Kurt Rambis

The vast majority of onside kicks are desperation moves when the opposition knows you're going to do it (e.g. down by 6 with 45 seconds left in the game). Surprise onside kicks not done in desperation, I would assume, have a different success rate. I would love to know the success rate of "expected" versus "unexpected" onside kicks - might tell a very different story for all we know.

There are many, many risks in life. Some are smart risks; some are dumb risks. Playing the stock market with intelligent help and/or substantial research is a risk - but at an average return of 8% a year over the past 90-something years, it's a smart risk. Playing the stock market by throwing darts at stock listings is a dumb risk. I like seeing coaches take smart risks. Running your QB in certain situations is a smart risk. Some trick plays (including onside kicks) are smart risks. IMHO, going for it on 4th down at your own 34 with a backup QB in the game is not a smart risk. I'm thrilled with what I've seen from Lanning and staff so far, and I like the fact that they are willing to take some risks, but I agree that they need to be a little smarter with some of the risks they take.

The reality is that we all could look back on the careers of Nick Saban, Joe Paterno, Woody Hayes, Bear Bryant, and any other legendary coaches and find blown calls and flat-out mistakes. Just like we can look back on Hall of Fame QBs from the NFL and find some "WTH?" interceptions or bad decisions. Mistakes are gonna happen. The keys are 1) to minimize them, 2) not to repeat them, and 3) do enough good things that your team overcomes them. From the UW game to the Utah game, I think we already saw some of #2 happening...

I wish I could believe this could happen. I definitely could see UGA beating LSU and Clemson losing. BUT... ...given the lack of respect the Pac-12 gets (and has deserved in recent years), I have to believe a 1-loss B1G team goes even if they don't make the title game. Or, if it's an absolute beat-down in the B1G, that a 2-loss Bama team goes. And if TCU has one loss, they still might also go over the Ducks. That 49-3 score will loom very large, as will the Pac-12's recent weakness and east coast bias. I think not only would all these things need to happen, but by BIG margins - Ducks swamp OSU and USC by 30, Michigan and Clemson lose huge, etc. If tOSU beats Michigan 24 - 20, I don't see Big Blue losing its grip on #4. Remember, the committee isn't just voting in what they truly feel are the top 4 teams. They want a SHOW. They want ratings. I doubt the committee really wants a UGA/Oregon rematch, and the only way the Ducks get in is as the 4th seed. Pure logic says the Ducks would have a shot under the circumstances you described, but I doubt the committee will choose based on pure logic.

I don't think so, unless SC beats Notre Dame first. A two-loss USC team probably isn't going to the playoffs, even if they win the Pac-12. So we go to the Rose Bowl if... SC beats ND and Oregon beats OSU (SC goes to the CFP and Ducks are in the Rose Bowl) Oregon beats SC in the conference title game (we won't go to the CFP but will be in the Rose Bowl) If SC loses to ND and then beats us in the conference title game, they would go to the Rose Bowl as a non-CFP conference champ.

Seems to me that in some ways, this is the opposite of the UW game. Last week, the Huskies played very well and deserved credit, but Oregon basically gave the game away with too many mistakes and missed opportunities. This week, Oregon played very well and deserves credit, but Utah basically gave the game away with too many mistakes and missed opportunities. The missed 38-yard FG in the first quarter. Two picks. The pathetic pass on 4th down that landed at Kincaid's feet. Letting a gimpy QB who hadn't run all day convert a critical 4th down with a run (really just a stumble forward). Just shows how, when teams are fairly evenly matched, little things throughout the game create a win or a loss. The devil is in the details.

Mel Tucker, Jimbo Fisher, and MC all have massive guaranteed money, and all three programs are experiencing serious buyer's remorse at this point. I wonder whether schools will start thinking twice before committing tens of millions of $$ to long-term contracts in order to land a new coach?

