Charles Fischer

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.

This has been a GREAT thread, and it demonstrates the wide diversity of opinion about whether the posts were in violation, and what to do about it. I guess more than anything--I've learned so much from all of you on so many topics in the past that I was hoping for a silver-bullet that someone offers to this dilemma. Nope. It is as difficult for all of you as it is for me. Had I sent the emails to No. 2 and No. 3 in the examples....they would not have been happy and would have thought that, "Charles, you are going too far." Of course the problem is always with Charles....it couldn't be that they could have written the post in a way that conveys their opinion without running afowl of our rules! I sure appreciate your feedback Drex, and all the good people who responded here.

My template explains how we operate, and lists the rule broken and has a link to the rules. You are right; a customized email gives some people the access to argue their case with me. What I've learned is that 99% of those who break the rules respond with..."my bad, so sorry Charles, won't do it again. Love what you are doing, and please keep it up." For people like that? You want to give them a hug, and them we forget about it and move on. The good people of this community who make an occasional mistake get a mulligan. Repeat offenders who create more work for me are the ones who get banned, and that is a very small percentage. But I still have to deal with 15 a month, and 185 violations in the last 12 months. I don't wish it on anyone. I do use the responses to my template/customized emails to help me gauge the future "trouble-level" I will have with a particular OBD member. Like the criminal justice system where most of the crimes are committed by repeat offenders....I found the same was true here as well. So if someone pushes back right away to the rules, the probability is high that he/she will continue to, and be an ongoing problem for me. I now have a template to their catty response that tells them what you suggested..."these are the rules and you decide if you can adjust. If you continue with multiple violations--you will be banned. Or you can adjust to our 'no-aggression-needed' atmosphere, or you can leave." I've learned to cut it sooner with certain people to save me time and work later. But it doesn't solve those grey-area posts like you see to begin this thread. Thanks for your thoughts.

I send a different template email for each type of violation, and usually I customize some stuff at the beginning of each email pertaining to what was written by the OBD member. I thought that explaining how 99.70% of the posts are published as just fine, and how his/hers falls in the low percentage...I figured that would make it obvious that civility is what the community wants. But I think you make a good point about making it more apparent; at first they were MY rules, but since the vast majority like "having the trash taken out," then it has become our rules. Thank you.

What is the surprise? Mario averaged 32 points a game last year at Oregon, and is doing the same now at Miami. Sounds like the “Prevent Offense” is in place to me! The only surprise is how clueless the journalists in the east are.

You wrote my feelings better than I have. THANK YOU.

That all makes sense. Now sell it to the masses...

Thank you Pitt, but in reference to your suggestion above...I've actually had people tell me, "if you don't like a post of mine--go ahead and edit it." Who made ME your damn editing maid? The point is--people are terrible about taking advantage of kindness. I show compassion, and they see weakness. If there are no consequences, then they will continue to violate rules and "let Charles clean up my mess." And when I apply consequences to people for their own behaviors? "In the end Charles, you are just a petty little tyrant." Whew!

This same offensive line would have languished had Cristobal stayed. Why? 1) How many were going to leave before Lanning/Dillingham/Klemm showed up? Wasn't it two or three? I know our best one who has won Pac-12 Offensive Lineman of the Week twice in six games, TJ Bass was one of them. 2) Dillingham's scheme is damn near twice as good as Cristobal's offense. EVERYBODY can see that. We've gone from 32 points per game to 42 points per game, which includes the Georgia contest! Nearly 50 points per game in the last five games, as this is an offensive lineman's paradise.

Look at the average rushing yards in the ten years before Cristobal, and then the average during his four years, and now what we doing now in rushing? Cristobal's teams underperformed what Kelly/Helfrich, and now what Lanning/Dillingham are doing. The scheme before Cristobal, and after Cristobal creates superior rushing numbers, despite his talk of being physical and running the ball. When you are the first team in NCAA history to average 45 points a game for four years and you come in and change that offense? How stupid/stubborn/boneheaded can you be? (He is a former coach, thus we can write those things) Yes. I am still sore about it, as Oregon could have done so much better. He recruited well, but was it the best on the offensive line? No, that goes to Coach Greatwood. Did he have the best scheme to create more rushing yards? No. Everyone before and after have done better including Bellotti. Now did Cristobal raise the overall talent level at Oregon? Yes, and I credit him for that. But remember...it was Willie Taggart who first broke the recruiting glass ceiling at Oregon. Would Willie Taggart Have Outperformed Mario Cristobal? FISHDUCK.COM These are not two of your favorite people to contemplate right now, but I would ask for your indulgence and fantasizing along with me. I understand how people...

Meh. The best offensive line in Oregon history that sent four to the NFL, and who are still on rosters were recruited by Steve Greatwood...before Cristobal. Coach Greatwood had five great ones verballed before July 4th in 2015...for signing in February of 2016. Calvin Throckmorton And they were wasted by Cristobal. Those pesky facts...

I have to agree with your logic all the way through, as I did not consider some of the points you made--good stuff. Thanks!

Go from one winning season to another...