WiseKwacker

Another nice article, Darren. Those were some REALLY BAD memories, but excellent reminders of the troubles the Ducks have had with the Wildcats over the years. I only have one quibble with what you've written. From my perspective, the phrase, "...the legendary Brent Musburger," is an oxymoron. I think it goes back to the guy's coverage of the NBA while constantly referring to Bill Walton as "mountain man." On the other hand, that 2009 game was one of my all-time favorite Duck games. Thanks for putting in that link.

Predictable? You mean like when they put Sean Dollars in, they're gonna throw to him? I'm far from an expert football analyst, but come on, Kenny. And, Haywarduck, you nailed it on the Cougs "Couging it." Once the Ducks had the game in the bag, I found myself actually feeling sorry for the fans they showed in the stands. The Cougs HAD THAT GAME, and THEY EARNED IT. The Ducks' defense was frustrating to watch, to say the least. Too many missed tackles and AGAIN the inability to stop short passes which often turned into first down passes. And, Dilly's offense was really great until they got inside the red zone. Then, it was really frustrating to watch. As far as I'm concerned, the Mauigoa interception was on Dilly for calling the same play two times in a row. The Cougs knew what to expect when they kept Dollars in for two plays in a row. Okay, in spite of the negativity, I'm very happy the Ducks came out of this one with a win. Hopefully, it's a big learning experience for all involved.

I almost turned this game off at about 9:00 to go. How the HECK did the Ducks win this game?!?!? Happy with the resilience, but MAN are there some things to fix. I'm not down on Dilly, but the Cougs' OC really out-coached him. And, how many missed tackles did the Ducks have? Yikes! Incredibly relieved to come out of this with a win. Kudos to Bo Nix.

The first college football game I attended was the 1967 game between OSU's "Giant Killers" and the O.J. Simpson-let Trojans. I was a high school sophomore. My buddy's dad took us; he was an OSU alum. It was a cold, drizzly fall day with a muddy field. Even though I was a Duck fan by that time, I rooted hard for the Beavs. Their defense played great, and they never let The Juice turn the corner on the numerous end sweeps the Trojans ran that day. Simpson just kept running out of bounds near the line of scrimmage on those plays. Afterwards, my buddy persuaded me to storm the field with all the college kids--even though I worried about getting my Converse sneakers all muddy. I forgot all about that once we were out there celebrating with everyone else. I was a Beaver Believer on that day. I'm rooting for them to do something similar today. BTW, I didn't attend a Duck football game until my first year in Eugene as a student. The student section was always only half full in those days--at least at the end of the games.

The two backs that I've been most impressed with are Sean Dollars and Byron Cardwell. Cardwell is slower to the hole than the others, and, when there's nothing there, he can look particularly bad. Then, the next time there's no hole where it should be, he'll see that and bounce left or right to a place where there IS a hole. He has really good vision and some great moves once he's got a little opening. Dollars is my favorite of the RB group. Clearly, the coaching staff sees him as the best receiver among the RBs, as he's consistently in there on passing downs. Beyond that, though, he's quick and fluid as a running back. To my eye, he's been consistently effective as a runner during his brief opportunities. Irving and Whittington have been pretty solid. I just haven't seen anything special about either one so far. Hopefully, we'll get more clarification with the BYU game.

Never argue with an old coot who watched waaaay too much television in his youth...

I watched "Game of Thrones" when it debuted years ago. After about season 2 aired, I retired and devoured the books as one of my first "tasks" as a retiree. The books, in my view, were better than the TV series as is often the case. I was anxious for Martin to write the final two books in the series after reading the five he's written. Waiting...waiting...waiting. Word was he was not likely to ever complete the book series once the TV writers used his outlines to complete the story. Now, I read that he may in fact be returning to the task of completing the book series. I guess I'll believe it when I have a copy of Book 6 in my hands. As to the new 'House of the Dragon" series, I also had trouble hearing much of the dialogue. I didn't have captioning on, though, as I usually do for most things I watch. I'll have to watch it again with captions on--it's a great help for my well-worn ears. Gotta go. My family's fantasy football draft is tonight, and I gotta lot of prep work to do. My nephew's won the league the past two years. Gonna kick his a$$ this year...maybe.