Since Lanning and staff didn't recruit either backup QB, I don't think recruiting position has anything to do with it. I've gotta believe the coaches simply think TT has more potential and/or is a better option currently than JB, based on what they've seen in practice and position meetings. Since none of us gets to see any of that, it's impossible for us to know, unfortunately.

Yeah, I remember when we pretty much knew who would be back. Aside from the occasional academic or behavioral problem, we didn't have to deal with early draft entries and transfer portals. And I'm not even all that dang old! That's what makes the consistent success of Bama, Ohio State, and one or two others so impressive. Aside from an occasional down year, you know somehow they'll retool and reload and be right back in the top 10. I'm hoping we can get to that point as well. But man, there's a whole ton up in the air for next year...

The pants don't tie in to the jersey, although the white helmets do help to tie the whole thing together. Still, would prefer at least a narrow green stripe or some green details on the pants to make it more cohesive. But I love the color combo of bright green, yellow, and white. Mr. Blackwell has spoken!

247 Sports just published a list of the hot assistant coaches, and ones already rumored to be in consideration for open jobs. Dillingham isn't even on the list, interestingly enough. Survey says: Assistants to watch on the coaching carousel 247SPORTS.COM Breaking down the hottest names to watch on the college football coaching carousel with feedback from those in the industry.

I've seen a lot of reasons stated on this board why Oregon lost, mostly focusing on coaching decisions. In my reasonably humble opinion, the Ducks had multiple opportunities to win this game - and missed most of them. It's not one thing, but a variety of things. The hands-to-the-face penalty cost us a first and goal from inside the 5 - that's potentially a four-point swing right there. The snap miscue inside the red zone - that's another seven-point swing. Just those two plays change the game entirely. Penix played out of his mind - congrats to him. The passing defense couldn't stop anything - no pressure on the QB and few stops by the DBs. It's been a weakness all year. The onside kick decision was questionable - as Charles points out, convert it and DL is a genius. Fail at it, and... Nix being lost at a critical time - bad luck and injuries happen. It sucks, but it certainly won't be the last time. The 4th-and-1 decision - going for it in the first place, the play call, and the decision with a backup QB in there. In short, yes, I believe we can question a couple of the calls. We probably can in every game, and could have under previous coaches. Yes, some players made key mistakes. I've yet to see a game where no one screwed up. Any one of those things could have been a killer. A combination of them is what did the Ducks in Saturday. I can't really blame Lanning, the DBs, the pass rush, the DC, the refs, bad luck, Forsyth, Powers-Johnson, or anyone else, because just as all of them have contributed heavily to the team's success this year, they all contributed to the loss Saturday. This team (players and coaches) just isn't deep enough, talented enough, and/or experienced enough to have a bunch of problems in one game against a good opponent and overcome them. Yet.

Actually, I believe MOST of our best QBs were 3 stars, or maybe even lower. I'm not going to go back and research it all, but I'm pretty sure Herbert was a 3 star, and although I'm not sure there were "star rankings" back then, I'm going to guess Joey Harrington, Akili Smith, Jeremiah Masoli, Vernon Adams, Dan Fouts, Chris Miller, Tony Graziani, and Bill Musgrave were all under-the-radar recruits. I know Fouts and Musgrave were basically unknowns, and Miller was considered risky because of his knee. Masoli and Smith were JC transfers.

HS to college is a lot like college to pro - drafting and recruiting are both all about projections. A star in HS/college may not have what it takes to make the next level - mentally, physically, emotionally - or he may get distracted. Scouts and recruiters are projecting that a guy has the chance to be really good, but it's nothing more than an educated guess. A few weeks ago in another thread, I posted some research about the top 10 HS QBs for each of the past 5 years or something like that, and around half of them were either backups, complete flops, or struggling badly. The NFL spends far more money on scouting than colleges spend on recruiting, and about half the first-rounders never pan out. Heck, many of the guys in the top 3 - Russell Maryland, Ryan Leaf, LaMarcus Russell, Trent Richardson, Tim Couch, Tony Mandarich - end up being mediocre players or total busts. If TT had been great under MC, then I think you'd have to look at what the coaches this year are doing or how they're handling/preparing him. But what have we ever seen that gives us the idea he's our next starting QB? It's pretty hard to blame the OC or HC for a player they inherited who has never shown game performance. And it's pretty hard to blame them for not bringing in another QB in the transfer portal - I mean, really, who's going to come in when the pitch is "We need an experienced backup - never mind the two 5-stars and the one 4-star we already have"?

