-
Finish your profile right here and directions for adding your Profile Picture (which appears when you post) is right here.
GeotechDuck
-
Posts
651 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Events
Posts posted by GeotechDuck
-
-
Unreal. They are all good with Cam McCormick getting an 9th year, but Dante is out? Typical.
-
1
-
-
If I am counting correctly, I believe that makes 12 and likely done. I am assuming they holding that last spot for Dante just in case?
Shelstad
Evans
Bittle
Barthelemy
Tracey
Cook
Bamba
Angel
Moss
Lindsay
Traore
Phillips.-
1
-
1
-
-
4+ points per possession is insane. Wow.
-
1
-
-
I remember it so well, that it is almost like it happened yesterday. I was a senior and standing on the bench in the student section. I saw the interception, but completely missed the return. As soon as Kenny got his hands on that ball, I was tackled by my friends behind me and ended up in a pile of students on the ground.
What an amazing year to be a student and clearly the turning point for the program. Rose Bowl and NCAA tourney and never looked back!
-
1
-
-
I think that is a solid idea by Klatt. There is too much grey area right now. Even a NET ranking like in hoops would go a long way. That way a team that plays two FCS schools only gets credit for Q4 wins for those types of games.
-
1
-
-
On 5/22/2024 at 11:06 PM, David Marsh said:
I'm fine with this...
But when fall rolls around I'll have a 2 year old and a 6 month old at home... Let's just say having night games at least means my girls are in bed. My eldest isn't took keen on me watching anything but Bluey...
Granted Bluey is pretty good.
But it isn't Duck Football. So for me a night game means I get to watch in mostly peace.
I have a 9 year old daughter and she still watches Bluey. I don't say anything because I secretly like it. The Dad is pretty solid in that show, especially in the "neighbors" episode. Both my wife and daughter say all the time that he is exactly like me. I might push for NIL Bluey money.
I also like night games because I get to watch with no interruptions.
-
Very interesting topic. I think Kelly has to be at the top of that list for me. It was the first time I truly believed that Oregon had a shot to win a championship when he came in and changed college football forever.
However, I was in undergrad for the last 4 years of Brooks and in graduate school during the first years of Bellotti.
I honestly believe that Brooks did an outstanding job of recruiting guys that had “it” during the early 1990s. Those guys were pissed off about losing and went out and did something about it. I think that helped change the program and set it on the right path.
If you don’t have resources and are consistently recruiting from the back of the pack, that was a very difficult thing to do and is often overlooked.
Brooks may be a quiet second on that list.
Lanning is still TBD, but he could rise to the top of that list very quickly.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Very interesting. I wonder how they are going to compete with YouTube TV if they don’t have the other network channels for sports. They are going to need to keep the price down, as I think YouTube TV has that same content, plus more, for around $60.
If it is an add-on to Hulu or Max and is around $20, I could see it getting some traction.
-
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
-
2
-
-
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
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.
-
3
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
Here is some excellent analysis on the game by ESPN.
I predict that Will Richardson will not score in this game.
-
1
-
4
-
-
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!!!
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
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.
-
On 3/4/2024 at 5:05 PM, Dave23 said:
I'm sure Oregon is at the top, Dante has been snake bit his whole career which would account for a lot of it. I personally have been feeling that the main problem has been a good assistant and strength coach as these guys spend a lot of time individually with players.
When Tony Stubblefield moved on the dynamic on the team seem to have changed. Will Richardson never seem to develop along with some of the other guys that had talent. At the same time training injuries and team chemistry has gone down.
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.
-
1
-
3
-
-
On 3/1/2024 at 11:26 PM, JabbaNoBargain said:
All true, but one conference has 5+ “blue bloods” and the other has zero, Not equal schedules so not all losses are equal. I’d go as far to say that 9-3 in the new B1G is the equal to 11-1 in the new B12.
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.
-
1
-
Husky Hubris and SC Smugness That Did NOT Age Well...
in Our Beloved Ducks
Posted · Edited by GeotechDuck
USC fans not sold on Lanning and saying he is overhyped and can’t win the big game?
Hilarious! We should probably listen, because USC fans must know more about being overhyped than anyone else on the planet.
Oregon has only lost one game to USC in the last 12 years under 5 different head coaches. USC’s current coach is 0-3 in playoff games, 1-4 in NY6 games, and 0-3 in NY6/playoff games with a Heisman winning QB running the offense.
if you look up “overhyped” in the dictionary, there should be a picture of USC.