-
Finish your profile right here and directions for adding your Profile Picture (which appears when you post) is right here.
Kurt Rambis
-
Posts
373 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Events
Posts posted by Kurt Rambis
-
-
I prefer 8. Do we really feel like the #11 or #12 teams in the field deserve to be there just as much as #1 or #2? Frankly, most years it's hard to see real worth in teams below the top 6. There's usually an obvious top two or three, then another two or three who probably are all deserving of spots 3 and 4. Once we get down into two-loss teams, which is probably inevitable when we're talking a 12-team playoff, I don't think they deserve a shot. They lost that privilege by losing two games.
And 12 teams won't solve the problem of "deserving" teams being left out - we could go to 30 teams and #31 would gripe and moan that they deserved that last spot over #30. We're at what - 68? - in March Madness and every year we hear some 19 - 15 team yelling about how they deserve to be there too.
12 extends the season too much and lets in good teams rather than great teams.
-
2
-
-
While I really like what Bucky and the other backs have done so far, any scuttlebutt on what's happening with Cardwell? Is the injury still lingering, is he in the doghouse, or do the coaches just think the other backs are better? I really thought after the taste we got last year that Cardwell would be the Next Big Thing at Oregon.
-
On 10/25/2022 at 1:51 AM, Pocketchange said:
I would be looking at Miami's recruits and players right now
There would be a bit of poetic justice to that for the fans, but Lanning has no reason to target Miami and his staff probably has little or no pre-existing relationship with those recruits. I would think any program that is struggling right now, looking bad, and/or in limbo - Miami, Nebraska, ASU, Iowa, and others - is a prime target for flipping recruits.
-
On 10/24/2022 at 5:40 PM, Mic said:
As far as recruiting top players out of California goes this is what I think Oregon's chances are going forward:
1) They depend greatly on how well USC & UCLA are ranked and playing. Those 2 schools up (like this year) Oregon's chances go down.
2) They depend somewhat on how well CAL and Stanford are ranked and playing. Those 2 schools up (unlike this year) and Oregon still has a decent chance.
Oregon has been benefitting from USC, UCLA, CAL and Stanford schools struggling in the recent 2 decades, more-or-less. Once that changes (and it is already) then Oregon will be forced to find their 4 & 5 stars elsewhere. By and large, not entirely, of course. But the low hanging fruit is about gone for Oregon in that region of the west IF the two biggest schools continue to find success. How moving to the B1G effects that will have to be seen but it might also tend to make things tougher for Oregon.
I don't disagree with the concept that if CA schools are in the national spotlight, that'll make recruiting against them harder. That's true for any school. I'm just not sure that's going to happen long-term.
UCLA was ranked #9, but why? They certainly didn't play a particularly tough schedule - UW, Utah, and four total cupcakes. Chip has always hated recruiting. Especially once they move to the B1G, I'm not convinced they'll be much over .500 on a regular basis.
USC has looked good this year but also has played only 3 decent teams - a close loss to OSU, beating a fading WSU team, and losing to Utah. Also not convinced they'll do that well after the move, particularly since they actually play D in the B1G, and Riley's defenses have traditionally been weak.
Cal has been mediocre for years. Stanford had some great years, but they've been down for a while, and with their academic standards for recruits, they're not even in play for the majority of recruits.
Staying in SoCal will always be appealing for some players, but I'm not convinced we'll face overwhelming competition from the CA schools long-term, any more than we have for the past 10 - 20 years.
-
Possibly the biggest problem right now is not the existence of NIL - it's the lack of many rules regarding the NIL, or any ability by the NCAA to enforce what few rules there are.
The NFL pays every player, and there is inequity in what different guys get, but they have very well defined rules. One team owns your rights for a certain amount of time; guys come into the league through the draft; you can't just walk away from a contract to another team; teams can't tamper with a player under contract, etc.
The NCAA has few rules and is toothless to enforce any they actually have. Until all teams are operating under the same rules, the rules are well defined, there's a reasonably level playing field at least for the top 25 - 50 teams, and there's an enforcement mechanism, this will continue to be a complete free-for-all mess.
Right now, the only real enforcement mechanism is the conferences. If Bama is who tampered with a Pac-12 player, you think the SEC is going to do anything? Heck no. But if Bama tampers with a Georgia or LSU player, you watch the SEC have a big problem with it.
-
I sorta think the best college football humor is Miami's performance this season.
Just sayin'.