Another excellent discussion starter, Confucius. I'm with you on the 3-game "leash." Frankly, I can't visualize a scenario where the Ducks' defense isn't stellar at the start of the season with good health and excellent depth. So, if the team goes 1-2, I think it will mean that the offense has sputtered. I think the coaching staff will be ready, in that case. to change the trigger man at QB. As others have already mentioned, if they DON'T make a change in QB then, it will be an ominous sign about the perceived readiness of the two underclassmen. Personally, I'm optimistic the record will be no worse than 2-1. And, if a change in QB happens, it will be because of the positive development of Thompson or Butterfield. Fun to speculate at this point in lieu of actual game action.

Wow! That would be a great add.

Thank you...thank you...thank you! I will print it out immediately. I wish the GO DUCKS website listed this info on the roster page. Oh, that's where this came from, and I see they have now added that info. I guess I was just a bit impatient. So, sue me.

Fun read, Confucius. Somebody hit the "fast forward" button to get me to September...PRONTO! As you note, the D-line has to make us all drool a bit, thinking about the potential and depth there. Then, there's the LB group; can't wait to see these guys wreak havoc on our opponents. For me, the key is the DBs. I'm glad we snagged Gonzalez with his game experience and obvious skillset. It'll be good to get Williams back on the field. And, as for the rest of the group, I hope they mature quickly and begin to realize their potential. And, I hope we've seen the end of the soft cushion form of coverage. Watching opponents march down the field by throwing a continuous stream of 8-10 yard passes just kills me.

Perfect description of what we've seen through numerous coaches at USC over the years. Love it. And, sadly, I have to agree that it became the Ducks' model over the past few years. But, as others have said above, it seems like Lanning will be more aggressive in approach, and, while we can expect the Ducks to get burned on occasion through that approach, it'll also likely result in an increase in takeaways and TFLs. Those are real momentum builders.

Whoa! How can you leave out "No Problem" Norv Turner? Well, I guess we're talking about ex-Duck quarterbacks who've been successful in the NFL as quarterbacks...

Another good one DNC. Food for thought. I like the idea of getting a second QB some consistent game action weekly, but not necessarily to the point of calling it a "two-quarterback rotation." The system I can recall that made sense to me was run for several years by that quarterback factory in Pullman. It's been a while, but I think it was back in the Mike Price era when the Cougs would routinely run a couple of series in the 2nd quarter of games with their younger back-up quarterback. Some games, this unit really clicked and left the fans wanting more. Other games, things didn't click for this unit, and it was a relief to get back to the first team QB. Regardless, the back-up got meaningful game action every game, and this process definitely aided in the player's development while allowing the coaching staff to determine whether or not they saw real potential in the younger QB. I much prefer this kind of game action for the back-up QB over mop-up duty in lop-sided wins or losses. I'm sure more head coaches prefer the latter because it represents a much smaller risk. No doubt most head coaches never want to face a situation where they lose a close game that includes two disastrous series in the second quarter with a back-up quarterback.

So, Kayvon moves on the the NFL, and we have this situation? Who'da thunk it? I've gotta say that while I was all over the Taimani transfer from Fuskieland, the two Nebraska transfers slipped by me at the time. When you stack up these guys with the holdovers and the incoming freshmen, it's a pretty impressive interior DL. We know the linebackers will be fabulous if they can stay healthy. So, my only real question about your prophecy, Charles, is with the edge guys. I hope DJ delivers on his promise while playing big minutes on defense for the first time. And, while we know that Funa is solid, I hope Swinson takes the next step this year. Thanks for the good read, Charles. There's excitement in the air! Excitement in the air, I tell ya.

That--in my view--was a great piece of writing, DNC. Very entertaining. I'm not an MC hater, but I certainly was frustrated watching his coaching style play out year after year. For me, the Pittman departure was really telling. Thus, while I appreciate the kind of guy MC is, I breathed a sigh of relief when he moved on to Miami. Although I was not upset that he left us, I was certainly worried as the search for his successor slowly unfolded. Initially worried that Lanning was a "reach" by Mullins, I'm now nearly convinced that we've got a bona fide "steal" in our bright-eyed young coach. All I need to confirm that thought is to see how he coaches up "the kids" (sorry, I lived through the Don Read years) on Saturdays. So, I appreciate your spin on the MC situation at The U, Confucius. The Mopes--not to be confused with The Moops--and the Slurps are hilarious nicknames. And, I've now added "Corch" to my football vernacular. Keep 'em coming.

