noDucknewby

Great news obviously, but besides DM the biggest get would be Poncho coming back IMHO. Regardless, if we got every eligible player back next year (yeah unlikely but we can dream), holy cow would we have an experienced group of starters.

The plot thickens? I always assumed he was a Utah lifer, but Michigan would be lucky to have him IMHO.

DC Morgan Scalley has long been considered a coach-in-waiting, I guess I don't get the Nebraska joke? Congrats KW and enjoy that Utah powder.

The best way to put ND in their place is for the P4 schools to quit scheduling games with them. The domer double-standard has always peaved me no end, but this latest whine fest is just over-the-top entitlement. Yes the CFP committee was afraid to bump Bama even after their unimpressive showing in the SEC championship game, but if YOU would have beaten Miami then this would be a non-issue. Get even by destroying your bowl opponent, not by crying foul in a system where you get preferential treatment anyway. YOU put yourself in a position to let the CFP decide your fate and they did.

PSU was pretty low on my list of teams that I hate, but they've managed to move up a few notches with this debacle. That guy should be fired, but it's their program and if they're OK with this kind of representation from the AD then that probably tells me all I need to know. Too bad, I like Matt Campbell and I think he will be a good coach (although I'm not convinced he's an upgrade from JF).

I guess they're taking their ball and going home crying🤣. They only hurt themselves, they will be totally off the radar and lose a months worth of practices (assuming this is still not allowed for non-bowl teams). I do agree however, that this system is a bit stupid. G5 teams do not play at the same level as P4 teams, period. Sure they get a win every now and then against P4 teams, but having two G5 teams as part of "the 12 best" defies logic. The committee did what they had to including JMU, but this just isn't an accurate seeding. The G5 needs their own playoff, there's plenty of interest and of course $ to be made. We know changes are coming, home games in the second round would be a great first step. This is now officially a playoff and the bowl system is going the way of the 8-track tape.

Ok great this is a favorable path to the final four, no question. That said, as a season ticket holder I was hoping for a better matchup. Even Tulane would be more interesting, but to think that we could have had Alabama or Miami in Autzen if we were ranked a little lower makes me wonder how much of an advantage (at least for the fans) it really is to be seeded higher. Don't get me wrong, I'll be there, but we'll be paying a premium price for the equivalent of a September cupcake game.

The more you get out of the committee's hands the better off college football will be. Of course they will deny this, but the conspiracy theorist in me says they decide who they want in the CFP then work backwards to justify it. Is ND really better than Miami? They have identical records and nearly indentical SOS, but ND gets the nod despite losing the head to head matchup. This defies logic. The "eye" test is really just a beauty contest based on who the powers that be think would draw more eyeballs. Personally I love the play-in concept for championship weekend. The top 2 conference finishers play each other for the 1-2 seeds, #3 plays #6 for the third seed and #4 plays #5 for the fourth seed. This year's B1G play-in games would be (caveat not sure how the tie-breakers would work): tOSU/Indiana 1-2 seeds. OBD/Iowa #3 seed. USC/Michigan #4 seed. SEC would be: Georgia/Bama 1-2 seeds. Ole Miss/Okiehoma #3 seed. TA&M/Texas #4 seed. Losers could still receive an at-large bid. It's ridiculous that Miami would be left out in favor of JMU and Tulane, but that could very well happen. Not shedding any tears for Mario, but seriously in what world does this make any sense? Maybe not a perfect system and should always be considered a work in progress, but if Bama loses and gets dropped out in favor or Tulane and JMU, the SEC will just blow the whole thing up.

This one's still a headscratcher to me, who is PSU going to find that's an upgrade? Kind of like just quitting a job because you think can find a better one. I think this is a great hire for VT, they would be stuck with the crumbs if they didn't act soon. I'm just laughing, what if Kiffin stays at Ole Miss? There's going to be a big scramble and somebody's going to wind up with a big downgrade.

This smells on so many levels, kind of the college football equivalent of a payday loan.

We were warned of this by longtime B1G fans when we joined the conference, that traditional B1G powers would be protected. This is a rough November stretch to be sure as Indiana and tOSU cruise while we play three ranked teams, two on the road (caveat the fuskies might not be ranked on Tuesday). That said, we're getting more respect nationally than when we were in the P-12 and we still control our own playoff destiny, so I'd call that a net gain.

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.