Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

Anytime you have a new QB, it's not unreasonable to lose a couple games that shouldn't.

nogerO wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:43 pm

Duck07 wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:43 am

nogerO wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:17 am

Duck07 wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:53 am If we're 9-3 next year a Coordinator is getting fired.

Doubt that. We were lucky not to be 11-3 this year.

We're so far past the goal being to just have a good/great season.

If we go 9-3 next year and fail to make the Playoffs, Stein or Tosh are getting fired for that crap.

Pretty sure you weren't a Duck fan when Dan Fouts was playing. You're spoiled and overconfident. Don't get me wrong, I want the Ducks to go undefeated next year and hope they do but my football spidey sense says 9-10 wins. Guess we'll see...

If we're 9-3 next year a Coordinator is getting fired.

nogerO wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:43 pm

Duck07 wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:43 am

nogerO wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:17 am

Duck07 wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 9:53 am If we're 9-3 next year a Coordinator is getting fired.

Doubt that. We were lucky not to be 11-3 this year.

We're so far past the goal being to just have a good/great season.
aIf we go 9-3 next year and fail to make the Playoffs, Stein or Tosh are getting fired for that crap.

Pretty sure you weren't a Duck fan when Dan Fouts was playing. You're spoiled and overconfident. Don't get me wrong, I want the Ducks to go undefeated next year and hope they do but my football spidey sense says 9-10 wins. Guess we'll see...

What relevance does Football over 50 years ago have with the expectations currently? That drives me crazy, there's nothing spoiled and over confident about how the expectations have changed. The 80's and 90's weren't all sunshine and rainbows either, but there has been a consistent and steady rise for the program and the expectations have risen with them. At this point, until a set of coaches wins a National Championship, they are gonna be a slip-up away from the hot seat. It comes with the territory, and the coaches that come here know it full well and I would venture relish it. I know it's not the same thing you or I grew up with even if it was a few decades apart. Gone are the days of internal or Oregon adjacent hires, being happy to just make a bowl and recruiting classes with a few 4 stars and a bunch of hopeful diamonds in the rough.

If we're 9-3 next year a Coordinator is getting fired.

Absolutely.

To be honest, I'm a tiny bit surprised that nobody was fired over what happened at the Rose Bowl. I mean that was a complete meltdown and that can't happen with title-aspiring programs. And then you take that meltdown and put it in context with the rest of the season and you notice how poorly our defense played against other playoff teams and... yeesh.

I love Tosh's recruiting but his seat should be hot. He should also consider himself fortunate to be getting another year to prove himself. Not saying that he should be ran out of town by a pitchfork mob, but I wouldn't blame Lanning one bit for making a change based on the available data.

Expectations have certainly changed. We can also be reasonable. I always tell my wife that I'm a "results enthusiast," I'm willing to be patient but I always expect results. It's fair to question whether these coordinators will deliver and top-tier program can't afford to let coaches spend years learning on the job.

If the team was sick it would explain some leeway internally to that game, but I still can't get the taste of that game out of my mouth and if I feel that way, then I can only imagine how Dan, the coaches and players feel about it that game. There is 9 months of stewing on that game and while they've got to move on from it, not using that performance to motivate you is wasteful and if it doesn't create some kind of change, then failure to adapt starts to become a problem.

Right now I'd predict we'd lose at Penn State, but everything else should set-up very well with another strong chance of playing for the B1G CG. As we've seen though, the best option might be for us to drop a close one at Penn State, who goes on to play Ohio State in the CG so that we get 2 weeks rest and a home game from a 11-1 regular season. A far more interesting scenario would be if we make it to the B1G CG with a locked up spot in the Playoff, would we simply play all of our 3rd and 4th string players and not give AF about the result and try to "game" the bracket?

A far more interesting scenario would be if we make it to the B1G CG with a locked up spot in the Playoff, would we simply play all of our 3rd and 4th string players and not give AF about the result and try to "game" the bracket?

I didn't give this thought much credence this season, but, as you say... adapt or die. It seemed pretty clear that Ohio State benefited from momentum while we were hamstrung mightily from all the time off.

