GeotechDuck

They could have Tom Brady at QB and it wouldn’t matter. Until they fix their line issues (especially DT) they are not going anywhere.

The Cliff Harris pick was close too. I was at the game and I think my biggest issue was with Chip forcing the run for so long before unleashing Thomas and allowing him to push the ball down the field.

Getting absolutely blown out in three playoff games by letting teams score 50+ points on your defense and being 1-4 in NY6 games, including a loss to a G5 school, gets you second place on this list? The bar is set pretty low for Lanning. And yeah, as someone pointed out, the fact that Smith is not in the Top 5 is a complete joke.

Oregon is the better program. It is not close and has been that way for a long time. USC has only beaten Oregon ONE time in the last 12 years. USC only has ONE conference championship since 2008. Oregon has 6, Stanford has 3, Washington has 3, and Utah has 2. The best part is that USC fans are so delusional, that they really believe that Riley, (who is 0-3 in playoff games, 1-6 in NY6 games, and 0-3 in the post season with a Heisman QB starter and blue chip rosters) is somehow going to bring USC back to the Pete Carroll days.

What good are receipts after you get fired??

What a great game! Left it all on the floor. Can’t be upset about anything. 28 and 20 is insane. just needed one more play and couldn’t get it. Outstanding effort.

Who’s really betting against Altman in a first round tourney game?? Smart money is on Oregon.

Great article!! It’s amazing that basketball has been improving their process for years, while football continues to bumble along. At least we have an actual playoff for all Power conference champions now. However, if history is any indication, football will find a way to screw it up.

Here is some excellent analysis on the game by ESPN. I predict that Will Richardson will not score in this game.

That was amazing, especially since I went to Vegas with 11 Arizona fans. They did show up tonight to cheer on the Ducks with me. I have been to the PAC-12 tourney 4 times and all 4 times Oregon won the whole thing. 13-0 in Vegas when I was in the stands. I think I better book my trip to the BIG tourney right now. I don’t bet much, but decided to do a parley card with Illinois, NC State, Oregon, and Iowa State. That worked out okay. What a night!!!

I am at the tourney and watched Arizona yesterday. Their defense in the 1/2 court against USC was nothing short of incredible. I am pulling hard for the Ducks, but if Arizona defends like that again today....it is going to be a long night. They are clearly better at 3 starting positions on the floor and their bench is stronger and deeper. Oregon is going to need their best game of the year along with some luck.

The only thing that makes sense in my opinion is 1,1,1,1,1 and 9. Or, even better: 1,1,1,1,1 and 11. Why are they giving teams "byes"? As the poster stated above, go with a NET ranking like hoops to encourage teams to schedule properly. Don't use final records as criteria anymore. Q1 wins matter more than overall record. Q4 losses kill you chances. Teams would be lining up to play the best matchups available. The BIG and SEC will be skewed every season and get multi-bids anyways. SEC is essentially forced to go to a 9-game conference schedule, or they are going to get less teams in. Everyone wins.

Agree. When Tony left, things started going downhill. Wish we could get him back. Didn’t he just get fired at DePaul?

Is it bad luck, or is there an issue with the strength and conditioning program? One year is clearly bad luck, but consistent injuries on the roster over the past several years may justify a deeper look into the S&C program for basketball. It would be interesting to look at the games missed since 2018 vs. other teams. Maybe it is just perception, but I would guess Oregon would be at the top of that list most of those years.

This is a good discussion. It will probably work out most years. But let's look at an extreme example: 1) Team A is 7-2 in the BIG and finishes in third place. Team A beats: Illinois (17), Indiana (18), Maryland (12), Minnesota (13), Northwestern (16), Purdue (14), Rutgers (15) and gets destroyed by Wisconsin (8) and UCLA (9). Team A has zero ranked wins and didn't play tOSU (1); Oregon (2); Michigan (4); Washington (5); PSU (6); USC (7). 2) Team B is 8-1 in the ACC, but finishes in third place because of a tiebreaker. Team B beats: North Carolina (4), Florida State (5), Louisville (6), VA Tech (7), NC State (8), Duke (9), Syracuse (10), Boston College (11) and loses to Miami (2). Team B didn't play Clemson (1), but has ranked wins against UNC (4) and FSU (5) and loses a close game to Miami (2) in OT, which costs them the tiebreaker. Why should Team A get an auto bid over Team B just because of conference afflation? That seems completely ridiculous, especially with the unbalanced schedules. 3) Then add this twist to the scenario. What if Michigan, Washington, and PSU all finish tied for 4th in the BIG at 6-3, but they each played tOSU, Oregon and each of the other two teams they are tied with? Is Team A better than any of them?? No chance Is Team B better than any of them?? Maybe not We have not even discussed OOC games. IMO, they need to stay with the at-large format and make teams that don't win their conference prove it on the field.

I don't understand this. While it benefits the Ducks, having multiple auto bids from a single conference is going to end up letting in some 8-5 team in a down conference year that has no business being in the field. As the posted above noted, this will most likely happen in the ACC or Big-12, but could happen less frequently in the BIG or SEC as well. In 2012, are you letting in 8-5 Michigan as the third place team? How about letting in 9-4 Wisconsin in 2013? I know there are more teams now and an unbalanced schedule, but that doesn't mean there won't be a 4- or 5-loss team in a down year. Why not just stick with the at-large bids, so the best teams are invited? Notre Dame gets a vote in all of this even though they are not in a conference? I think they should implement a requirement that you should have to be in a conference OR have won a major Bowl Game since 1994 to have a vote. That would knock immediately them out of the discussion.

Is USC even a factor anymore? They have not won a conference championship game since 2016 and have only one conference championship in the past 13 years. I keep hearing about how great Riley is, but is he really great? He is 0-3 in playoff games; 0-3 in post season games with a starting Heisman winning QB; and 1-4 in NY6 games. That's sounds a lot more like Mario 2.0 than greatness to me.

Pretty difficult to win games when you get killed on the glass and don't take care of the basketball. Colorado essentially had 8 more possessions than the Ducks tonight. Shelstad finally had to face a long, athletic defender tonight and he struggled. Dante looks very rusty. Need that win in Utah now.

At this point, I have NO DOUBT that if Oregon would have won the CCG against Washington by 3 points, both Washington and Oregon would have been left out in favor of Georgia or Florida State. I hate to see the Pac-12 go, but this is exactly why it needed to happen. The only chance to get in the playoff from the PAC or ACC conference is to win every game. And even that is not a guarantee anymore? It never should have been 4 teams in the first place. Winning your conference should matter, so it should have been 6 or 8 from the start.

I think Ty has played great this season. As for the pick he threw vs. ASU, his arm was hit on that play. I think he can be a high level starter at Oregon.

Absolutely. The BIG needs to throw them a lifeline. Even if it is a 1/4 share to start, I think it benefits everyone.

This is a great post. In life, you can't have the reward without assuming the risk. These "kids" begged to be treated like adults with jobs, income, responsibility and pressure to perform. Hey college athletes, welcome to the real world! I have no issue with what is going on in Colorado or Oregon right now. Under the new structure, these "kids" are essentially paid professional athletes. If they are not performing, cut them immediately and move on. This is nothing more than a business now.

Hopefully he is a better shooter than his numbers show. On paper, it looks like we replaced Soares with the exact same player.

Wow! Great news.

Looks like we found a PG!