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
-
Interesting that the higher-ranked team has only won 9 of those 17 matchups (53%), and the home team has only won 10 of the 17 (59%).
-
On 10/13/2022 at 6:49 PM, Tandaian said:
It is a bit silly to be angry at somebody for doing exactly what we would do in the exact same position.
There's one pretty big difference: did Oregon's AD help block Pac-12 expansion? On the "leaving" part, I agree with you. I even get it about lying to the commish, because it's not like you can make secret backroom deals in the light of day. But what SC did is akin to burning down someone else's business and then claiming their insurance money.
My head says it's better for the Ducks if SC wins, but that's only if SC and Oregon both make the championship game. Too many ifs and unknowns...not to mention I still think the Ducks are good enough to win the Pac-12 and then lose by 30 to an SEC team. We're just not there yet, IMHO.
Therefore, go Utah!
-
3
-
-
On 10/12/2022 at 6:24 AM, Nevada Dawg said:
Bama has been a bit uninspiring this year and could easily have lost two games already. Those things make a difference when there are many potential deserving teams.
I could see Bama getting left out of things, but not if they win the SEC title game.
-
On one hand, If A is clearly off-limits and B is questionable and you make B off-limits, then C becomes questionable; if you make C off-limits, then D is questionable. There will always be someone who can take offense - particularly if there's a player's family member on the board. Even a statement like "I'm not sure what Player A was thinking on that play; a smarter thing to do would have been to run out of bounds" can become "You're calling my baby stupid?! What do you know about playing football?"
On the other hand, there's a reason we all keep coming back to this forum.
There's no question a line has to be drawn; the question of WHERE will always be a moving target. For instance, I don't read the snarky "comedy" articles about each week's opponent because I don't appreciate them. I'm sure others love them.
IMHO, it all comes down to intent. "Turnover Thompson" isn't making a statement or having a discussion about a player; it's just an insult. It's like the difference between saying, "Charles, I disagree with you about where the line should be drawn" and "Charles, stop being a big baby." Both might intend to say the same thing, but one choice is rude and unnecessary and I would flag it.
The second example is largely the same, to me. Saying you think Butterfield should be elevated to #2, that TT doesn't look like a Power 5 QB, etc. are all perfectly reasonable opinions (right or wrong). Same as saying an OG looked slow or out of shape, a freshman looks lost out there, someone committed a boneheaded penalty, the play calling in the 4th quarter cost us the game, etc. But saying something like "That fat dude needs to back off the buffet table" or "Dilly's stupidity cost us the game in Q4" turns an opinion into an insult. Unnecessary.
I had zero problem with #3. I didn't interpret it as commenting on intelligence, but on game awareness. I've seen plenty of smart people freeze up in front of an audience or on a test, for instance - doesn't mean they're dumb. Had it been something like "He's not bright enough..." then that's a different story. I've seen plenty of athletes with amazing athletic ability who simply can't figure out how to use it - the difference between Harold Minor and Vince Carter.
As for how to deal with it, I would suggest a nice, brief, non-confrontational e-mail explaining what was wrong with the post, an alternate way to express the sentiment, and noting that these rules are implemented by popular opinion. This thread gave people an opportunity to express themselves, and it's pretty clear you're not the only one with concerns about at least some of these statements. Put the responsibility on the entire board - not just the owner who wants things a certain way. At this point, it's clear that's where it rests, and maybe that approach will save you some grief and arguments. It's how WE want things as a community - not just how YOU want things.
-
1
-
1
-
-
College recruiting is much like the NFL draft - so much of it is projections of what a guy might develop into at the next level. You will ALWAYS have a better team if it's loaded with 5-star recruits (or 1st round draft choices) than lower-level guys - the numbers bear that out over and over again.
But then we make the mistake of projecting that to individual players ("This guy was a 1st rounder/5-star, so he should be great!"). And too often, we have expectations of greatness right away.
Plenty of guys wash out at the next level; others take a long time to develop. For every Bryce Young or CJ Stroud there's a Brock Purdy. Top 10 QBs from 2017 - 2019 (from 247 Sports) include Hunter Johnson, Myles Brennan, Jack Sears, Dylan McCaffrey, Keytaon Thompson, Justin Rogers, Jarren Williams, JT Daniels, Tyler Shough, Max Duggan, Spencer Rattler, Graham Mertz, Ryan Hilinski, and Dylan Morris - that's 14 guys out of the top 30 who have done next to nothing in college.
