Kurt Rambis

I don't consider WSU or Stanford to be rivals, particularly - any more than ASU, Cal, etc. But for some reason, it seems like the crushing, inexcusable, damn-we-could-have-played-for-it-all, what-the-*&$^!-happened losses always seem to come against one of those two teams, and particularly Stanford. And I have no idea why. At least with WSU I can occasionally blame the weather and/or the fact that they have often run an unusual game plan given that their talent level tends to be on the lower end of the Pac-12. But freaking Stanford?!

And the other Oklahoma QB, who was one of the front runners for next year's Heisman, will be starting at the other USC. Totally forgot that Nix would have two years. Which means a) if he starts and holds that job, I'd have to assume Butterfield and Thompson would both depart, and b) if he starts and plays really well, we could have a strong QB for two years. Worst case is he wins the starting job and underwhelms, while the other two are transferring. Frankly, I just want what's best for the team both short and long term, and I have no idea what that will be. I remember the mistakes when Harrington, Musgrave, Herbert, and Mariota were young, but I also remember what they all grew into.

I like guys with some personality, like John Madden and Al Michaels/Chris Collinsworth. But I just don't like Walton. Can't listen to him. Just crosses the line from having personality to being a complete clown who half the time isn't even following what's on the court - just riffing on some obscure topic and won't shut up. Dick Vitale in a different way was the same thing to me - just tough to listen to him. Seems I'm in the minority from the other comments, but that won't be the first time...

Well, nothing anyone can do about #4. #2 and #3 I'm not overly worried about. MC left a pretty stocked cupboard, and the team was EXTREMELY young last year. That leaves #1 and #5 as the critical factors, not just for this year, but for the future as well. That's why I'm hoping one of the young guns at QB takes hold of the job and sticks there (deservedly) throughout the season. If Nix is our starter, that's a one-year solution to a team that probably doesn't have a huge shot at the playoffs. One or both of the two young QBs will likely leave, meaning a total restart next year. I'm happier to take some lumps this year as a transition year anyway, then hopefully have an established veteran at QB for next season with a full recruiting class and a full year under new coordinators and position coaches.

NFL teams reportedly concerned about Kayvon Thibodeaux’s effort level WWW.YARDBARKER.COM Thibodeaux is viewed as one of the most talented players in the 2022 NFL Draft. A 6-foot-5 edge rusher with great length and... Not the first time I've seen reporting on this, but I found the following very noteworthy: "The issues with his motor are seemingly backed up by people affiliated with the Ducks’ football program, who said that the talented pass rusher 'gave up on plays too easily.'" Would LOVE to know exactly who the article is referring to...and what they have to gain by it...and whether it's even accurate reporting.

According to John Canzano of The Oregonian: Oregon Ducks director of player personnel Don Johnson Jr. suffered a heart-related medical emergency on Monday. He remains hospitalized. Hope things will be okay.

Meh. Everyone has an opinion even if most of them on any subject are uninformed. I've seen other "draft experts" who've had him going #1 to Jacksonville. Now that contracts are essentially pre-determined for draft picks, I personally would rather go #10 or #15 to a team with some hope than landing in New York or Jacksonville and getting ready for five years of losing. So much of the success or failure of any draft pick depends on the ownership, management, and coaching of the team he lands with. I'm guessing Trevor Lawrence would have had a far better rookie season and ultimately a much better career had he been drafted by, say, the Colts or Patriots than by the Jaguars. There's a reason some teams are always drafting in the top ten while others are usually drafting #25 or #32.

I don't think you can be a successful coach without thinking, "I can fix this."

Too funny. I actually recognize the name Lynn Myrick from my time working in Grants Pass many, many years ago at KAJO. And I eventually relocated to Arizona before moving overseas. Small world...

Grew up in Rogue River. When I started getting interested in football as a kids, the Ducks were the closest team we had and as I recall the only one on the radio ('cause they sure weren't getting any TV coverage in our two-channel town).

From the time they entered the Pacific Coast Conference in 1916 through 2021, UW football has finished on top of the conference exactly 17 times. In 105 years. Impressive. Even during the "glory years" of Don James, in 18 years they won the conference title six times, with one split national championship. Just for contrast... USC joined the conference in 1922...38 conference titles, 7 national titles. UCLA since 1928...19 conference titles, 1 national title Cal since 1916...14 conference titles, 2 national titles Oregon since 1916...14 conference titles, no national titles Stanford since 1919...15 conference titles, 1 split national title If you want to talk about a "legacy" program, it's USC. UCLA has better historical results than UW in a smaller number of years. Cal and Oregon are about in the same place historically as the "legacy program" of Washington. Heck, STANFORD has almost identical historical results to UW. Obviously the only claim UW has to a "legacy" is a legacy of delusional fans. But at least there's a high amusement factor.

