My FishDuck Friends....I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, I think rebuilding the bonds with former players is a good thing and it can help with recruiting and contacts in the NFL.

 

On the other hand...it is the former players that wanted Justin Wilcox hired and got the Civil War name change done--without any input from those who pay the bills.  (The season ticket holders!)  Considering how the former players have NOT acted in the best interests, (IMHO) of the fans--part of me wants him to stay away from them, or at least--don't listen to them?

 

Your thoughts?  (A prior article about this topic is below)

 

Former Oregon Players Are NOT on the Fans’ Team by Charles Fischer of FishDuck

 

 

I was on the Lanning train back when we were having the Wilcox vs Kelly debate. With that said, I like how the past players banded together and pushed for Wilcox in an attempt to keep the UO from chasing after some shiny new flavor of the month coach. I think they just wanted to make sure the Ducks brought in somebody who actually would care about the Ducks and not use them as a stepping stone.

 

Connecting with former legends by the new staff seems like a great idea to me. I think it also shows that Lanning is here for the long term which should make all involved breathe a little easier.

 

I think we should also be considerate of how the name "Civil War" effects recruits and players from other parts of the country that don't have local connections to the term. It's a phrase the we may not have political connection with but that may not be the case for outsiders you're trying to bring on to the team.

There's listening, talking and doing. So far I like how Lanning is doing all three. The previous coach had the second one down, but didn't seem too good at the other two. I'm not too worried about him listening to Harrington. Now if Harrington had any eligibility left then he could definitely show Lanning how it is done at Oregon.

 

I do hope he extends the listening to Bellotti. He might impart some pearls of wisdom about how it is done at Oregon. I could imagine there is some pretty shrewd knowledge about how to play in the Pac-12 Bellotti could share.

On 2/13/2022 at 11:41 AM, The Kamikaze Kid said:

I think we should also be considerate of how the name "Civil War" effects recruits and players from other parts of the country that don't have local connections to the term. It's a phrase the we may not have political connection with but that may not be the case for outsiders you're trying to bring on to the team.

Great point and something we all need to be better with. It is one thing to say something isn't offensive to oneself, but to apply that to others isn't showing much enlightenment. Playing cowboys and Indians use to be fun as a kid, but when you start playing with Native Americans, not so much, especially when you understand history. 

On 2/13/2022 at 11:41 AM, The Kamikaze Kid said:

I think we should also be considerate of how the name "Civil War" effects recruits and players from other parts of the country that don't have local connections to the term.

I think that is a "Red-Herring."  I have been following recruiting for over 20 years on the subscriber sites and with the thousands of recruits interviewed....NOT ONE of them ever mentioned their objection to the name of our Rivalry game.

On 2/13/2022 at 11:42 AM, Haywarduck said:

I do hope he extends the listening to Bellotti. He might impart some pearls of wisdom about how it is done at Oregon. I could imagine there is some pretty shrewd knowledge about how to play in the Pac-12 Bellotti could share.

Now THAT is what I would like to see happen.

On 2/13/2022 at 11:47 AM, Haywarduck said:

Playing cowboys and Indians use to be fun as a kid, but when you start playing with Native Americans, not so much, especially when you understand history. 

I think I understand history; hundreds of thousands of men died to stop slavery and preserve the union.  Over 186,000 black soldiers fought for the north, and over 40,000 over them died for that noble cause.

 

It comes down to how each person chooses to view it; it was either a name that represented slavery, or a name that represented the first fight for the rights of black Americans.

 

Or is it just a name we use that we don't think twice of over the years because it is just a moniker.

 

No matter how you think of it...the vast majority of both fan bases of UO and OSU disagree with the name change, and it was brought about by the former players of both schools.  Getting back to the premise of this thread and my article....the former players are 0-2 with the fans at Oregon, IMHO.  Is Lanning spending extended time with a former prominent player who was instrumental in those episodes a good thing?

Edited February 13, 20223 yr by Charles Fischer

On 2/13/2022 at 11:58 AM, Charles Fischer said:

I think that is a "Red-Herring."  I have been following recruiting for over 20 years on the subscriber sites and with the thousands of recruits interviewed....NOT ONE of them ever mentioned their objection to the name of our Rivalry game.

