noDucknewby

Doesn't even make my top 10 nightmare natty teams: Fuskies (obvious reasons) Domers (perennially overrated) Miami (obvious reasons) tOSU (still sick of the "Pac-1" jokes when USC was dominant) Rodents (sure never gonna happen, but man would that suck) USC (see Domers) Scumbag programs like FSU, LSU, etc. Georgia/Alabama, they don't need any more Indiana or any other progrum not OBD that doesn't have a natty

Disagree on this one. Losses aren't inherently needed but can have a silver lining. Did Michigan need a loss two seasons ago? Adversity without losing can be just as beneficial. Good coaching can keep an undefeated team motivated and prepared, not easy I know, but one of the things that makes for a great coaching staff.

This is a great take. PSU will indeed most likely target an existing head coach, but really the only slam dunk is Cignetti. Hartline or Patricia would be great choices, plus it could potentially weaken tOSU.

Teachable moments are usually better from a win than a loss IMHO. That said, how this team responds this week and the rest of the season will determine whether or not this loss lights a fire under the team and/or the coaches can make adjustments to what was obviously a flawed game plan. I'm cautiously optimistic as usual, but if the Ducks come out flat against Rutgers I'm going to be a bit concerned.

I would love to see an expansion, but I'm not sure how much more foot traffic the current configuration can handle. There's very congested pinch points, especially on the north side, where some of us poor schmucks have our season tickets. I was reminded of that yet again prior to the Indiana, game, as people backed up in the concesssion and beer lines almost completely blocked through traffic to the north side. The new stairways that were installed a few years ago are great for getting out of the stadium, but don't help much for entering the main entrance on the footbridge side. Improve/expand the amenities on the north side and fix the concourses first, otherwise any increase in capacity would be a logistical nightmare.

Yep, I had the misfortune of being at Boise State for the Blount punch but he was eventually reinstated (for the CW and subsequent bowl game I believe) so yes it was short-lived but still a nightmare for opposing defenses.

University of Oregon AthleticsFootball Roster - University of Oregon AthleticsThe official Football Roster for the University of Oregon Ducks

Spot on, they've earned it. Whittington can't seem to stay healthy and Limar (love the guy, great teammate) just isn't as talented. Hughes is already gone and I just don't think we'll see much more of Harris or Riggs in the future. Agree with Charles, the "lightning and thunder" combo we had with LaMike and Blount could be coming soon. Let them tire chasing Hill around then Davison can pound them into submission. I think there is very good chance Hill starts against Indiana.

Not sure how another year would give him more playing time. Whittington is gone after this year, but Limar still has another year as does Harris and then there's the upcoming freshmen Davison, Hill and Riggs. Am I missing anyone? Damn our RB room is loaded and who knows who we may add next year. My $ is on Hughes transferring, it makes the most sense for all parties IMHO.

It makes sense on some levels, pooling the product thus negating conferences from competing with each other for TV revenues. It would be a massive money maker and thus the increasing competition would almost certainly drive up the cost for the networks. That said, why would the B1G and the SEC go along with this when they're currently getting the lion's share of the TV revenue? Only by force and I doubt congress has the ability or even the inclination to institue such a system. The creation of a super conference would probably alleviate a lot of resistance from the B1G/SEC but only if the bottom line for these conferences improves. Otherwise why would they voluntarily give up their increasing revenue and power to support lesser conferences/teams? In such a scenario the G5 (G6?) conferences would only be getting the scraps anyway so how does that improve parity and provide stability to the non-revenue sports? Splitting the FBS into two divisions and letting them each negotiate their own consolidated TV deals might make the most sense, but again I just don't see the desire or fortitude from congress to make this happen. Right now the B1G/SEC/ESPN are the majority shareholders and they like they power/control they have over the sport and I just don't see that changing.

I can't say I agree with the "so-so" characterization of our running back room, but I do agree that a clear rotation has yet to emerge so the waters are somewhat murky in that respect. Any one of our RBs could transfer and be the guy on another team, maybe not a top 10 team but at least a good one. That said I do agree with previous posts regarding the personnel shrinking as the redshirt window closes. Assuming Whittington stays healthy (big assumption) he is plenty capable of carrying this team as the #1 back. It's hard not to root for Limar, he's such a solid guy and team player but to my mind his role is still more of a backup than a bellcow. Hughes to me is still a head-scratcher, part of me thinks he may be fighting some kind of injury, he just doesn't seem that dynamic. The freshmen RBs are going to be stars IMHO. Davison is more versatile and a great blocker, so I could easily see him slide into a Jordan James type role. Hill reminds of DAT, just get him the ball in space, but between the tackles he's not at his best. Zero chance either one of them redshirts in my book. Riggs and Harris, I just don't see how they don't wind up being buried on the depth chart. Not sure how they would feel about redshirting but they're in a tough spot, I wouldn't be surprised if they hit the portal.

OK thumbs down to buckeye posturing, but it does kind of make sense to reward playoff teams like the NFL does. As for the regular season, hopefully revenues remain divided equally, but this is no longer a sport that even pretends to be equitable. Rewarding performance, i.e. playoff appearances, is at least an objective standard that all conference teams have the opportunity to achieve. The TV ratings gimmick that USC used to use on the Pac-10 is too subjective and easily manipulated. It's easy to have the best ratings when you get the best time slots all the time.

Puzzling to be sure, I get the managed reps thing but Penn State is less than a month away and I would think game time reps in this system would be pretty important before then. That said, damn we got a stable of backs with or without Hughes.