Obviously I'm not an NFL talent evaluator, but from what I can tell Nix is probably a 3rd - to - 5th rounder in the NFL draft - someone expected to be a career backup. The big question is whether staying another year can really elevate his draft status. If so, it may be worthwhile. If not, what's the point? Why not get an extra year of NFL experience and an extra year of NFL pay, particularly since he's older than most draftees? If you're a 4th round pick this year and scouts tell you you'll probably be a 4th round pick next year, you go. If scouts tell you another good year could elevate you to 1st or 2nd round, you think hard about staying. And none of us knows what scouts and NFL talent evaluators are telling him...

Anyone surprised? Anyone? Bueller?

As things turned out, it was a mistake. 49 - 3 says that. UGA being the defending national champ says that. But how was UO supposed to know that four years ago? I remember the Ducks going to Michigan, Ohio State, and Tennessee, and emerging with statement wins that helped put the program on the map. Why was UGA a mistake but not the others? Because of the result. Just like if a coach goes for 2 in OT instead of kicking the PAT - win the game with the 2, you're brilliant. Fail to convert, you're a bum. The only thing I think was truly questionable was the "neutral site" game, which was neutral site in name only. That was a Georgia home game, and we don't get one in return. Also consider the following: Oregon got a heck of a nice payday for that game. Oregon got exposure in a major recruiting area. Oregon got major national exposure (which turned out to be a bad thing, given the result). Oregon had the opportunity for another major statement win. In 2018, coming off a 7-6 season, who would reasonably have thought the Ducks would be in contention for the CFP, and that a bad loss in that one game could be the difference between making it and being left out? Or that it would be the first game for a new coaching staff and a new QB? Scheduling is a crapshoot. If someone in 2017 scheduled Stanford for 2022, they certainly wouldn't figure they would be getting one of the worst teams in the nation. And if they scheduled Oregon State the same way, they would have figured on a cupcake and gotten a rude surprise when a strong Beavers team showed up. Also consider that things change and schedules can't always change that quickly. Strength of schedule plays a role in CFP decisions, and the Pac-12 has been down - who would have known in 2018 that there would be four teams in the top 15 and we might not need a signature game like that? The CFP is going to 12 in a couple of years, but we already have schedules confirmed past that, and it's probably too late to adjust if needed. Hindsight is always 20/20.

I just find this amusing. Like when UCLA's DTR said something along the lines of, "If we had just done our jobs, we would have won easily." Dude, you just got your tail handed to you - stop pretending it was some type of fluke. If it makes the loss easier for you to handle emotionally, tell yourself you're the better team, but don't verbalize it because you just look like a fool. I love the predictions of how Oregon's program will come tumbling down and UW will become dominant. Maybe George R. R. Martin can use that fantasy for a Game of Thrones sequel. What's next - predictions that a tsunami will wash away Autzen? The NCAA will determine the eggshell uniforms violate some archaic rule and the Ducks have to forfeit the last 15 victories over UW as a result? The CFP will only accept teams wearing purple? SMH.

Perfect example of why I don't get too excited about a recruit or a potential new coach, or too down if there are rumors that a key player, recruit, or coach is leaving. Disinformation, people changing their minds, rumors, clickbait, attempted sabotage by fans or coaches of other teams, deals to be worked out, indecision - just not worth worrying about. When a coach or current player announces he's leaving, then it's real. When a recruit signs an NLI, then it's real. When a new coach signs a contract, then it's real. Sadly, with the transfer portal and buyouts, even when a kid is playing for us or a coach is under contract, it may not be real for long. I have no doubt we'll lose promising players to the transfer portal, assistant coaches will get promoted elsewhere, recruits will flip, etc. The Ducks will reload and move forward. Until they need to, it's all just noise.