247 has Thompson rated #9 among '21 QBs. The rest of the top 10 class: Quinn Ewers (tOSU), Caleb Williams (Oklahoma), Sam Huard (UW), Drake Maye (UNC), Brock Vandegriff (UGA), JJ McCarthy (Michigan), Kaidon Salter (Tenn), Kyle McCord (tOSU), and Tyler Buchner (Notre Dame).
Ewers couldn't get on the field and transferred, but is doing well at Texas. Williams is a star. Maye and McCarthy are first year starters doing well. McCord looks good as a backup.
But Huard has 24 yards passing this season. Salter is a mediocre starter, but at Liberty. Vandagriff is 0 - 3 passing in his career. Buchner has struggled (3 TDs 5 picks) in spot duty and is out for 4 months with a shoulder injury. And we've all seen Thompson.
So far, out of the top 10, it looks like 1 star, 3 more who are looking really good so far, and a bunch of nothing for the other six. Maybe some of these guys will become starters and even stars as they mature and get more opportunities, but it's not like Thompson is that different from the majority of the top ten from 2021.
That's why it's hard to get too excited about Donte Moore - will he be the next Spencer Rattler, or the next CJ Stroud? I'd rather have him than not have him, that's for sure, but he, Butterfield, Thompson, Cade Millen, Robbie Ashford, Tyler Shough, and all these other guys who have come through Autzen who haven't left a mark tell us that it's a real crapshoot.
-
1
-
1
-
8
-
-
I look at it this way: would I rather listen to an interview with Leach or with a non-personality like Nick Saban? Leach all day long.
Yeah, he takes it a bit far sometimes, but I love when athletes and coaches let their personality out rather than engaging in cliches and corporate speak. Plus you have to respect what he consistently managed to accomplish at WSU. People think it's hard to recruit to Eugene? Try eastern Washington.
Plus he's a fellow Pepperdine alumnus, so there's that.
-
Just turned 57 and I like 'em. And they do have "nightmare green" elements in the numbers and helmets, so at least we can pretend school colors are involved!
I love the fact we go totally non-traditional sometimes.
-
1
-
-
On 10/4/2022 at 4:15 PM, Charles Fischer said:
In other words, the conference needs to be "top-heavy" for multiple or any Playoff participants in the current formula. But the good news is...
1) The number going into the Playoff is about to change to 12 over the next couple of years, and
2) Oregon could become a "Clemson" of the Pac over the same couple of years and make a high seed in the Playoff, IMHO.
Agree completely. I was reacting to the way things are right now, not the way they will become with 12 teams in the playoffs.
However, I still would rather be top-heavy, as the #3 and #4 teams will definitely make the playoffs, and #10 would have a strong case, whereas teams in the 15 - 25 range have no shot unless they're conference champions.
-
Sure, it's 5 - 3, but look at where those teams are rated:
#3, #4, #10 for the B1G, compared to #6 (and I believe seriously overrated at that), #12, #13, #18, #21.
In other words, two teams that right now might make the CFB playoffs, versus none. I'd go for quality over quantity any day. Especially early in the season, 15 - 25 are usually a bunch of teams that no one really know what to do with - good record but played no one (UCLA), no tradition but suddenly a solid record (Kansas), highly ranked last year but struggling (Cincinnati), etc. Does anyone really know whether Kansas State is better than Washington State? But everyone can see Ohio State is obviously better than Washington State.
Both conferences have plenty of traditionally weak teams - Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern, Cal, ASU, Oregon State. Pac 12 has more decent teams than the B1G; B1G has more serious playoff contenders than the Pac 12.
-
2
-
-
It's the known versus the unknown. By the end of the year, we'll know exactly what we have in Nix. Unless TT or Butterfield gets to play, they'll remain total unknowns.
So if Nix implodes, then we'll probably be ready to move on as fans. If he continues to play like he did against WSU, we'll want him back.
Unfortunately, if he implodes, he's probably back; if he plays great, he may be gone.
-
1
-
-
First Ducks game I've seen in nearly three years and it's this? Ugh.
Well, at least I don't think we need to worry about losing our OC to ASU...
-
1
-
-
On 9/18/2022 at 12:14 PM, Duckhart said:
TA&M is supposed was to be a top 5 team in the nation.
Then I guess Appalachian State must be ranked #1. "Supposed to be" and "is" can be miles and miles apart.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Oh, HELL YES!!!
