Ducks coast to easy victory over Sun Devils, shows promise for Rose Bowl run

I’m thinking about overall record, body of work, resume, not who beat whom. Fans and voters have different ways of looking at rankings. Are the point of the rankings get the 2 teams that Vegas would favor over anyone else playing each other at the end of the season, regardless of if those teams are each 8-4 or 9-3? Or is the point to get the 2 teams that earned it by having the most impressive overall seasons? These questions aren’t even answered anywhere and the more I discuss it with people, it seems like it’s split down the middle. Until those questions are answered the rankings system can’t even be improved.

I personally think the 2 teams that “earned it” by having the best overall season/resume should be playing each other. So I don’t have that much issue with the rankings right now because every team above us is undefeated or has 1 loss with the exception of LSU, who’s 2 losses have come to #1 and #2.

The real argument comes when Oregon has 1 loss and teams like Cincinnati are undefeated. At that point, without answering the questions above, nobody can say who “deserves” the higher ranking, because the AP/USA Today/Harris organizations have no definition of what “deserving” actually is.

Hopefully the BCS just blows up a couple more times so we can get the playoff that 99% of people want.

I honestly have no idea how you have any basis to claim that playing Blount will help with winning.

Blount was great last year sure, but this year is totally different. He had an opportunity to rise on the depth chart in practice, and he didn’t earn it. It’s pretty much as simple as that.

And the running backs coach said before ASU that LGB wasn’t in game shape.

Regardless of whether CK deserves to be second-guessed by the likes of us, I guess I don’t see the reason to complain about a 44-21 win.

And the day CK starts catering to the media (the student section for that matter) will be the day I do start second guessing him.

And who cares for his sake – the sake of winning is all that matters. I don’t know why his experience and proven power places him 5th but I know winning is what’s best for the team.

This is where you and I are going to continue to disagree. Sometimes winning is NOT the best thing for the team. It’s the best thing for the FANS. Boise State is a great example. Winning helped make the football team “Chip’s Team” and allowed us to move past the Bellotti-era that much quicker. He took command, rallied the team and helped us rebound. It sent home the message of “win the day and if you don’t prepare well, you will fail”.

How you win is just as important as if you win.

all I know is he may not be playing for other than football reasons.

No, you absolutely do not know that. You have absolutely no clue what is going on with this situation.

It should be a football decision

At this point, now that he’s reinstated, it probably should be UNLESS there is some things that still need to be taken care of that we don’t know about.

Maybe Blount isn’t playing because "it’s not a football decision" ever thought of that?

Yep, I sure have and honestly…if that’s the case, then I respect the decision. If there is something outside of football that’s keeping Blount from getting carries, then great. That means the coaching staff is doing a great job at managing the team and I think even higher of them. If you are going the whole “Chip Kelly has it out for Blount!” angle, then why even both reinstating him and going through the media blitz?

An SEC coach would have said "What the effing hell else is there but winning?"

Judging by your previous posts, you have contempt for the SEC but now you want to be like them when it suits your argument? Whatever. We aren’t in the SEC.

You’ve repeatedly said to “put the best on the field” when it comes to Blount. By your own admission, you don’t go to practices and don’t know where Blount is. That must mean you 1) Think all of the Oregon coaching staff that’s involved with this situation is inept when it comes to the evaluation of this particular case or 2) are a Blount homer and just want to see him in the game.

Since you would have a hard time convincing me that the coaching staff is inept, I’m perfectly fine with you wanting to see him in the game that badly. I wouldn’t mind seeing him but not to the extent of getting special treatment. If the coaching staff says he isn’t game ready (which they have) and is listed as the 5th string back after his reinstatement (which they have), I’m going to trust their judgment. You can choose not to all you want and that’s your prerogative.

I don’t think this scenario is very likely, unfortunately. Blount has simply not had enough playing time. If Kelly were adamant about using him, or thought he could have a significant impact, he would have given Blount carries, especially in a blowout win. But that didn’t happen.

Blount had promise, but is simply too far behind to make a significant move in the depth chart.