I bet you there would be coaches who could sway an elite recruit considering moving to Oregon with a few tidbits about Oregon. With our history on race, and the name of that game, a good recruiter could put more than doubt in a recruits mind. Having Black Americans play in the Civil War is like asking Native Americans to play in the Bear River Massacre. They may not know what that is, but they would learn about it, and never want to play for any school associated with making a game of it. Maybe we are crossing over into taboo subjects, but I can agree to disagree on this one.

"...they would learn about it, and never want to play for any school associated with making a game of it."

 

Again....what you write makes sense, but only if other schools are actually engaging in negative recruiting to the smallest detail, such as the rivalry game name.  I have read THOUSANDS of posts about recruits over the years, and I am quite confident that it has never been a factor in deciding to come to Oregon or Oregon State.  I would need to see proof that it is actually an issue to recruits.

 

In fact...this is the first time I've seen anyone bring up recruiting in the name-change discussion.  

 

             Its a new STRETCH to me!

personally, i think that the name “civil war” is just lazy and not very descriptive of the rivalry. even taking the politics and history out of it, it’s not a good name. 

 

the real disservice is how long it’s taking to rechristen the game “the platypus bowl.” now that’s a good name. 

My Friends, if I had wanted to start a thread about the change of the Rivalry Game name....I would have.  But the thread is about Lanning talking to the former players....and I should not have indulged an answer to those who went off-topic.

 

If people cannot stay on-topic, then I will lock the thread.

 

How do YOU feel about Lanning meeting with former players?

I think Lanning reaching out to former players (and coaches, should he do so) is a good thing. I imagine he listens to them and then sifts through what they say for whatever information he thinks will help him understand the past, benefit the present, and plan for the future.

I agree. There's nothing wrong with talking. It's take what you want and leave the rest.

 

I would hope that our prior players would be integral in helping with recruiting. Being a mentor with being in college, the pros and post football life. It's one thing to hear it from the coaches but to hear from a previous player to me can hold more weight.

 

Thus I believe it's very important to have relationships with former players.

I hope I am not going out of bounds here.  Really just trying to have a conversation.  History, is our past, it is not always good but it show us there are other ways to succeed.  The U of Oregon gets many of its athletes outside its own boundaries, this is why it is important to ask why some come to the U of Oregon and others do not.  Education, sports may not be the only thing some students or athletes are drawn to the Ducks.  Others may not find Oregon diverse enough.  I hope that the majority of student/athletes that came to Eugene, Oregon or the Ducks found it a worth while life experience.  That "our" past does not have to be our future.

Not sure who reached out first but glad they met. Face to face, ears wide open and full on communication. If Coach Lanning wants to fully embrace the history of Oregon football then Harrington is a great place to start. Then Coach Belotti would be the next stop.

 

As a Duck fan, I would like to return to the concept of family. Coach Lanning and his staff are now part of the Oregon family   Build and grow from within that family took the program from barely making the Independence Bowl to 2 Nattys. Not to mention multiple Rose and New Years Six Bowls. It was a successful business model that endured 4 decades. A smart HC could learn a great deal from that model. Especially the business and continuity aspect.........

 

Not so sure I would take any advice on who to hire as a head coach from the players. But those former great players would be a welcome addition at high end fund raising events.

Charles, I never thought I'd have to agree to this, but you are right in the comment that we are in a rent a coach era.  I know Mike Bellotti well, and for what it's worth the only reason that he did not accept either the Notre Dame, or USC jobs was because of his wife he was adamant about staying in Eugene, and a secondary reason was Oregon PERS which has been great for Mike and his family.

 

I really liked Christobal as a human being, great guy to visit with, hell of a hard worker, but in my opinion (and many others) a lousy game coach, and I don't think he will be any different at Miami.

 

Is Lanning an improvement, the more I learn about him the better I like him.  He seems like he's a very intelligent individual, that being said, I think he will most likely be a much better head coach than some of us even think he will.  His intelligence is showing in how he has picked what I think is an outstanding staff.

 

If he is a rent a coach, that means down the line, we will be looking for another Lanning and then have a mediocre year, or two, will that happen, maybe, and maybe not.  He does not have the tie to a school that is a football powerhouse, or potential like Christobal did.  Oregon has the ability to match salaries with most schools, so it's highly possible that he could be a long timer, time will tell.  So far everything he's doing I like, but I said the same thing at this stage of the game about Christobal.

If Lanning has the success we hope for, just maybe his spouse will like Eugene as much as Mrs. Bellotti!  Their children are the right ages, and Eugene is about as good as it gets for child rearing environment.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful post,Mre. Penny.