Living overseas, there's basically no way to watch the NFL without streaming. I share a subscription to NFL Game Pass with my niece and her husband - can watch any NFL game live, or see the whole thing after the fact without commercials, or even watch a 40-minute telescoped version of the game. Plus I can watch previous Super Bowls, classic games, NFL shows, or anything else they have on there, commercial free.
Would freaking LOVE to do the same thing with the Ducks, with Pepperdine basketball, etc.
As for the "I'm too old to do this" issue, I simply refuse to let that stop me. If I can't understand something the first time, I'll study it or ask someone who knows what they're doing. We have cable for my elderly MIL who lives with us, but I haven't watched it in two years - everything is Netflix or Disney+. No ads, can watch it whenever I want (not whenever the network programs it), can pause it, rewind to catch something I missed, etc. It's just a much better way to watch TV.
Now Prime specifically is a bit of a hassle, because we can't get most of the programming in Europe - but that's why smart people invented VPN and Apple Air Play!
-
I love great, heated rivalries in any sport. Steelers/Ravens.
RedskinsCommanders/Cowboys. The old Celtics/Lakers and Celtics/Pistons.That's one of the great things about college sports - rivalries tend to stay around forever. Michigan/Ohio State and Alabama/Auburn have hated each other forever. On the other hand, the biggest rivalry in the NFL used to be Steelers/Raiders, and now the two teams couldn't care less about each other.
Even the small schools have great rivalries. When I was at Pepperdine, it was Pepperdine/Loyola Marymount in hoops. Man, that got ugly - some of the crowd shenanigans I led during a particularly heated game made the front page of the LA Times sports section. (Nothing destructive or soccer-hooligan-like, just loud and obnoxious.)
There's nothing like beating your big rival.
-
No, not in general, but which would you rather have happen to the Ducks:
- Get embarrassingly rolled 49 - 3 by one of the best teams in the nation
- Lose a close game to a lower-level program like Appalachian State or Georgia Southern (or Eastern Washington)?
In other words, just given these factors, would you rather be Dan Lanning or Jimbo Fisher/Scott Frost?
-
This statement alone tells us the current state of college football:
"Georgia...has more five-stars than the Pac-12 conference combined."
It's essentially the SEC, the B1G, and then everyone else - and even in those two conferences, more than half the teams are mostly lousy and/or occasional pretenders.
Not sure what's worse - the be a bigwig in an also-ran conference, or to be Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Missouri, Rutgers, Maryland, etc. on the big stage but never getting a speaking role.
-
I've seen a lot of posts of utter disappointment on here, which is entirely understandable. I haven't seen a lot of "buyers' remorse" posts on here, which is laudable. Unless a coach does something idiotic like punch a player or start throwing equipment onto the field, there should be no buyers' remorse after one game.
Just like had we won 49 - 3, we couldn't exactly crown him as the next Bear Bryant.
Smart loves him, UGA fans love him, so far his players seem to love him, and certainly a lot of recruits love him. He'll need time to get his feet under him, get all the assistants onto the same page, recruit his kind of players, and install his team culture and schemes.
The sun actually came out this morning - probably even in Eugene.
-
1
-
-
If it were just "better players," there would be no upsets in college football. Appalachian State would never have beaten Michigan; Boise State would never have beaten Oklahoma. It's a lot more than just that, although I have no doubt that plays a major role.
Oregon had much better players than Stanford last year, but look what happened.
Is it scheme? Coaching? Lack of effort/heart? Lack of football IQ? Transitioning to a new system? Lack of leadership? Maturity? No idea. Maybe even the guys who coach and play on the team don't know right now. And if they do, I'm sure no coach or player is going to come out and say, "Yeah, that defensive scheme sucked" or "Yeah, that position group is seriously overrated." So we fans will stay in the dark until we get to see some more games and get a sense of what's happening on a regular basis.
And I'm not buying the time zone or home field elements. Home field is generally worth about 3 points in the spread. I used to travel 25 weeks a year all over the US and often dealt with 3 times zones a week, working until midnight, traveling commercial, well into my late 40s without being a highly conditioned athlete with every training, equipment, and nutritional advantage known to man - sucks sometimes, but deal with it. No different than playing with a sore ankle or a head cold - sucks, but deal with it.Those can't possibly begin to explain a 46-point gap.
We Need Some College Football Humor (Thank Twitter!)
in Our Beloved Ducks
Posted
So much for the winning streak...