Love this. There are SO many small things to master that add up to great play. I've always loved watching guys like Tim Duncan and Karl Malone who do all the little things right and constantly improve. There are a lot of flashy players who don't. I'd rather have a WR who can consistently move the chains with an 8-yard out, never runs the wrong route, and blocks like a demon (see: Ward, Hines) than the guy who will weave through traffic for a 60-yard TD on one play, then drop two passes, run the wrong route resulting in a pick, and doesn't block. Maybe that's why my favorite basketball player of all time is Kurt Rambis. Guy was too small, slow, and athletically limited to even realistically make an NBA roster - but he played a key role in multiple NBA title teams because he played really smart and did all the little things like diving for loose balls, playing D, and setting picks to let the superstars succeed. NO DIVAS!

Agree and disagree. In terms of him snubbing the Ducks, I have no problem with that. No kid owes Oregon anything because he grew up in the state or had family attend the school. I grew up in the state, my brother went to Lewis & Clark, my dad went to USC, and I still chose to leave Oregon and go to Malibu to attend Pepperdine. And one reason I didn't go to Lewis & Clark is that my brother was BMOC, so I had no desire to go there and be known as The Little Brother. I can assume Cota might have felt the same about his dad's legacy. Pepperdine had what I wanted, and I assume UCLA had what Cota wanted (or thought he wanted) at the time. In terms of him enjoying it, I have no recollection of anything like that, so I can't comment. Would love to be filled in on details. Now, as a fan and not a talent evaluator or anything close to it, I look at what he's done at UCLA and I'm underwhelmed. So I'm not sure of the point of adding him to a room that's already got a lot of talent. If the other WRs are better, I don't figure he'll take away any playing time from them, so that's not a worry (and if the coaches are playing guys who are less able to help the team, we have bigger problems than just who plays WR). I'm just not sure what we're getting with him, but then I wasn't sure what we were going to get with "lower-level talent" like Herbert, Masoli, Mariota, or Chung (and those four certainly seemed to work out okay, maybe minus one laptop). Maybe the coaches love his leadership, love his maturity, really feel they need depth, or see something in him that some of us as fans don't. So I'm not excited about the addition ATM, but I'll trust the coaches and assume they know a lot more than I do (not that it's difficult).

Had to be the FSU game. Just the total devastation against a top team when it really counted - to go to the national championship game. At the time, FSU was a top program just like Michigan or tOSU when we beat them, but this was not just regular season. Bonus points for making Famous Jameis look completely lost. But since so many people have commented on this game already, #2 is probably the '12 Rose Bowl against Wisconsin. Just watching De'Anthony Thomas overwhelm the Wisconsin D with his speed was tremendous.

Bonus points for using "oleaginous" in a sentence. Sesquipedalians unite!

There are so, so many unknowns with this team. Brand new coaching staff, led by a first-time head coach. We know he can recruit and run a defense. Can he manage a team? Are the players we have right for his system? If not, will he and the staff be able to adjust for the type of players we have? Will guys also be able to adjust to the new staff's style and expectations? How many guys might still transfer when things start to shake out - and will the guys who do be starters or affect depth? How will our depth be at key areas like WR and RB? As injuries inevitably happen, will the 2nd and 3rd string guys be able to step up? Will the new trainers and training approaches cut down on the ridiculous number of injuries we had last year? Or was that just random bad luck and had nothing to do with the training? And of course who's the QB going to be? Is Thompson really ready? Will Butterfield surprise? Will Lanning turn it over to Nix, and will he be worthy of the decision? Will we have an obvious starter all year, or will the team switch back and forth as various starters underwhelm? This team has a lot of young talent, but it needs to mature quickly. And if we don't have a QB emerge as a quality starter and leader, it's going nowhere. While I see a lot of comments on this board about how much more excited various fans are about Lanning than MC, how Lanning is going to be a much better game coach, etc., that's all speculation at this point. I hope Lanning and his staff end up being the kinds of coaches we think and hope they can be, but the jury is still out with a whooooooole lot of things on the Ducks this season. I wouldn't be shocked for this to be a rough adjustment season if Lanning has growing pains, the players and system/expectations don't match, players don't mature fast, and/or we don't end up with a dependable QB who can make things happen. I also wouldn't be shocked if this all goes really well and with the talent we have we end up with a one-loss season (probably GA) and a Pac-12 title. If I had to bet, I'd say 3 - 4 losses is the most likely scenario. I don't anticipate challenging for the NC nor a complete collapse. I really hope the Ducks prove me to be an unreasonable Debbie Downer!

Rams 32-21, 334 passing, 94 rushing, 2 TOs, 5 sacks. Rams' strength is the D-line; Bengals' weakness is the O-line.

