Dan Lanning "Haunted" By Rose Bowl

[GatOrlando]

After recent post spring practice, Dan Lanning talked about the upcoming season and reflected upon what was almost a perfect first season in the B1G. Winning the league and making history as the first B1G program to beat Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State in the same season. Yet it wasn't enough. 

 

He didn't answer when asked if he was the one who informed Tennessee of their starting QB eyeing a bigger bag. Smart man in both ways.

 

Oregon's Dan Lanning admits waking up every day haunted by embarrassing Rose Bowl blowout

WWW.SPORTINGNEWS.COM

---

Dan Lanning and Oregon had high expectations in the playoffs, but just flatlined. Lanning hasn't forgotten...

 

[30Duck]

Every day it seems more reasons come up to make every Oregon football fan not only "love" their coach but respect him too. The Heupel/Tennessee situation is the latest and won't be the last. Of course, when a coaching job opens up, whether in college or the NFL, Lanning is going to be on the top of the list. 

 

But I'm as sure about Lanning staying at Oregon, "until they ask me to leave" as I am that the water in the ice cube tray, I just put in the freezer, will turn into ice. Taggart & Cristobal both talked the talk, and we remember what that sounded like. Lanning doesn't sound, or act, like either of them.

 

I hope he isn't too "haunted" by the Rose Bowl. The losses always leave bigger impressions than wins. But he has a lot of wins. It would be irresponsible to go into 2025 saying that the team will be better than it was in 2024. But the opportunity is there for a fantastic season. 

 

 

[Jon Joseph]

 

I'm not sure 'haunted' is the right word for this OBD fan. In the first quarter, I felt like Ryan Day, Jeremiah Smith, Will Howard, The Chipper, et al, had pulled out my Adrenaline Plug, and copious amounts of adult beverages could not revive me.

 

I think I would have been more haunted by a loss in OT or because of a bizarre play? I think?

 

During the Ohio State Spring game, Will Howard was asked which of the PO wins was the best. He immediately responded, 'The Rose Bowl. We owed Oregon.'

 

Everything went right for TOSU in the playoffs. A playoff Ohio State is out of in the 4-team era. The team with the most talented roster got its Sierra together and had a blowout of Tennessee to its credit heading into Pasadena. 

 

The Buckeyes were the beneficiaries of a screwed up playoff format and OBD got the short end on the stick.

 

Next Case!

 

 

[30Duck]

On 4/16/2025 at 9:53 AM, Jon Joseph said:

I'm not sure 'haunted' is the right word for this OBD fan

"haunted" definitely isn't the right word for me either. As losses go, the Rose Bowl was pretty easy to get over. Howard admitted that the L to Oregon, actually, the 2nd in a row, stung. That was a sign of respect that OBD will never get from Washington...yeah, I'm thinking of the classless 70 put on the Ducks because Oregon had the gall to beat UW 12 times in a row. 

[GatOrlando]

I think Dan has a stronger word he'd like to use. I'd like to hear it one day. I also think there was a stronger feeling toward seeing the path Penn State and Texas were given over the only undefeated team in the field. They couldn't have adjusted the seeding so Oregon could've gotten SMU, Clemson, or Indiana? People were saying Tennessee was potentially the second best at large team.

 

So you're giving the only undefeated team and B1G champion the toughest team coming out of the first round guaranteed? Seems kind of dumb to me. We all know college football is now NFL Lite. But that doesn't mean you have to have such an amateur way of seeding the tournament. 

 

It was dumb. You all should turn in your cards right now and go work as Minions at Universal. You can't think clearly, you can't put together a competent reason for giving us Oregon vs Ohio State  2 any earlier than the Championship. Go!!! Get out now!!! You are fired!!!!! Do not pass go, do not collect two hundred dollars!! 

 

What, I said go now. It's over.

[Grandpa Duck]

I suppose the seeding by the College Football Playoff Committee needs to be explained every month or so for those who post negative comments in a thread and never return to it.  
 

First, the committee did not seed teams.  They seeded numbers, 1-12, before the season began.   No one knew which teams would finish the season in what numbers.

 

Second, the winners of the SEC and the B1G, plus winners of two of the other three conferences were given a bye into the second round as part of the negotiations between five conferences.  That was the carrot for agreeing to the 12 team playoff.  So ASU and Boise State end up seeded #3 and 4 even though they were ranked well below that.  
 