Another great article from the Ball of Confusion. I'm so grateful that you're putting in so much work to provide us "readers" with stimulating material to ponder and discuss. Keep it up. One of the things we never want to talk about is the daunting certainty of the injury bug. For most of us, there's likely an element of superstition involved; nobody wants to be guilty of "jinxing" somebody on the team. Aside from that, though, we KNOW injuries are going to occur during the season (and likely even in the pre-season). Thus, one of the things that gives me a great deal of optimism about this year's Duck squad is the depth. Personally, I can't think of a Duck team with more depth--and, I've been watching Duck football since the 60s. Yes, there's inexperience at QB, DB and RB, but there's also depth there with talented athletes just waiting to get their chance to perform on the field. Things are heating up as the first kickoff draws near; we're less than a month away. Go Ducks!

Wow, that was a fun read. Good stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for asking, Charles. I don't really mind one way or the other. I consider myself a sports snob. While there is NOTHING like watching live game action from the stands, I've grown to prefer watching games on my 65" TV screen at home for numerous reasons beyond the ease of bathroom access and cheaper, colder beer. Among them is the increasing efforts at the stadium/arena to get me to stand up and cheer when somebody else deems it appropriate. I'm a pretty independent cuss, and I want to decide myself--following the action of the play on the field/court--when I want to stand and cheer or do something else. (The one notable exception to this is the "Shout" tradition between the 3rd and 4th quarters.) I don't like sitting by the guy who's constantly yelling at the refs for "bad calls" all game long. I don't like sitting by the chatterbox who's talking about everything EXCEPT the game. I don't like doing "the wave" or participating in "Everybody clap your hands..." AND, I don't like having cheerleaders try to tell me when to stand up and cheer. (I have to admit, though, that I DO enjoy seeing that old guy who brings binoculars to the game and only using them during timeouts to watch the cheerleaders.) And, don't even think about talking to me when the Ducks are performing badly unless you want to get your head bit off. Okay, enough about my idiosyncrasies. This anecdote probably best sums up my attitude about cheerleaders. Back in the Kamikaze Kids era, I attended every basketball game at Mac Court. My usual perch was in the front row of the 3rd balcony, giving me a perfect bird's-eye view of the action on the court. (And, of course, the thrill of feeling the balcony swaying back and forth when the crowd really got going.) Well, one day I decided I'd make the commitment to sit courtside in the student section, which was mid-court in those days. So, I got up at the crack of dawn and joined the two guys who'd apparently spent the night there. As the doors opened, I sprinted for the stands and got a seat a mid-court in the front row. Watching warm-ups was great as I could even hear conversations between players and coaches. Then, about two minutes before the national anthem, the cheerleaders trotted out and plopped down right in front of me. As a college student, I loved looking at beautiful women just as much as the next guy, but I spent that entire game absolutely despising those blameless cheerleaders. STOP BLOCKING MY VIEW OF THE GAME ACTION, and STOP FORCING ME TO STAND UP ALL THE TIME! After that, I ALWAYS relished my sprint up the numerous flights of stairs to the 3rd balcony for my unobstructed view of the game action. (And I NEVER brought binoculars along with me, either.)

ANOTHER great article, DNC. I appreciate the fact that you don't just take a position that will please most of us diehard Duck fans. Your positions thus far have always been well-supported by extensive research. Clearly, from the number of comments, you're giving all of us something to think about and debate. Well done! Looking forward to your future articles. By the way, DNC, did you ever live in the Watergate Apartments in the early 70s?

Interesting take. I don't find it as offensive as some of the others who've weighed in here. Like it or not, the Huskies are our allies at this point as we both angle for the best possible situation for our respective teams.

Really enjoyed reading the article, Dazed. Lots of interesting connections in his young career. Thanks for doing the research to present it to us. I also enjoyed watching Coach Dilly in action; lots of positivity in his approach with his players. With each passing day, I keep feeling better and better about this coaching staff.

Absolutely right, Charles. If we're going to root on Gov. Newsom in California for questioning whether or not UCLA can leave the Pac12 for that midwest conference with a losing Rose Bowl record, then we've gotta accept the same kind of meddling by the Oregon legislature and governor. Frankly, I think that ship sailed a long time ago when the state stopped paying for virtually ANY of the costs associated with the Duck and Beaver college football programs. While we may often be frustrated by the way college football "regulates" itself, I don't think it will help to get politicians involved in it. To me, it's akin to that dispute between two parties who can't come to a compromise. They ultimately go to court to settle matters, and often both parties are subsequently frustrated when the judge makes a decision on the matter. (Hope this comment was generic enough to qualify as "non-political.")