EveryDayGreen

Agree with David's main point and arguments. Let's not be a sour grapes fanbase. If we feel compelled to talk about Taggart or MC, then Haywarduck nailed it: MC elevated recruiting and built what appears to be an amazing team-first culture. FSU bailed us out of our worst coach in decades (yes I think Willie was worse than Helf). Miami spared us from paying $85million for a decade of plodding Cristo-football. Thank you to all three. Taggart, eh I don't ever have to thank that guy. Best of luck to MC at Miami. If they play well, great for him, and hopefully our Ducks beat them any and every chance they get. Looking forward to the Lanning era now. May it bring plentiful touchdowns and wins.

All three of those posts are just... sheesh. Lots of anger, jealousy, rationalizing, speculation... Yeah the Ducks played a bad first half in the Alamo, and Utah kicked us in the teeth. But you won't find me hate-watching a husky bowl game just to go post about it on a forum somewhere. I'm with Logger29, I respect UW enough for their history, and I like seeing the Pac do well in general (hopefully with the Ducks on top). But fans like this are embarrassing. Who knows how the Lanning era will go. I'm eager to find out, and cautiously optimistic that the new staff will recruit and develop top players. Could be a fun time for our Ducks

Like a lot of you are saying, I'd be worried after a game like that that the players are fed up. But these are the kinds of losses that great coaches learn from and bad coaches dig in and get defensive about. Cristobal is absolutely a stubborn coach, but again I don't think he's a fool. After being humiliated on national television, maybe it's finally a wake up call. For all the other losses in his tenure here, I think last night was the first time where MC truly saw the limits of being all brawn and no brains. Every other loss, even the really bad ones, could be chalked up to fluke, bad effort, came out flat... Most of us saw the strategic issues, but it felt like MC always went with the effort/toughness/drive excuse. This time, the defense gave it their all at the start, and the offense stalled because of the QB. The result: an equally tough but significantly smarter team kicked the **** out of us. Up until last night, we had one somewhat fluky loss on the year, and it was easy to argue getting AB in long term. The shine has now worn off. What will we see vs OSU? Personally I would think we stick with Brown to start, but if things go south in the first half, we will see if MC is the learn-from-it type or the stubborn-beyond-reason type. I appreciate hearing everyone's thoughts on this. Like Jon Joseph said, it is a bit of "psychoanalyzing." It's been on my mind for weeks, like I'm sure for all of you, as to why AB hasn't been properly benched even once, especially since MC and Moorhead were so clearly willing to bench Shough last year. So after sleeping on it, this is the best I could think of. Love the discussion here.

The difference for USC is the new athletic director. Mike Bohn is all business and whoever their new coach is, he will be expected to run the program efficiently and effectively. No more ex-athletes hiring ex-Carroll assistants, which was always an exercise in nostalgia. That said, the SC program is an absolute mess, and they will be multiple years of a rebuild away from contending nationally. The huskies on the other hand... I will never understand why they have such a high opinion of themselves. Their ceiling is a Don James type coach. Two decades of contending in the conference, with maybe one shot at the natty. But they need to find that coach first. Their current AD botched everything with Lake so badly, it doesn't inspire confidence in their search.

A lesson I've learned in life is to think about others complexly, as in giving the benefit of the doubt and assuming someone might be balancing multiple things at once. So in that spirit, I've been pondering why on earth do we continue to see QB Brown out there, and here is my theory to share and discuss with all of you: I think Cristobal's continued reliance on Brown actually has nothing to do with X's and O's. MC has shown some glaring weaknesses strategically, but the man is no dummy. Brown is a liability as a downfield passer, he struggles making correct reads, and as such, he hinders our offense's flexibility and creativity. But it's Brown's other attributes that put him over the top. Cristobal is obsessive about the mental game, toughness, physicality, you name it, and I think Cristobal is biding his time while the young guys learn the "intangibles" from Brown. 1) Resilient and tough -- MC's number one priority has been team culture. Every interview with him, it's the first and last thing out of his mouth. Brown is far from a technically gifted QB, but he continually bounces back from bad outings and just keeps working hard. We were down early to Stanford and UCLA, barely scraping by Cal and AZ, but Brown stayed the course and didn't get rattled. I would argue Cristobal values that resilience all the more for having seen how a rattled QB a la Braxton Burmeister and Tyler Shough can quickly get overwhelmed. Cristobal's message to the other QBs and the team is that toughness is more valuable than technique. And heck, if you want to talk about toughness, we do have to give Brown credit for marching into the Shoe and leading him team to a win. 2) Conservative and humble -- Brown's strongest point as a QB is arguably how careful he is with the ball. Yes he has a couple of egregious interceptions -- that pick at Stanford was embarrassing -- but for the most part Brown plays within himself and takes care of the ball. He is also a humble player who is not out to be a hero, sort of an anti-Johnny Football. Watch any interview with Brown and his ability to be self-critical and humble is actually pretty refreshing. Just like with resilience, I believe Cristobal is continuing to send the message to his team and his young QBs that humility and responsibility are more important that flashy play and long bomb throws. 3) The long game -- This is the critical piece, and it's an idea I first read somewhere else. Maybe someone said it awhile back on this forum. In this day and age of QB transfers, Cristobal is very likely acting cautiously with his three young QBs because he is afraid to pick one and see the other two walk out the door. The issue isn't that they are all worse than Brown, it's that they are all roughly even with each other. By not anointing a new QB yet, MC is able to keep developing all three guys. Play his cards right, and MC will keep all three through the spring and into fall camp, giving him over a full year before he has to pick the best one and likely see the other two transfer out. This is what handcuffs Cristobal from pulling Brown in the second half last night. So, to be abundantly clear, I am not saying Cristobal is necessarily correct for making these judgments, if this is indeed what he's thinking. I personally would approach things differently, but from what I've seen in interviews with MC, this feels like where he would be at mentally. I would also bet good money that Thompson, Ashford, and Butterfield are each way ahead of Brown in terms of technique. It is the other side, the "mental" side, along with biding time developing the young guys, that is causing Cristobal to stick with Brown. After the terrible performance at Utah, it's possible Cristobal changes his mind, but I would think being so close to the end of the year, Cristobal will continue to play the long game. Then again, if Brown plays another terrible first half against the Beavers, all bets are off. What do you all think? Anything I missed in my analysis? Please feel free to pick this apart!