mikethehiker

How about just plain confidence and experience? When our first team was trying to score a TD at the end of the game against Georgia's reserves, did any of you actually believe they were going to do it? Did the players themselves think it would happen? I'm not so sure after being rattled all day. Two quick points: 1) Our skill position players are much smaller. I made a mental note years ago watching Alabama vs Clemson in national title games, "we won't be competing for titles until we get much bigger at the receiver position." Size at receiver and the ability to get physical separation from elite corners is a huge difference maker or at least a great equalizer. We simply didn't have the scheme or the player to make a play down the field. 2) I'm not sure what coaches tell players vs media, but the "every position is an open competition" line is getting old. Your program isn't going anywhere until there is a clear talent/experience pecking order on both sides of the ball. I bet Georgia, Alabama, and Ohio St all have very clear 1 and 2 deeps starting fall camp with few exceptions. It adds clarity and confidence for the program and helps the team understand what to expect from the players around them. I didn't know what to expect from Oregon on Saturday. Did the players know what to expect from themselves? All this to say that Oregon has four head coaches (1 interim), a gazillion coordinators in the last 5 years, and a huge swath of players from the transfer portal. Georgia is a well-oiled machine at this point after years of building and consistency. It's disappointing that we played them at likely the worst possible time.

Agreed, something needs to change. It should be a blank canvas. I'd rather reduce the demands on players than compensate. How can you compensate a male sport and not female athletics in a Title IX world? And why not all sports? It's always been a slippery slope. Far more student athletes appreciate the opportunity to attend school for free that those who feel they need to be paid. The truth is that it is a privilege to play and showcase your talent on a college football stage. Athletes used to be thrilled just to show up on ESPN, Sportcenter, or FOX. The product being sold to TV viewers is not the athletes or the names. It's the schools, amateur athletics, and the college football stage. It's a BIG advantage for these elite athletes to be part of that. Try building your personal brand without the college football stage. My 2 cents

The answer to all this may be to let go of "the dream" and create a parallel NCAA. The "have nots" outnumber the "haves" by a mile. The "have-nots" should let go of the "haves" and create their ideal system around amateur student athletics. Create the best playoff possible where everything is settled on the field, reign in coaches pay, eliminate NIL, reign in the demands being put on student athletes. Create a competitive NCAA based on competing ideals and let's see who wins out. One rule - there can be no crossover play. If you want to compete in our "league" with amateur athletics, you have to abide by amateur athletic rules. The semi-pros need the "have nots" to beat up on. Maybe when the "have nots" stop complying, the "haves" will get tired of beating the snot out of each other and losing and will prefer a more pure form of amateur athletics where the best athletes are more spread out across the country.

To think we could have expanded with Texas and Oklahoma years ago.

These were my thoughts also. PAC-12, ACC, and Big12 are all extremely motivated to survive right now and the Oregon/Washington combo may be the biggest chess piece on the board. ANYTHING is possible right now and those 3 conferences are in the fight of their lives. What was impossible yesterday is possible today. If nothing will fix losing LA schools, the best I can hope for as a sports fan is possibly a merger and hopefully four power conferences remaining.