Quack Fix: the impact of Blount not playing and previewing Arizona

by ntrebon on Nov 17, 2009 8:48 AM PST in Morning Quack Fix Comment 83 comments

It was great to be back at Autzen for the ASU game and to meet several ATQ posters. Here's hoping it doesn't take me another three years for a return trip home. Here's your quack fix for Tuesday.

George Schroeder has a column up that argues that the restrictions on LeGarrette Blount (i.e., no interviews, no clarification of the "academic and behavioral ladders", and not seeing any game action last Saturday) might actually be making the situation a larger distraction than it otherwise would be.
Rob Moseley has a notebook up that previews the Arizona Wildcat defense. Moseley also reports that Jamere Holland was already back at practice despite the knee injury he suffered against the Sun Devils.
Gary Horowitz looks at T.J. Ward's return to the Oregon secondary. Horowitz notes that Ward currently has the fifth most tackles on the team after only playing in five of the ten games thus far. Horowitz also has a preview up of Arizona that focuses on Chip Kelly and the team not looking too far ahead.
Gregg Biggins has a story up about TE recruit Christian Thomas, who was at the game this past weekend. It sounds like he came away awfully impressed, despite the cold weather. Thomas is rated the #7 TE overall by Scout and the #3 TE by Rivals, both of whom have him at four stars.

There are few video clips after the jump. Go Ducks!

Chip Kelly talking about the upcoming Arizona game:

Oregon-Arizona: Chip Kelly talks about Saturday's matchup

KVAL has their own Arizona video preview with a few sound bytes from Ward and Kelly, as well as Kelly talking about Blount not playing against ASU:

0 recs | Comment 83 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Re: The Blount thing

I’m torn. On the one hand, I think Kelly’s got the right motives behind handling Blount the way he has. In a vacuum, I think it’s the way to go. But in a way, Schroeder’s right – by keeping Blount away from everyone Kelly is inherently making it a distraction. Because until the media gets their story, they’re just going to keep speculating. And that means they’re going to keep asking Kelly about Blount, over and over and over.

Is it a media creation? Absolutely, but that’s pretty much the media’s job. To create stories out of anything. I kind of wish that Kelly would just talk about it and make Blount available so the media can get their fill and leave it alone.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 9:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Is Kelly making it a distraction for the team? Really, that’s all that matters. And I really don’t think that he is.

Media can go and **** themselves.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 9:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't buy

the “it’s our job” argument. And even if it is your job to create angles, stories, entertainment, there are innumerable examples in sports journalism where it’s done without resorting to muckraking, which is basically what this boils down to. (See: Jim Murray, Tom Boswell, Peter Gammons).

(Do not see: John Canzano, Dwight Jaynes, nearly every ESPN.com journalist and blogger)

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The reality is that there are not an infinite number of stories available. Would you call Schroeder a muckraker? Because this is the third straight week he’s written about Blount, and probably the third straight week he’s asked Kelly about Blount. The sports media world is saturated, but because of that saturation we as fans get every possible angle of every possible story.

Like all things, you can choose not to read the stories of the people you don’t like. But I guarantee that has a backlash that affects the media members you do like.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 9:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I actually have stopped reading the media stories I don’t like. I tried reading Schroeder’s piece and realized it was just more of the same.

But, I do like Ted Miller’s blog, and ATQ for the most part. And it’s irritating to still see Blount headlines on a daily, or even hourly basis.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 9:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

To add to that, I also read actual reporters, like Moseley, as they carry actual news.

Schroeder and other columnists I rarely read, because I don’t respect their opinion.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I neglected to mention Rob Moseley

That dude is AWESOME. He’s always the first place I go for Duck info.

Just the facts, mang.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 10:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Miller carries actual news. But he also deals in opinion. You can choose not to read his opinion pieces, but he’s still going to write them. Which means he’s still going to try to get quotes. Which means he’s still going to ask about them.

And yeah, Moseley is awesome, I agree. But you can’t say he’s never asked these questions either.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I never said he didn’t. I expect various media members to ask about Blount. But this Schroeder piece is inventing a story. It’s pretty obvious he’s trying to be clever and find a new angle. It just comes off as ridiculout.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I didn’t find it ridiculous at all. Ted Miller had a different take, but he clearly didn’t find it ridiculous either. Schroeder has written enough good stuff that I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on these things. And I actually think he has a decent point.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this. It was a bad article. It made some very poor assumptions about Kelly’s alternatives. He’s trying to go against the grain and come up with some original point on this. I get that, but it’s simply not well thought out.

For example, from Schroeder’s piece:

Chip Kelly clearly didn’t like the topic. But he should get used to it, because it’s not going away. Not until Blount plays. Not until he talks.

This is such a naive point of view. This topic is NEVER going away until Blount is no longer a Duck, and maybe not even then.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t know, I think he has a point. Media feeds off of uncertainties because they’re way more interesting than the truth, for the most part. Kelly is keeping this thing a mystery. And it’s giving reporters an excuse to ask about it and come up with relatively far-fetched opinions. Once you have concrete answers, the media will drop it in all but passing remarks because there’s no more controversy.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

Whatever Kelly says the media will use their spin and angles on to make their points more poignant. Kelly and Blount NOT talking about it just allows them to speculate… and the team and the fans already know that that is all it is…speculation

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actual news (like Blount talking or playing) would give reporters much more to talk about, and something more substantial with which to cause a distraction.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

For a couple days maybe. You have a press conference, you get all the information you need, and then it’s over. The media will write their stories the next day, there will be some follow up the day after, maybe even after the next game, and then it’s done except as a passing “over-arching issue that the team overcame” comment in an opinion piece.

