Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Our Beloved Ducks Forum

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Featured Replies

Posted
No.

We may be able to go to to toe and win against USC, OSU, and Michigan, but national media and the public still don't quite see us as a true blue blood quite yet based on the chatter of the last week.

I base this on a simple principle, the benefit of the doubt, or presumption of excellence.

For example, when OSU beats another team, it's taken as a reminder of how good they are, and if the other team didn't get run off the field it's because they were really good, just not good enough to beat the amazing OSU (e.g. Texas).

The flip side is how new bloods are treated. When Indiana absolutely destroyed a highly ranked Illinois team, they immediate thought is Illinois is actually absolute trash, and Indiana is just competitive, not top tier. They don't get their stripes for winning.

We've definitely lived this over the years. The asymmetry of it all is irritating .The assumption that if we beat someone it means the other team really isn't as good as we thought, but if the other team beats us it still means they're really good to beat us. You can't win the perception battle even by winning.

We are now somewhere in the middle, we get a little benefit of the doubt with high preseason rankings and with pomp and circumstance leading up to games. But there is still a large contingent with their doubts as evidenced this week.

A lot of people are definitely saying Oregon beat PSU because PSU sucks, not that we played a big role in their downfall to UCLA.

Even worse is the talk that if we lose to Indiana it will mean we aren't that good, but still Indiana might actually be really good (emphasis on "might" for being the new blood they are too)

So we're still in new blood purgatory, peering up at the final level to be a true blue blood.

Until then, it's going to be "No flowers for you! Win a Natty, then we'll talk...but no promises."

Edited by Solar

No.

Great thoughts!

I think we’re a bit like a frog in the slowly boiling pot, our environment is substantially different than it was in say, 1995…but it’s been a slow burn that we might not fully appreciate.

Hard to compare eras, but we definitely get the benefit of the doubt way more than 95% of the teams out there. One example, we lost our QB and we’re starting a guy that flamed out at UCLA going into the year, but we were still ranked in the preseason top-10. Will we ever get as much benefit of the doubt as USC or Alabama? Hard to say.

Another thing to think about is how do teams “lose” blue-blood status? Is Army still blue-blood? Harvard? Minnesota? Or somewhat more recently, how about Nebraska? Oklahoma? TA&M?

IMO this is a slippery slope, but I’m not sure it matters anymore aside from getting ribbed about zero titles.

Edited by JabbaNoBargain

No.

IMHO, nothing will change until we win 1 maybe 2 Nattys and put the trophy on the mantle over the fireplace!

The moniker of a blue bood is subjective and somewhat fluid. Time and distance from glory play a role. One upon a time Nebraska was a powerhouse blue blood. Now? PSU won titles to earn blueblood status. How about now?

Fun topic for sure but I dont have a problem with OBD's not being considered a blueblood. Scoreboard talks and we came up short twice.

Go Ducks!

No.

Oregon will never be a blue blood to those programs, just like the richest people in the world are considered “new money.” Who cares?

Oregon is widely acknowledged as a top 5 college football program nationally by those in the know. Everyone knows Oregon football, we have one of the best head coaches in the game, we can and do recruit with anyone in the country (backed by an organized and strong NIL program), have world class facilities and are constantly competing for national championships. There are no guarantees but most people believe it’s just a matter of time before Oregon wins a national championship.

What other college football programs would you trade places with right now?

  • Moderator
No.

Sorry to say that I think we are a basketball school since that is where our blue bloodline is located ever since that fateful day in 1939 when we owned ALL of the NCAA Basketball Championships.

  • Moderator
No.

All I know is that the “blue blood” programs don’t really want to play us at Autzen.

  • Moderator
No.

First things first. When some d-bag starts talking to me about “natty’s” I always ask what position they played in their team’s winning of their “natty”. When they mumble something incoherent as they usually do, I ask them how they contributed. I will give some level of credit to a season ticket holder or booster, but I typically despise “jock-riders” and I let them know.

