Mudslide

What is this about?

I've said it before and I'll say it again...Richardson is a turnover machine. Five tonight. He seems to enjoy dribbling into double and triple teams...or tripping over his own feet and losing the ball at least once per game. I don't get it and I'm not a fan. And oh yeah...on disappearing for long periods of time...he was 3 for 11 tonight...1 or 7 threes made. Ugh. All that whining by me said...I thoroughly enjoyed the game and the boys brought tons of energy tonight. Great job, overall.

I'd do it for a bad case of eczema.

Naw. Richardson is a turnover machine looking for a triple team to dribble (not 'drive' ala Peyton) into. He disappears for halves (or games) at a time. I have yet to see him put out the energy of, say, Young. He seems to just loiter much of the time while on defense. I agree that he is definitely not the "guy". He is capable of scoring in bunches, but he cannot be relied upon in that regard. And he drove to the basket much better, I thought, the previous two years. He is a head scratcher, that's for sure.

Size doesn't matter. Just ask my wife. But to quote the greatest of all time, Knute Rockne.... "The only qualifications for a lineman are to be big and dumb. To be a back, you only have to be dumb."

I am much more optimistic about the D-line this year. Experience is huge for these players...and of the 14 scholarship D-linemen last year, 10 were freshmen, 3 were sophomores and one was a junior. And I disagree about lack of production from these young dudes. Dorlus, Swinson, and others held up darn well against tOSU and showed decently late in the season. Given a refreshing, new, attacking defensive scheme by the new coaching staff, as well as a year of seasoning for the linemen, I believe we have the makings of a quite decent line. And I highlighted the two players above because I believe they will clock in as All-PAC12 players at the end of the season.

And since we're also talking about Oklahoma and why Riley left...here is a trope, oddly told to me by my cardiologist, a guy who trained under the famous Dr. Michael DeBakey at Baylor University. Do you know why Texas doesn't fall into the Gulf of Mexico? -- Because Oklahoma sucks.

"The U...future proofing education."

How do you get a former University of Miami football player off your porch? Pay him for the pizza

I'm glad, but sad, that you're all seeing the same ugly view of my dystopian predicted image of college sports. Perhaps fans can be a force for reason. But I doubt it. It's pretty depressing, or should be, for most of us. Heck, even the head negotiator for the Players Negotiating (Federal lawsuit) Committee agrees...predicting the end of all non-revenue college sports. Geez. At least I hoped for some residual college 'club' teams. I do not see this snowball being stopped at any point...that is until the to-be-formed Collegiate Players Union negotiates some kind of barely acceptable contract terms with the NCAA.

Wandering thoughts from a decrepit old geezer......................... I agree with you, OP. Greed will kill the product. Here is my prediction for the most likely of future of "college" football (and other sports to a lesser degree). I think it's likely that this NIL form of employee agreements will soon morph into performance contracts (just like the pros). Education will be irrelevant, or secondary at best. A labor union will indeed form. Collective bargaining with the NCAA will occur. Strikes will happen. Individual greed will sever team bonding and fan loyalty. And free agency already exists. Every action has its consequences. Just saying that 'poor' college students already on full ride scholarships deserve a piece of the pie they helped make sounds like 'justice'. But it really doesn't provide the entire picture. Nor a vision of the action's consequences. I do not see a happy ending for this vector of collegiate sports. I've said before that the pros are now all about salary and "what's in it for me"...not the team. That will happen to our beloved college football...then basketball, then baseball, then ??? I've ditched the pros because I saw the big 3 sports strike or threaten labor strikes in my lifetime. That kind of greed made me keep the big buck ticket money stay in my pocket. I no longer have any favorite teams.....because they aren't teams. With few exceptions, they're a collection of privileged, overpaid, me-first athletes with no loyalty to teams. Oh, and college game tickets will skyrocket too, just like the pros. So then....why should I support that? You all most likely have bemoaned the stories about SEC teams paying players to come to their schools. "Under the table" stuff. I didn't see a lot of support for the "justice" of that for players. This new paradigm will be no different...except to be on a much larger scale. Incidentally, this pay-to-play program will percolate down to high school...maybe even lower (given that teams are submitting offers to middle school kids). It's a sad day. For me at least the landscape of collegiate (and amateur) sports in general will be unrecognizable to those of us in the grey beard bunch.

Chicken meet egg. Which comes first? His love for us or our love for him? After all, HE signed an LOI and he is here visiting. I'd say he is showing the love. How about us? Not so much, so far.

Excellent point and I completely agree. And perhaps we could be more welcoming to the guy ... and to all visitors to the Ducks. I think that's all he wanted.