I guess I don't want to focus backward, but forward. Yeah, MC did great recruiting and mediocre (at best) on many game days. Yeah, he left the Ducks. Yeah, there are probably ways it could have been done better, but I don't think a coach has ever left where the fan base felt it was done well. Yeah, the timing was awful for us. And yeah, we have a new coach and MC is literally almost as far away from Eugene as he could get. So I'm not going to continue to dwell on the previous coaching regime, what they did right, what they did poorly, or wish him failure or success at Miami. To me, he's just like any of the players who willingly transferred out or who got kicked off the team: buh-bye, thanks for what you did when you were here, now you're an ex-Duck and no longer on my radar.

Heck, hasn't Montana gone undefeated against the Huskies recently?

I'm sure there's lots of inside stuff with both Riley and MC to which we as fans have no visibility. To the typical fan, it's basically this: MC left to go home and coach his alma mater. Riley left because he was afraid of coaching in the SEC and/or he jumped at a bigger market/paycheck. Essentially, it's "Honey, I'm breaking up with you because I'm moving across the country to go home" versus "Honey, I'm breaking up with you because this other person over here is better looking and has more money - see ya."

And if this all happens, "college" football will simply become another pro league. At that point, they'll be competing with the NFL, not feeding it. The NFL will not take that lightly. See entries on WFL, USFL. Teams in non-NFL markets like Lincoln, Eugene, and Tuscaloosa might be okay - Stanford, Cal, USC, UCLA, Arizona State, and others are in trouble. The NFL will have no problem throwing its weight around - signing players who should be freshmen, refusing teams the right to play in its stadiums, non-compete agreements for coaches, playing on Saturdays. Anger the NFL at your own risk. And I'm guessing if it's another pro league, billionaire boosters are going to be less likely to donate money for new facilities. If it's all profit-based, let the team turn a profit. As employees, can they be laid off if the team runs into problems? Can they be fired for non-performance? Traded? (I wonder who might want Butterfield for a huge D-lineman?) Do they get workman's comp if injured? Does OSHA get involved and regulate equipment and practices? Can they now be required to work full-time year-round, eight hours/five days a week? Do they get the same medical coverage that other school employees get with co-pays and deductibles, rather than all their specialized medical attention? (Yeah, you blew your MCL - you're authorized for ten physical therapy appointments.) Maybe the same travel perks (Yes, a direct flight on the team charter would be great, but we booked you to Gainesville through Dallas and Orlando - oh, and you're in a middle seat next to the lavatory...here's your bag of peanuts.) If they're not required to attend classes, any kid with an F average can play for Stanford or Notre Dame. At that point, why does a team need to be associated with a school at all? Then how long will it be until "Alabama" is disassociated entirely from the University of Alabama? Or until a group of owners wants a team in Portland to compete against Oregon and Washington and doesn't even bother to associate with a university? How long until Oregon alumni no longer follow the Ducks because the team is associated with their alma mater? This could go in so, so many ugly directions. One thing I know: I would rather be an athlete getting a free education, all the training table food I can eat, regular physical therapy, specialist doctors, charter flights, and all the other perks they receive, than be the equivalent of a $50k-a-year mid-level employee at a university.

As someone who went to college in Malibu, I can attest to that. Of course, there were plenty of "things" to get into in 1987, when I was down there. As well as in '67, '72, '78, '04, etc. when SC was winning national titles. So I'm not sure how that's changed...

I think USC under Riley will be much tougher than a lot of folks on here do. Not necessarily next year, because there are still a lot of holes in the talent there - but soon. At the same time, if Oregon can't beat USC in a Pac-12 title game, why would anyone think that same Oregon team could beat Clemson, Ohio State, Georgia, Alabama, Michigan, Notre Dame, or any other playoff teams that year? We'll either be good enough to beat SC and then compete on a level playing field with the other playoff teams, or not good enough to beat SC, which means we also would have lost quickly (and probably badly) even if we had reached the playoffs. Simple as that.

With any level of competence from the coaching staff, USC recruits itself. Major city location, great scenery, major media center, deep surrounding talent pool, lots of history. Get enough 5-stars and even a moderately talented staff can win 10 - 11 games. Given the brand, that and a Pac-12 title puts SC in the playoffs. To put it simply, there are a whole lot of advantages SC has with Riley. It's going to be a tall task for Lanning and the Ducks to overcome that. Not saying they won't or can't, but don't kid yourself that Riley just isn't that good. Phenomenal recruiter, great track record, media darling, great personal brand name, and I've gotta believe it's a heckuva lot easier to recruit to LA than to Norman.

I fortunately never had one of "those" relationships romantically, but from a business standpoint, I've had a few clients I hated to see leave because of the financial impact, but boy I was sure glad to see them go related to quality of life. So yeah, I get it.