If it’s a USC OR fusky fan I remind them that all championships were mythical before 1998. Meaning, they were awarded based on the opinions of media voters. After 1998 they were awarded via a championship game. USC won in 2004 but it was vacated, so they only have a mythical AP championship from that year. When they try to legitimize mythical championships then I use last season as justification for Oregon’s first national championship in football since an official selector voted us number one.

Remember to remind all fusky fans that they only have 2/7 of a national championship. They were one of five teams who claimed the 1960 championship and one of two teams who claimed it in 1991.

No.

Colin Cowherd now considers the Ducks a "Blue Blood" program . . . for what it's worth.

Nice to hear a prominent national voice, who LOVES his blue blood programs, talk up the Ducks.

No.

I love to cheer Oregon. IMO Blue Blood programs have several National Championship Trophies. If several things continue to be as they are.....I suspect that will happen in the next decade.

Once those are in place......other things follow.

No.

The only opinions that matter are those of 17 and 18 year old high school players who have top talent and skills at football.

  • Administrator
No.

Great topic, and thanks to all who begin threads. I agree with HappytoBeADuck in that once we win two 'Nattys, and are consistently in the top ten...then we are "currently" Blue-Blood.

Stop winning and that definition changes; Clemson won a couple, but are they Blue-Blood now?

Mr. FishDuck

  • Moderator
No.
35 minutes ago, Grandpa Duck said:

The only opinions that matter are those of 17 and 18 year old high school players who have top talent and skills at football.

Thanks, GP. No doubt that HS recruiting is still a B1G part of the process. But, in today's CFB world, I think seasoned players from the portal matter equally, if not more. It's all about roster management today, not just coaching up quality star-rated recruits; recruits who don't play early are likely gone.

ONE CFB program has not lost a starter to the portal, OBD.

OBD's true Frosh and 2nd-year players are stepping up, which is great to witness. However, without an outstanding portal class, including an RB who couldn't step up, would OBD replacing 18 starters be ranked in the top 5?

Since the inception of the BCS, no team without a Blue Chip Roster has won a title. This was true when a team had to win one game to be a champ, and far more so when you have to win three or four games in a row against top competition. No matter how they are rounded up, you do not win at a championship level without the Jameses and Josephs.

Blue Blood recognition will come only post-Natty for OBD and not before Oregon secures two or more titles. Fair? No. However, even without a title, Oregon's name is dropped whenever the subject involves a discussion of CFB's top programs.

No surprise, in the above post, Charles beat me to it! 😍

No.
4 hours ago, DrJacksPlaidPants said:

USC won in 2004 but it was vacated, so they only have a mythical AP championship from that year.

They can vacate that year all they want. USC is the 2004 title holder. Point blank. They were more than dominant from 03 to 05. They didn't take away Auburn's 2010 title despite everyone knowing AU bought Cam Newton. So I'll be damned if anyone outside of this forum wants to say USC wasn't titleholders in 2004. Mythical or not though, USC and UW were dominant the years they were deemed champs.

I don't like the hate for our PAC8 brothers. They were more successful then, now they're not. I was happy the PAC12 was obliterated. I didn't feel the need to justify regional support for teams that didn't support college football like "they should have". But I support the four that joined the B1G. They earned those titles. They market their teams appropriately. That is what one does when one wins. We will do the same if(when?)we win ours. And I certainly see hundreds of thousands of Duck fans will be just as arrogant as the blue blood fans we hate.

We may never get the respect we deserve. But it will be fun when we defeat more blue bloods. Because all they will have to say after we defeat them is we aren't a blue blood. Then we can say: well what justifies you as a blue blood now that you lost to us?

No.

Will Nebraska ever win another National Title?

Is Minnesota a blue blood? They have more claimed National Titles than Penn State with seven. Pittsburgh and Michigan State have six claimed titles each. These are all P4 programs with titles dating back sixty plus years. Michigan State has won the B1G and made a playoff. Are they a blue blood?

I think it's time to just call the perennial contenders "Big Brands". Big Brands get the recruits, they have NIL, facilities and uniforms. They have big names attend their games and get the prime television slots against other Big Brands.

