noDucknewby

I'm "compelled" to donate to the DAF so I can have the privelege of giving them more money for my season tickets. Probably wouldn't otherwise, the tickets, travel, etc. are expensive and my finances are working class. I'm generally averse to this kind of crowd funding because I have doubts that donated money will actually be used as intended. That said, the players deserve to be compensated and have for a long time. Should that compensation fall on the backs of bread-and-butter fans? As long as it's voluntary I have no issue with it. I'd rather see grass roots funding than a few sketchy boosters.

Yeah maybe in the dark days of February, not coming into football season!

I'm certainly not commending his ethics for not honoring the coalition's "gentlemen's agreement", just the result. Does the end justify the means? That's an ethical judgement. I'm guessing we'd all be cheering him on if he were in our court.

Interesting read. It seems to me that if they're negotiating specific numbers for their escalation clause, then further expansion is more likely than not. It's possible that Warren is just making sure he's covered for all the potential "what ifs", but that sure seems like a lot of effort for something that may not happen. This guy's an alpha negotiating beast. If further expansion does indeed occur, I can't imagine he won't use his leverage to get new schools at a discounted rate (except ND) so that the per school rate for full members is not impacted as much. Good news/bad news, we're probably on the short list but the P12 is toast.

You've got to hand it to Warren, the B1G is in fat city for the next TV cycle. For the LA schools, no more night games, hadn't thought about that aspect. Just another reason I doubt UCLA gets pulled back in. What I find interesting is that the B1G contract has built-in flexibility for expansion. Obviously this is geared towards ND (probably not happening), but I can't help but think that Cal/Stanford is looking pretty attractive all of a sudden (or maybe all along for that matter). This would solve the regents hurt feelings and give the B1G the Bay Area as well. Not to be a Debbie Downer here, but I just don't see anything here that bodes well for the Ducks or the Pac.

Yes that's true, in that scenario adding SDSU could really sweeten the package. I still don't see it as enough though, I think it's a done deal. Hope I'm wrong but usually I'm not (tongue planted firmly in cheek).

Yeah but ESPN could be the only bidder, so that doesn't give the Pac much leverage unless GK figures out a way to get other entities involved (which he has stated as a goal). Not sure who though, streaming is a possibility for sure, maybe CBS since they're losing all their SEC games?

I have a hard time believing that the regents would force UCLA to give up $75 million/year in exchange for about half of that to remain in the Pac. This is all about the $, they'll probably make big fuss for show then figure out a way to pacify Cal and start collecting the checks.

Fair point Charles, but live reps even in a dumbed-down offense still have value. But I agree that you have to give the backup QBs meaningful reps by running the regular offense, even if it does in the short term risk some bone-headed mistakes. If there's an injury one of them will be thrown into the fire anyway.

The best way to utilize multiple QBs is to keep the pedal to the metal and put inferior teams away early. I know, easier said than done, but MM hardly played in the 4th quarter the year he won the Heisman. Let's get rid of the ugly grind it out, sit on a lead strategy MC used. It always used to drive me crazy when we intentionally conceded momentum to lesser opponents. Sure burn some time off the clock, but don't just run it up the middle every play.

Being a mediocre coach is not a character flaw. Agree with others, he just didn't have a Plan B if his power running game wasn't working. Why his game plan for Utah.2 was exactly the same as Utah.1 is beyond me. Breakups are never pretty, but nearly everyone in the workforce explores other options at one time or another. Doesn't mean disloyalty, business is business. Throw in the powerful draw of home and family (not to mention a boat load of money), how many of us would have done differently? MC took over a program in dire straits and left it in much better shape than he inherited. Am I disappointed with blowing our chances at the CFP twice under his tenure? You bet. That said, we're landing on our feet; for me it's just time to move on and I wish him the best at Miami.

Notre Dame and USC overrated as usual I see. I would put us in the 10-15 range pre-season, of course I think our ceiling is much higher than that.

I see two losses before the bye week, probably Georgia and BYU or Wazoo. I see one loss after the bye week, most likely Utah or UCLA. That's 9-3 with one or two conference losses. If it's one, we're in the conference championship, with two probably not. The key this year IMHO is a stout defense that gives the offense (especially at QB) time to develop. If our defense plays up to it's full potential (and we stay healthy), we could go 10-2. I don't see an 11-win regular season, we would have to run the table after a Georgia loss (still giving us a chance here, but being realistic).

I'm cautiously optimistic, as usual I guess. Not drinking the Kool-Aid just yet, but he probably gives us our best shot against Georgia in the opener. After that it's up to the coaches as much as Bo to put him in a position to succeed and if he's not working out then they need to have the courage to bench him for Ty or Butters. Often in football the key to QB success is a good defense and running game. We should have both regardless of who winds up getting the start.

CalBear I stand corrected on the CSU/UC distinction, and I'm not denying Cals academic credentials. I speculated on an earlier thread that Cal and Stanford would get invites, I'm just saying it's unlikely they get invited before UO/WU.