Lanning seems like a smart guy. He probably sees how much the community looks back at the days of long tenured coaches like Brooks and Bellotti. He probably knows that a few top level years from now, he could be looking at 8-9M a year or more for the next 10-15 years here with a fanatical fan base supporting him all the way. Or roll the dice somewhere else and have it not work out.

I will go out on a limb and say that I disagreed with the premises of your previous article, that the "Former Oregon Players Are NOT on the Fans’ Team."

 

I do not feel that changing the name of the rivalry game was a big deal, whether a majority of the fan base liked it or not. I am sure that the Redskins fans didn't like getting their name changed either, but it's just part of modern life.

 

I remember a HUGE push back against changing Union Ave. to Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. in Portland, when I was working right on the street. That push back has not aged well, as it shouldn't.

 

I was one who thought, and still think, that Wilcox would have made a fine hire. He was an excellent DC when Washington was as relevant as it has been in recent times. His lower recruiting rankings may have something to do with working at Cal rather than Georgia.

 

That being said, I think that Lanning is a fine hire as well. But I disagree with the premise that hiring Wilcox would have been a "Catastrophic Blunder" as you phrased it.

 

Since I disagree with both premises, it's hardly surprising that I think it's fine that Lanning met with Harrington. Even if I agreed, I think that coming into a new job and saying "I will NOT hear out former players because they did not advocate for my hire" would be a really poor way to start a new regime.

Edited February 14, 20223 yr by Viking Duck

You can recruit to Cal, as Tedford proved that in the past. Wilcox does not have the chops in my opinion.

 

So I guess we can pretty much disagree on all of it, and that is fine. Thanks 

I think Lanning meeting with former players or anyone really, (assuming he is mostly listening) is just expanding his knowledge, and no knowledge is wasted.

More knowledge is always an asset. I'm all in favor.

I'm all for the current coaching staff meeting and talking with past players. These past players have connections of their own and many of them may be interested in investing in Oregon, again, either through monitary donations or even publicity or whatever, if they feel involved with the program. 

 

I think there was a lot of desire in the push for Wilcox because Taggart basically implied the old coaching staff didn't know what they were doing and fired them. Then follow that up with the Cristobal years when really it did feel like the old players were left out of the program. 

 

And then follow all that up with those two coaches leaving Oregon in a disrespectful ways. 

 

I can certainly see the old players wanting to feel connected again. So if Lanning wants to do that and get a real sense of what Oregon football is about, then go for it. 

 

Taggart and Cristobal didn't understand Oregon football. They coached it and put their stamp on it but I'd say they never understood and understood whatade Oregon truly special.

 

Always be on good terms with wealthy or influential alumni. Unlike the Gonzaga administration who thought it might be a good idea to suspend John Stockton’s season tickets. He’s worth 8 figures. Good luck getting a check from him when you need it.

Edited February 14, 20223 yr by DrJacksPlaidPants

Wasn’t Justin Herbert one of the aforementioned former players group? Can’t imagine any possible advantage to stonewalling former players that include gems like him. Seems like sort of a package deal. I say invite them along for the ride.

Yes to getting rid of Civil War. 

 

Hell no to the Platypus Bowl.  Just an embarrassing name for a rivalry game, IMO.

On 2/13/2022 at 5:56 PM, DrJacksPlaidPants said:

Always be on good terms with wealthy or influential alumni. Unlike the Gonzaga administration who thought it might be a good idea to suspend John Stockton’s season tickets. He’s worth 8 figures. Good luck getting a check from him when you need it.

Rules are rules. Once you make an exception, especially for someone like Stockton, the rules have no teeth and become problematic to enforce.

 

Just because he is capable of writing a big check …. that should allow him to break rules that everyone else has to follow?

 

I could care less if Stockton wears a mask. That is entirely his choice. But until he agrees to do so the university has made it clear that he is unwelcome to attend games at McCarthey Center.

I am locking this thread.  I ask people not to turn this into a Civil War name discussion, and everyone knows that I do not want any comments that will instigate further discussion into areas that turn into politics.

 

None of you are thinking of that when you write...you just want to state your opinion.  Yet I have to look at "will this post initiate a response from someone else that can turn political?"  You see, I've been down that slide before, and I recognize it immediately.  Three posts in one thread....geez.

 

I am sorry I ever started this thread.  Just trying to strike up conversation...