I do think the overall "all teams with a bye lost" argument is flawed. Georgia was playing with a backup QB, and nobody seriously believed Boise State and ASU were top seeds. But I also can't look away from Oregon's piss-poor showing in the Rose Bowl. I have to believe that had we lost the B1G title game that we'd be preparing to play Ohio State for a natty right now.

pezsez1 wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 2:05 pm

A far more interesting scenario would be if we make it to the B1G CG with a locked up spot in the Playoff, would we simply play all of our 3rd and 4th string players and not give AF about the result and try to "game" the bracket?

I didn't give this thought much credence this season, but, as you say... adapt or die. It seemed pretty clear that Ohio State benefited from momentum while we were hamstrung mightily from all the time off.

I do think the overall "all teams with a bye lost" argument is flawed. Georgia was playing with a backup QB, and nobody seriously believed Boise State and ASU were top seeds. But I also can't look away from Oregon's piss-poor showing in the Rose Bowl. I have to believe that had we lost the B1G title game that we'd be preparing to play Ohio State for a natty right now.

BSU held their own for most of the game against Penn State, and did so against Oregon as well. Nobody may have believed they belonged, but they did.

ASU had opportunities to win. Nobody may have believed they belonged, but they did.

Georgia's backup is arguably better than beck, who went through a 6 game stretch of throwing 12 interceptions.

There's credence to the argument that the bye week hurt more than helped. Taking that much time off causes rust, meanwhile the other teams had a warmup to get things running smooth again.

squintsdd wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 5:26 pm

pezsez1 wrote: Wed Jan 15, 2025 2:05 pm

A far more interesting scenario would be if we make it to the B1G CG with a locked up spot in the Playoff, would we simply play all of our 3rd and 4th string players and not give AF about the result and try to "game" the bracket?

I didn't give this thought much credence this season, but, as you say... adapt or die. It seemed pretty clear that Ohio State benefited from momentum while we were hamstrung mightily from all the time off.

I do think the overall "all teams with a bye lost" argument is flawed. Georgia was playing with a backup QB, and nobody seriously believed Boise State and ASU were top seeds. But I also can't look away from Oregon's piss-poor showing in the Rose Bowl. I have to believe that had we lost the B1G title game that we'd be preparing to play Ohio State for a natty right now.

BSU held their own for most of the game against Penn State, and did so against Oregon as well. Nobody may have believed they belonged, but they did.

ASU had opportunities to win. Nobody may have believed they belonged, but they did.

Georgia's backup is arguably better than beck, who went through a 6 game stretch of throwing 12 interceptions.

There's credence to the argument that the bye well hurt more than helped. Taking that much time off causes rust, meanwhile the other teams had a warmup to get things running smooth again.

Our team also consists of transfers guys nowadays, who haven't played together in the same system for 3-4 years. They need some time to gel and get their timing synched again, as was evident in the first few games of the season.

I would hope that some of the folks on the committee have at least a half an ounce of brains and realize the system is focked and change it to a realistic seeding using a combination of the final polls to seed the teams. This has been a joke.

nogerO wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 8:19 am I would hope that some of the folks on the committee have at least a half an ounce of brains and realize the system is focked and change it to a realistic seeding using a combination of the final polls to seed the teams. This has been a joke.

Unfortunately, it's not up to the Committee. It's the Conference Commissioners who set up the automatic Byes for the conference champs, and the Mountain West & Big12, thought the format was fine.

Merganzer wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 1:31 pm

nogerO wrote: Thu Jan 16, 2025 8:19 am I would hope that some of the folks on the committee have at least a half an ounce of brains and realize the system is focked and change it to a realistic seeding using a combination of the final polls to seed the teams. This has been a joke.

Unfortunately, it's not up to the Committee. It's the Conference Commissioners who set up the automatic Byes for the conference champs, and the Mountain West & Big12, thought the format was fine.

I stand corrected. However the format was a joke.

There's credence to the argument that the bye well hurt more than helped. Taking that much time off causes rust, meanwhile the other teams had a warmup to get things running smooth again.
[/quote]

There is also credence, as well as luck, that playing less games mitigates the possibility of losing key players to injury. It’s really a toss up.

As for all the piling on Tosh, isn’t Lanning supposedly a defensive guru? Is he not a part of any of the defensive scheme nor calls? Not involved in deciding whom should be playing in certain situations? If Lanning is completely hands off of the defense, then I understand, but I wouldn’t buy it.