The only reason to bring Cal along would be to pacify the CSU board of regents and get UCLA off the hook. I could see Stanford going ahead of the Ducks, but Cal? Not likely IMHO.

Well clearly the gloves are off. Not sure I agree with him, but at least he's scrapping for the conference instead of sipping Dom Perignon on a chartered flight to his $7K night hotel suite. He's also hinting that UO may have trouble getting to the B1G without little brother. Pretty clever.

Of course we're a threat, but does that make us a favorite? Not in my book. I'm not seeing any advantage in offense, defense or special teams, plus they have for all practical purposes the home field. I love our coaching staff, but this is DL's first game as a head coach playing against a journeyman coming off a national title. There's familiarity on both sides so that's probably a push. Regardless of how many new starters they have on defense, it is unlikely we we put up big numbers against them. I think our best chance is for OUR defense to have a great game and keep it close going into the fourth quarter. I don't see the moment being too big for Bo Nix, he's been there before. That said, he makes a bone-headed pick or two and we're toast. I'm hoping we can loosen their D up with a couple of explosion plays early, keep it close and win the fourth quarter.

Oregon will absolutely be competitive in the B10. We've already held our own against their top tier: Michigan, Michigan St., Wisconsin and now tOSU. Sure it will take an exceptional season to win the conference. Granted everyone is still chasing Ohio State at this point, but Michigan broke through this year and there's absolutely no reason we can't too. Besides, we won't have to win the B1G to get into the playoff. Since Warren and Sankey have indicated they may not support AQs now in the expanded playoff, it's unlikely that a salvaged P10 will get an automatic bid with or without conference expansion. Since the B1G and SEC have all the power, they're going to get as many at-large "best teams" spots as possible. Assuming an expanded 12-16 team playoff, those two conferences will account for at least half the playoff spots. Consequently a third or fourth place finish in either of those conferences gets you in. We remain in the P12 and we will most likely have go undefeated to even get a look. A one-loss P12 champion probably doesn't even get a sniff. I don't really like it, but if we get invited we have to go. We gain top-tier financial stability, playoff access and will always be seated at the big table. Stay in the Pac and we're just going to get table scraps.

I guess we know where the University of Spoiled Children got their entitled attitude.

Interesting article, I'm just not sure I agree with the basic premise that ND is the next B10 expansion domino. As much as I've always despised the preferential treatment of ND (going all the way back to the "Notre Dame Clause" of the BCS), I still believe that remaining independent in football is an inherent part of their identity. I think there's a very good chance they cut a deal with NBC even though they may have to accept less money. This is a university with a billion-dollar endowment, so a few million a year probably doesn't mean that much compared to their cherished independence. The real issue is playoff access and with the CFP almost certainly expanding to 12-16 teams, probably without AQs, their access will most likely be as good as anyone's while remaining independent. That said, I agree that no B10 expansion happens without their decision. If it's no then I still see the B10 moving forward, just maybe not as laid out here.

My take as well. Bo-Going to be hard to beat out for the opener at least, lots of SEC big game experience, clearly our best shot a giving Georgia a run. Butters-Really liked what I saw in the spring game, seems football smart, good accuracy. Ty-Physically imposing, great runner but just hasn't seemed to progress much since last year. Last year's coaching staff didn't do Ty or Butters any favors. Nothing against AB, he had some really good games and was pretty solid in the 4th quarter. That said he really struggled at times, and why he didn't get benched in the two Utah blowouts is beyond me.

Hate to say I told you so: Big Ten evaluating Cal, Oregon, Stanford and Washington from Pac-12 as further expansion considered - CBSSports.com WWW.CBSSPORTS.COM Could the Big Ten balloon to a 20-team (or more) league?

No cure for this nonsense except live snaps. Come on game day!

You've got to admit it, the guy's on a roll. He's pretty much calling his own shots and going forward he is in a better position for expansion than the SEC. Of course he covets ND, but it's my guess they reach a mega-deal with NBC and stay independent. Other than them, he pretty much has his pick of P12/B12 teams to choose from if he wants expansion and from what I'm seeing, he wants to be THE Alpha Dog conference, overtaking the SEC in that regard. The SEC is somewhat limited in expansion candidates, primarily because of the ACC TV deal locks in their most desirable programs long-term. Yeah maybe that gets challenged in court, or an outright buyout is negotiated, but that's expensive and complicated. All Warren has to do is invite UO/Fuskies and P12 becomes the new Mountain West (if it even survives at all). Nothing at that point would save them as a power conference. If I'm in his Machiavellian shoes I wait for ND, but once they are out I invite UO/Fuskies and Cal/Stanford and kill the P12. That would provide a 6-team pod (maybe throw in Nebraska) that could play each other every year and that takes care of 5 conference games on the West Coast. The other 3 or 4 could be home/away so each team in that pod would only play in traditional B10 territory 2-3 times a year. That also eases the travel burden on the other sports. Logistically it works better than just USC/UCLA and financially he could probably name his own price.