For the first round the, CFPC made a standard bracket with 5 Vs. 12, 6 vs. 11 and so forth.  Again, they made that bracket before the season started.  I think that Ohio State, ranked #10, beat Tennessee, ranked #7, and then, as the poorest ranked team without a bye to make it into round round two, became #8 of the eight teams in round two.  So, they drew #1, OBD.

 

Complain all you like, but the CFPC was given a sack of lemons by the conferences.  They ranked ASU and Boise State low, but the agreement made before the season started said their conference winners would get a top four seed.  The CFPC made the lemonade.  The blame lies with the conferences, not the committee.

 

And, to date I have seen nothing that will change next year.

 

In the end, Ohio State had the best team and was going to beat OBD whether we played them in the quarterfinals, semifinals or finals.  So, what difference does it make?

[GatOrlando]

 

[Jon Joseph]

On 4/17/2025 at 1:32 AM, Grandpa Duck said:

I suppose the seeding by the College Football Playoff Committee needs to be explained every month or so for those who post negative comments in a thread and never return to it.  
 

First, the committee did not seed teams.  They seeded numbers, 1-12, before the season began.   No one knew which teams would finish the season in what numbers.

 

Second, the winners of the SEC and the B1G, plus winners of two of the other three conferences were given a bye into the second round as part of the negotiations between five conferences.  That was the carrot for agreeing to the 12 team playoff.  So ASU and Boise State end up seeded #3 and 4 even though they were ranked well below that.  
 

For the first round the, CFPC made a standard bracket with 5 Vs. 12, 6 vs. 11 and so forth.  Again, they made that bracket before the season started.  I think that Ohio State, ranked #10, beat Tennessee, ranked #7, and then, as the poorest ranked team without a bye to make it into round round two, became #8 of the eight teams in round two.  So, they drew #1, OBD.

 

Complain all you like, but the CFPC was given a sack of lemons by the conferences.  They ranked ASU and Boise State low, but the agreement made before the season started said their conference winners would get a top four seed.  The CFPC made the lemonade.  The blame lies with the conferences, not the committee.

 

And, to date I have seen nothing that will change next year.

 

In the end, Ohio State had the best team and was going to beat OBD whether we played them in the quarterfinals, semifinals or finals.  So, what difference does it make?

 

Ohio State was the 8-seed. If seeded according to ranking, which will be the PO format if not this season, next season, OBD would have played the winner of Boise State at Indiana in the Rose Bowl. 

 

This format was designed for the five Power 5 Conferences before the Pac-12 imploded. To my knowledge, and after researching the issue, this was the only time in the history of college post-season events that lower-seeded teams were seeded above higher-ranked teams and handed a 1st round bye.

 

The Committee couldn't alter the format, but the Committee had no justifiable reason to seed Boise over ASU and send ASU to play Texas in Atlanta instead of 'Phoenix.'

 

The CBB Committee supports its rankings and seedings with the use of fully disclosed metrics. The CFB Committee says: Trust Us! Understandably, the B1G and the SEC do not trust the Committee, why we will see a 14-16 team PO field in 2026 with 4 B1G and 4 SEC teams, as designated by the conferences in the field. Every metric justifies this format. 

 

If Boise had defeated Indiana and lost to OBD in the Rose Bowl, it would have meant a difference of $8 million for the B1G. Indiana wins and loses to OBD, it's a difference of $4 million. Also, a different effect on recruiting and the national perspective of the program.  

 

IMO, B1G differences. 

 

[30Duck]

Th

On 4/17/2025 at 9:46 AM, Jon Joseph said:

The CBB Committee supports its rankings and seedings with the use of fully disclosed metrics. The CFB Committee says: Trust Us!

"March Madness" showed it truly is not "Mad" at all. 4 No.1's in the Final 4 showed what ranking & seeding can deliver. Teams are awarded a conference championship and a place in the 64 via a CCG win, but not guaranteed seeding, they could be a No.12

 The format certainly didn't know that Oregon would end up in the No.1 spot. They may have drawn up some brackets and seen just what the No.1 was walking into. But even then, save for Joey Harrington, people liked the wait for Oregon over playing a game, a potential loss. Talk about hindsight being 20/20.