What was a bigger game last year, Ohio State vs Oregon or Ohio State vs Nebraska? Those games happened back to back. One was remembered as a great back and forth. The other was seen as an almost letdown. The media didn't give Nebraska any credit for almost beating Ohio State. They said it was Ohio State still up in their feelings over losing to the Ducks the prior week. To me that was confirmation that Oregon is on the Ohio State level. Nebraska, not so much.

No.

The only thing to me that Oregon lacks that all the other powers have is a vintage or signature look. It's ironic in a way, Oregon became known for their uniforms, but outside of Eugene there aren't many who can identify that one iconic look. I personally like the chrome wings helmet, but the first Oregon game I saw was Akili Smith in the 1998 Sun Bowl. That yellow helmet with the O on it.

No.
4 hours ago, fred flintstone said:

I love to cheer Oregon. IMO Blue Blood programs have several National Championship Trophies. If several things continue to be as they are.....I suspect that will happen in the next decade.

Once those are in place......other things follow.

Or at least a single national championship sometime during the last century or so.

However, I think it is highly likely that we will soon win a national championship.

No.
1 hour ago, GatOrlando said:

Will Nebraska ever win another National Title?

Is Minnesota a blue blood? They have more claimed National Titles than Penn State with seven. Pittsburgh and Michigan State have six claimed titles each. These are all P4 programs with titles dating back sixty plus years. Michigan State has won the B1G and made a playoff. Are they a blue blood?

I think it's time to just call the perennial contenders "Big Brands". Big Brands get the recruits, they have NIL, facilities and uniforms. They have big names attend their games and get the prime television slots against other Big Brands.

What was a bigger game last year, Ohio State vs Oregon or Ohio State vs Nebraska? Those games happened back to back. One was remembered as a great back and forth. The other was seen as an almost letdown. The media didn't give Nebraska any credit for almost beating Ohio State. They said it was Ohio State still up in their feelings over losing to the Ducks the prior week. To me that was confirmation that Oregon is on the Ohio State level. Nebraska, not so much.

This 💯

The term “Blue Blood” really had become antiquated imo.

To be "Blue-Blooded" means to have a noble, aristocratic, or royal lineage, originating from a family of high social standing. You can’t change your origin, so perhaps the entire concept of “becoming” a blue-blood is a contradiction

No.

We are obviously a blue blood football program now. We need to get fans to focus more on basketball so we can be top tier. Football is set, 100%.

If you were from the East Coast you wouldn't care at all about Portland or Seattle, let alone Eugene. This is as good as it gets for football. And when I say that I think we are rightfully the #1 or #2 team in the nation, and there is not much good reason we won't always be (good luck to us).

But basketball? We need to embrace one and dones, and locals in Eugene need to stop crying about going to a corporate arena setting instead of Mac Court.

Edited by 2002duck

  • Moderator
No.
16 minutes ago, JabbaNoBargain said:

This 💯

The term “Blue Blood” really had become antiquated imo.

To be "Blue-Blooded" means to have a noble, aristocratic, or royal lineage, originating from a family of high social standing. You can’t change your origin, so perhaps the entire concept of “becoming” a blue-blood is a contradiction

Is there anyone born and raised in Florida who meets the above definition? 😁

And your team plays in a swamp and has a large reptile for a mascot. 🤢

OK. I know that your team was Spurriered on to a title, and then, the Gators did not wallow in the Meyer.

Beat A&M!

  • Moderator
No.
9 hours ago, Mike West said:

They can vacate that year all they want. USC is the 2004 title holder. Point blank. They were more than dominant from 03 to 05. They didn't take away Auburn's 2010 title despite everyone knowing AU bought Cam Newton. So I'll be damned if anyone outside of this forum wants to say USC wasn't titleholders in 2004. Mythical or not though, USC and UW were dominant the years they were deemed champs.

I look at USC the same way I look at Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire. Was the talent there? Did they get their moment in the sun? The answer is yes, but they and everybody else knows they operated outside the rules to get there. There will always be questions whether they could have had the same success without cheating.

Same questions come with mythical shared championships. Was your team really the best team? Could the Fuskies have beaten Miami? Colorado/Ga.Tech? Nebraska/Penn State? We’ll never know and there will always be room for doubt because it wasn’t settled on the field.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.