skills at getting past the offensive linemen. They know how to do it, but still lack the skills? "Bradyn Swinson is the next sack-master." That didn't age well either... 2) Dilly's offense is unbelievable. Dazed and I have talked literally for hours about it, thus I cannot convey all my feelings about it. Bottom line is that it is special and we better appreciate it while we can before injuries, coaches leaving, etc. The only reason we have a chance to beat UCLA, is because we have a shot at outscoring them. If we are relying on the Oregon defense to hold the Bruins down--it won't work. Dilly's offense is the straw that stirs the Oregon drink, and he is bringing back the Oregon Brand! Damn, he's young!

Joe was not "let-go" by the new staff at Oregon. He left with Cristobal to Florida immediately upon Mario's hiring.

Not believing it.

How so? There are tons of other teams to play for non-conference scheduling in all sports. The Big-12, the ACC and the SEC....Mountain West, etc. We have plenty to play in our own time zone, so make the LA schools travel everywhere else when they join the B1G. Again, we are referring to non-conference games after 2023 since we will have a full Pac-12 schedule in 2024 and beyond. It is just that I could see the LA schools wanting to schedule us whenever they could, so why help them? Let them be on an island that has to travel to Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin or Minnesota in November. Let's freeze them out!

In the Lanning/Georgia defense, they refer to one of the inside linebackers as the "Mac," who is a run-stuffer and that is Sewell. But the other ILB is called the "Money" linebacker, because he is called upon to do so much, and needs to have many skills. Jeffrey Bassa holds up inside, and can make the hits. You will see him coming around the edge on the pass-rush, and he was recruited originally as a safety, thus can do the pass-coverage well. His pursuit as a "Spill" defender on perimeter plays can been extraordinary, and what I once saw as an undersized "fill-in" has now become one of my favorites on the defense. Agree, or am I over-my-skis again?

I was talking with a Duck-Buddy about George K.'s statement to the California Board of Regents asserting the "UCLA will lose money going to the B1G." It got me to thinking how the LA schools need us in the B1G eventually for a western "pod" of opponents. But what if the Pac-12 does not allow any conference school to play any B1G school in any sport? That means the LA schools are going to do a lot of traveling! And it will drive up their costs and what was once a recruiting advantage of going to the B1G, now becomes a recruiting albatross with the long trips, jet lag and trying to do school work besides? I've been looking at how this conference is working to raise revenue to come close to B1G income, but the other method of evening things out is to raise the cost of doing business for the LA schools. Right? Is that what George has in mind? A scheduling freeze that disallows any contests with B1G teams? (Sorry, but I cannot help but snicker at the thought!) I know...I got to pondering again...

I received a PM that stated the following about your post: [Your remark]...struck me as off-topic and inflammatory, not to mention flat-out wrong and perpetuating a stereotype. I work with many non-profits and the vast majority have overhead ratios below 25% (often below 15%), yet they're constantly accused of "spending all their money on staff and fundraising." I agree, but not with either of you, but to please keep the discussion to Oregon Sports? I have enough to moderate without getting into the finances of Non-Profits.