It's fun to dream, but I can't get ahead of myself. Win the next game. That's all that matters. Do that each week and we'll all be mighty happy at the end of the year - but I gotta think one game at a time or set myself up for too much disappointment - particularly since getting to the CFP involves a lot of stuff the Ducks can't control (like whether TCU loses again, whether a 2-loss LSU or Bama team wins the SEC and they and UGA both go, etc.).

In my mind, those who choose no longer to be Ducks are no longer Ducks the moment they make that decision. I don't hate them or wish bad thing to happen to their careers, but I don't particularly care where they end up or how they do. We'll ride with the players who want to be here. And frankly, I don't much care why someone chooses to leave. It's their choice. Just like kids who transfer from Nebraska or UW or anywhere else - were they disappointed in the scheme at their old program? Didn't see a path to playing time? Think they're better than they really are? Doesn't matter - if you can contribute to the team, welcome aboard. I'll trust the coaches to decide who belongs here and who doesn't; who deserves playing time and who doesn't. So whether a guy has a huge ego that isn't being fed, doesn't like the weather, can't cut it in the classroom, doesn't fit the culture, misses his family, thinks he'll be a star somewhere else, is going through some personal problems, or anything else, thanks for the time you spent here, good luck in your future...and buh bye.

People argue all the time what's more important: coaching, system, players, etc. It works when everything comes together. Look how mediocre Belichick is in NE without Tom Brady; at the same time, look at how underwhelming Justin Herbert was at Oregon under MC. Have you ever seen a QB be truly great without a great supporting cast around him, and great coaching? Or a coach be fantastic without great players? Shula had Griese and Marino, Noll had Bradshaw, Madden had Stabler, Johnson had Aikman, Reid has Mahomes (and McNabb before that). Archie Manning was terrific, but his team was always horrible, so he never won anything. Nix got good coaching and a system that works for him, and he's flourished. He and Dillingham are making each other look good. One wonders what Brown would have been like under the current coaches, or what Mariota, Akili Smith, Masoli, Kellen Clemens, and others would have been like under MC.

I definitely respect the Utah program and would like them to be a consistent rival. As someone who did not actually attend Oregon, I also hold no hatred for OSU and would love to see two teams representing the state where I grew up (and still consider home) represented at the top of the Pac. The third is tougher. I lived in Phoenix for 27 years so hold a bit of a soft spot for ASU, having been to numerous games. I agree with Charles on WSU - love the underdog program and the difficulty of recruiting up there. Then there's Stanford - I have to cheer for a team that can compete at the highest level and still be one of the top academic institutions in the nation, with all of the limitations that puts on recruiting. It would probably be Stanford for that reason, plus we had a great rivalry with them some years ago and those games were wild fun.

Report from Captain Obvious: even if the Ducks win all remaining games, it's all going to come down to who else is a 1-loss team. Undefeated P5 teams will make it in, and there will probably be 1 - 3 of those. Of the other 1-loss teams in addition to Oregon (should we finish with just one loss), you can eliminate any of them with a loss to an awful team, like an FCS team, an cellar-dweller like Indiana, etc. The problem is that it's highly doubtful any of the other 1-loss teams will have a 46-point loss on their resume. I think that's what dooms the Ducks, if in fact they were to win out. That's going to be hard to get out of the minds of the selection committee. Add to that the fact that many of those 1-loss teams will inevitably be bluebloods like Clemson, Alabama, and Michigan, and a whole lot would have to break just right for Oregon to have any real shot. A 1-loss Oregon team against a 1-loss Bama or Clemson? Forget it.

Huh. Offered by Oregon and New Mexico State. New definition of the term "sleeper"...