Mudslide

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?

Wasn't DeRuyter recently hired by Texas Tech?

Whoa, Jon. You may want to make that 9 only. I think the Ducks kick off at 12:30 (3:30 Eastern).

I abhor anything that hurts my beloved Ducks. And that includes booing. Those of you that think it helps the team in any way, you do not understand human motivation. It only helps booing fans express their unmet expectations. It, in fact, hurts the team and its coaches and players who are putting out more effort than 100% of the fans who are booing. In my mind, booing is the adult version of infants screaming for their bankies.

Both coaches are half-baked game managers. But CK is CK. How I hate to predict this. I hope I choke on crow.......... Aye, that's it. Old spoiled crow meat........ UCLA 38-28 1TO 3 sacks 270 passing yards

I may be mistaken, but didn't the Ducks come back from ~10 point deficit against Arizona? And also, it seems like they started out in a 10-0 deficit vs. AZ St...not sure about this one. Maybe it was UT?

Just a note...In 2020 the Ducks totaled 11 TD's from the receivers. Six went to the the two tight ends, Kamp and DJ. Only 5 went to all the rest of the receiver group.

Thank you for a terrific article. I hope one day, maybe with this article, that we stick the final dagger into the notion that the Ducks did not up-coach Herbert.

Thanks for the great article, Coach. I wonder what rotation Altman deployed in previous years. For certain he always tightens up the rotation late in the season, but I don't recall what he does at the PAC-12 tourney. I do recall that much was made about the 3 (or 4) games played on consecutive days harming PAC-12 teams going forward into the NCAA's. Some coach suggested not necessarily playing to win in the early games in order to rest his players. I don't believe that was Altman saying that...but it is a potential strategy for player weariness and body healing. My guess...the Ducks play 8-9 players in all games. That rotation would include a few extra minutes for Terry and Kepnang.

His HUDL tapes show pretty nice mechanics and field awareness. Now...does he have the 'it' factor? I can't wait to find out... about him or the guys in this year's qb room. (Whistling: Roll On Alabama...)

Charles, hopefully it is some consolation that you have THE best sports forum available...at least that I've seen. And thanks for the help you've provided me to get rolling here and understanding how it all works. You are much appreciated.

Charles, I'm really trying to understand what your complaint is. Is it that the Ducks' offense is not 'fun' or exciting enough? We don't crush teams? We don't win enough games? MC broke his promise about continuing the former offense? MC is just not listening to the fans? Scoring more points makes it easier for the defense...to what end? (12-2 remember.) I'm not sure we disagree...perhaps we're just focusing on different aspects of the team's performance. I'm looking from a results POV. They've been mighty good in that realm. And from that perspective, I have been saying that MC has done a bang-up job. Could he do better? Probably. We all could. I get it that we disagree on whether 2020 should be considered an outlier of little importance (me), or that one can glean important data from the season (you). But what is it exactly that bugs you about MC using his offense (if not one of the above)? On a completely different tack...as some have mentioned here, I have modest reservations about MC's backfield recruiting. As had been mentioned, he has had 3 years to find The Back...to nail a Najee Harris or Royce Freeman type player. He has been amazing at achieving an overall improvement in the Ducks' historical recruiting classes. But if he really wants to run a mash and bash operation, he'd better get one of those cruncher guys.

If I read you correctly, shouldn't we then either terminate the man or silently begin searching for his replacement...or both? Your comments describe him as quite incompetent. To follow your logic... COVID is not a factor in W/L record ... and a 12-2 record is not acceptable.