I'm old enough that there was no 400m when I ran track. We had the 440 yard run...long before the metric world came to the U.S. My last run almost killed me and left me with lasting heart problems. No sirree. That long sprint isn't for the weak of mind or body. And I think I must have been both. And now that I'm a really really old grey beard (mustache that is), I can see that old age isn't for amateurs...or former, crappy 440 athletes.

Good call. Book 'em, DanL. (I've been dying to say that. )

He won't mind. In 3 seasons he will be $25,000,000 richer. $25 million! There are some seriously screwed up values in this country.

I hope, as well, DanL. But...................

I would question whether the analogy is apt. Football and baseball are quite different sports. Professional football doesn't and won't have minor leagues in the style of MBB. Further, even if the pros find a few high school players maturity worthy of drafting, that would be just a trickle compared to the players going to universities. College football is a huge money sport...billions involved. The NIL will still be in effect (even given some 'major league'). The law has spoken and players cannot be denied NIL monetary compensation. I agree that not everyone is motivated by money. (A few have it already.) But being good at sports (or the play acting business) is somehow worth MUCH more than almost every other occupation in the world. Here is an example. The President of the United States earns roughly $400,000 per year. (That would be before any questionable sources of funds. ) I believe the lowest allowed annual salary in the NFL is $600,000. (Someone please correct me if I'm off the mark here.) And certainly it is in the realm of likelihood that top athletes in the major sports will soon be (NIL) earning much more than their universities' presidents. This seismic shift in college sports may or may not lead to something any of us currently foresee. But for me...I see enough that I fear losing my interest in and backing of my beloved Ducks.

Though many have blessed or praised the idea of athletes sharing in the wealth of college sports, I have long not been one of them. Beyond a full ride tuition plus room and board, medical, etc, the NIL ruling will certainly change college sports as we know it. It will ruin amateur competition in the major draw sports. Certainly the major sports will become the minor leagues of the pro sports in football, basketball, and baseball. This, in and of itself, will drive the elimination of conference alignments as we know it. As has been noted, the NCAA is already, even now, a hollowed out (amateur collegiate sports) administrative organization. In the past, I have opined that the 'minor' sports, e.g. swimming, T&F, golf, etc, will the last bastion of college commitments-LOI-scholarship amateur sports. But of even that, I'm no longer certain. The OP is right on the money when discussing the certainly approaching mega-conference. It's possible that there will still exist institutions that stay the course of scholarships-only for the big 3 sports...for those kids not good enough to make some new "Minor Leagues of College Sports Conference" money. (That is my personal hope for at least partial salvation from this earthquake of collegiate sports change.) Commitments and LOIs will be replaced by formal labor contracts. New labor unions will form around this new group of "employees". Agents will begin hustling high school athletes and no school or other form of administration will be able to stop it. And it can get a little more dystopian after that. Elite athletes will not "need" an education. Why would they when at 17 they're making...say, 10 times what their parents earn? (A proper education is hard enough to come by these days as it is.) Athletics were once a means to an end...the goal of obtaining a good education and preparation for success in life. And now athletics are becoming its own end. I could drag this scenario out quite a ways. But it depresses me. I'm glad I'm as old as rocks. Greed of the athletes (and their unions) drove me from professional sports decades ago. And now I fear losing respect for the organization that will be college sports and its players. But then, I always have M*A*S*H* reruns to watch.........

As a former Aztec, I look with pride at those performances. But one sick kind of irony...the Aztecs head coach has been none other than....(drum roll)...Brady Hoke. (And I STILL don't like him.)

We haven't had our whole hour yet! .... And don't forget, there is always women's volleyball to watch. 'Tis strangely calming.

Okay. The thing about modern collegiate football (and most sports) is that it's both a big business and it's play. Business is in it for the bucks and play is for the fun. In the coming bowl game, the buck chasers are already (mostly) gone. So we'll see how much the play-ers enjoy the game. Play is for the fans, too. We don't watch these games for money (uh, gamblers excluded, of course). So take some deep, slow breaths and repeat for several minutes..."It's just a game. It's just a game. It's just a game........." In reply to the article, I keep in mind that the play on the field isn't just about "want to". It's also about health, training, play preparation, and skill. I fear that those things will be in short supply for the Ducks. But I hope for Duck strength on the field () I, for one, can't wait for the game. Play on. GO DUCKS!

I swear, if the Ducks didn't pass into a triple team, they wouldn't pass at all. How many turnovers this game?

It is ... wacky. And out of whack. Football is a GAME played by kids. For once I have to agree with Mrs. Mudslide. Paying anyone $5 mil, or $8 mil, or whatever, for coaching this game played by kids is so very out of line with the world today that it is a bit pathological. And from my retirement/Social Security view of things, it's a LOT pathological. Who can afford going to games any longer?