Triphibius

Although Dana Altman lent some credibility to the thesis of Zach Neil's article, I respectfully disagree. Tracey and Rigsby made significant contributions with their defense, and occasional offensive plays. Shelstad did not have his shooting touch, but he handled the ball well, and played hard and fairly successfully on defense. It would have been nice if Evans or Shelstad had provided more scoring, but the former played like a nervous freshman and the latter's inconsistency is nothing new. Oregon could have and probably would have won despite the dependence on Dante and Cousinard had it not been for Shelstad's injury. His presence on the floor in the last two minute and overtime would have made a big difference. Shelstad's absence meant: 1) Cousinard had to be the primary ball handler, which contributed to his exhaustion and no doubt affected the play selection; 2) Evans lost the best target for the crucial inbound pass; 3) Creighton's point guard scored ten points in the overtimes when he was no longer being guarded by Shelstad. If I remember the video replay correctly, Shelstad was off balance and vulnerable to the being injured because the opposing guard pushed him. No foul was called. My thanks and compliments to the players and coaches for all they have overcome and achieved this season, despite the many obstacles and setbacks. .

I am happy for the players and coaches. Considering the injury situation, this was a considerable achievement. I share Coach Altman's regret and nostalgia about the end of the league. However, winning the last Pac-12 tournament was satisfying. What a wonderful ending! Regarding Oregon's prospects in the NCAA tournament, a few random thoughts. 1. Few teams will be able to match up with Dante, especially in the early rounds. 2. However, I wonder what will happen if opponents simply collapse around Dante, perhaps in a zone, challenging Oregon to beat them from the outside. At present, Oregon has no consistent shooter from 3-point range. Shelstad comes close, he has had off nights. 3. As Coach Altman and Tommy Lloyd both noted, Oregon's defense was much improved. They got their hands on many passes in both games, leading to TOs, which were the difference, especially against the Buffs. . 4. Guard play matters, especially in the NCAA. Cousinard did not shoot it well last night, but he was superb in setting up Dante.

. Miami - Will it translate to the field of play? In Harford, Hereford and Hampshire, Hurricanes hardly ever happen. -- Henry Higgins

I remain a Pac-12 supporter. Hence: Great Success: OSU, WSU, Cal, Stanford, Utah, Arizona Qualified Success (less than UO): UW, UCLA Indifference: ASU Embarassment: The Loud One Disaster on the Scale of the Hindenburg: USC

News Item: Oregon's men's basketball team won a closely contested game against the University of Washington last night in Prichardsville, formerly known as Seattle.

Interesting observation, Critical. I thought the early struggles had more to do with play calls that seemed predictable and inappropriate given the defensive alignment. (Specifically, running into a crowded box, a la Cristobal.) I have assumed that he was not allowed to alter the (bad) play that was called. Of course, I could be wrong on one count or the other. I don't see how the UO could block seven men with six unless the QB is a threat to run. Bo played very well later in the game. The TD pass to Ferguson was "Heisman quality," IMHO. That does not mean you are wrong about the first quarter. I have not seen the game on replay, that was only my recollection.

Interesting report on the UO's emotional state in Las Vegas. The number of seniors participating suggests that they may be ready for this one. As I live in Georgia, I had the opportunity to observe Paul Johnson's tenure at Georgia Tech. His triple option offense gave teams a lot of trouble during the regular season, but Tech had less success in bowl games when their opponents had more time to prepare for it. If DL and his staff are as good as we like to think, perhaps that will be the case here.

One nugget buried in the analysis: DL observing that "we did not have a good plan" against UW. My suspicion, also. Analysis forthcoming?

I live in SEC country, and I am weary of hearing how wonderful their league is. The rematch between Alabama and LSU still annoys me. (This does not applly to the UGA fans who contribute here. They are a class act.) Given that this is the PAC-12's last year, I would like to see Washington defeat Texas. If UW wins that game and meets Alabama, I hope they win. Saban has enough trophies. If UW meets Michigan, I may be neutral.

If Moore can "make all the throws," will be learn which throws to make?

Why do these bad things happen to such nice people?

12 recruits a-signing 11 defenders tackling B1G opponents losing 9 coaches coaching 8 cheerleaders cheering (with bare midriff) 7 linemen swim-moving 6 Huskies lying (on the ground, having been pancaked) 5 championship rings 4 blitzing ‘backers 3 tight ends 2 receivers with gloves And a FishDuck in a Douglas Fir tree

Or perhaps move the more experienced but less powerful Harper to center and insert Poncho at one of the guard spots, depending on how other OLmen develop?

Although I regret what happened to Ty, I trust the coaching staff's decision on Gabriel. I am skeptical regarding Moore, for these reasons: 1. He backed out of his commitment to the UO. 2. He was a turnover machine at UCLA. 3. He must have been recruited by Dillingham, not Stein. Based on past experience, we are probably better off sticking with protegees of the current OC. 4. Physical gifts are a prerequisite but not a guarantee of success. Ty was also physically gifted, but apparently never developed sufficiently to win the trust of the staff.

I do not disagree. It just a matter of emphasis. Yes, both sides of the ball and special teams ought to be discussed. Considering that UW was playing well on offensive and that the UO offense was #1 in college football before the game, I think the bigger failure for the Ducks was on offense. In other words, the game could have been won with the defensive effort that was made if the UO had performed close to its season's average on offense. DL does not want to make excuses, but the loss of Burch was a blow, and there was turnover in the secondary, also. That said, I do have a questions about defense, proposed with the usual humility, as I am not a coach. (Though I did have some success in grad school as a receiver in intramurals.) The basic idea is this. If the MINT defense was designed to stop spread offenses, what happens when it has to defend an offense like the Stanford teams under Harbaugh that combines a punishing ground game with a dangerous downfield passing attack? Maybe LBs who are converted safeties (selected because they can run horizontally and vertically) do not have the bulk and strength to stop a power run game. Dillon Johnson made half his yards after contact, I would guess. The problem was not that he had huge holes, but that we could not get him on the ground. The UO could have used Noah Sewell or even Keith Brown Friday. (I am not saying Jacobs played badly. I have not seen the film.) All I remember is Johnson dragging three ducks with him for more yards, over and over. At this point, I am just tossing out hypotheses. I am eager to hear what Fishduck makes of it all in the upcoming article.