I really disagree with your take on the media. They thrive on speculation. Once you take speculation out of the equation, they dissect their concrete information and they move on to more fuzzy matters where they can inject a semi-informed opinion.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think speculation will continue for the season, regardless of what Chip, Blount, or anyone else says or does.

It's spelled "S-H-U-V-3-0-0-0"

by JShufelt on Nov 17, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Ya, I don't think this thing dissipates regardless of how it is handled.

He talks to the media well, redemption story, distraction.

He talks to the media poorly, train wreck story, distraction.

He doesn’t play – what if story.

He does and plays well – redemption story.

He does and plays poorly – fall from grace story.

He’s completely kicked off the team – righteousness story, severity story, martyr story, and oh, he hired a lawyer story.

He’s given a second chance – too many chances story, football vs non football story, Duck family vs Duck hypocrite story, and oh, he hired a lawyer story.

By punching out a little girl and going ape shit, he just flat out made himself an event and a superlative. We (and the media that serves the larger we) are freaking salivating for emotional highs and lows that alleviate the 9 to 5.

He’s Mike Tyson light with the potential to be Mike Tyson proper on one end of the spectrum or Jesus on the other.

The LGB story is not going away for the short, or maybe long term regardless of how he is handled.

GEEEEEERHAAAAAAARRRT!!!!!!
(arms and eyes to sky, ala Stephen Colbert)

by Bill Musgrave on Nov 17, 2009 7:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

We have our last 3 games on ESPN at night

This story is definitely NOT going away. If you don’t think that every announcer that is doing a Duck game on ESPN is not creating a full page of talking points on the Blount situation you’re kidding yourself.. whether Kelly/Blount/Bellotti talk about it or not.

Oh yeah, and gameday is at Arizona… think it might come up there?

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

AMEN

by gamedaytribe on Nov 17, 2009 4:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I would argue that yeah, Kelly is making it a distraction for the team indirectly. Media are a huge part of college football. Kelly may not like that, but it’s the truth, and we as fans, a lot of whom support the program financially, enjoy the media coverage. You can’t bury your head in the sand and pretend they don’t exist. They do, and they cause distractions. It would be disingenuous for me to come down on media for what they do when I consume so much of their product.

I agree with Kelly’s decision from a team standpoint – he’s rewarding the guys who deserve it and making it a true meritocracy. Ted Miller says something to that effect here.

But I think he is causing distractions by not addressing it. He is succeeding on one front and failing on another. I think the one he’s succeeding at is more important, so maybe he’s taking the right tack. But there might be a happy middle ground that he refuses to approach because it’s against his principles.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 9:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So out of curiosity, is the "distraction"

a) that Kelly isn’t playing Blount

b) that he’s telling the media to go fuck themselves

And who exactly is distracted by it? Kelly? Blount? The media? Us?

I’m distracted by the media making more of a story out of this than it ever should have been. So maybe the media needs to stop distracting us from what we’re here to watch: the game on the field.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 9:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The distraction occurs whenever some member of the media asks Kelly or a player about the Blount situation. That’s distracting to those people. They’re all tired of addressing those things (or declining to address them or whatever). How much of a distraction is it? I don’t know, but it’s above zero. Maybe it’s not enough to be important.

The game on the field occurs for 3 and a half hours every Saturday. If all we were here to watch is the game on the field, this site would not exist and we wouldn’t be here talking about this stuff. We love Oregon football and we want to consume it in many ways outside of the game on the field. Media is there to deliver that to us. I don’t always like the ways they do it, but I love that I can read 5 new things about the Ducks every single day. In this case, I think the bad is inextricable linked to the good. We’re not going to get that good stuff without having to see some of the meaningless stuff. But that meaningless stuff can cause distractions when it’s brought up over and over.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I seriously doubt that this is any distraction at all. They’ve been dealing with this all season long, and I would imagine are pretty much numb to it at this point.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Except that Kelly gets clearly annoyed every time someone asks about it. That’s not “numb.”

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

To me it always feels like he’s kind of laughing it off. And just brushes off the questions. So yeah, numb. He has shown he obviously doesn’t care much for dumb media questions.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I forget whether it was Miller or Moseley who reported that Kelly definitely snapped at them when they asked about an announcement for Blount’s reinstatement (probably for the 6th time that week). And Moseley has reported about some of the player’s annoyance at being asked about it.

Some guys can blow it off. And Kelly has, for the most part. But there have been times where it’s gotten to him. And I don’t blame him.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he is just being obtuse… to me that is how i feel Kelly is to the media on a whole… look at the Shelly smith interview at halftime of the ASU game:

Smith “Will we see LGB in the second half”

Kelly “I don’t know, stick around you’ll find out”

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Describing anyone as obtuse

summons my internal Andy Dufresne.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

OK. Let's look at AFTER the game.

Here’s a great win, almost a laugher. James has more rushing yardage at the end of the first quarter against the league-leading rushing defense than they give up average in an ENTIRE game. And then the media ditzells want to know “Why Blount didn’t get into the game?” instead of “How did you and your team destroy ASU’s run defense?”
Kelly wants not only to focus on reality but to also ‘teach’ the media what is important in this game we love. He said before the season, “I don’t deal in hypotheticals.” And he doesn’t. What he does do is to stay reasonably polite to people who treat him quite rudely. By rudely I mean that they don’t trust him to say what he means and so he has to keep repeating the message. And when the writers (read Schroeder, Canzano, Jaynes) don’t get it and don’t get what they want, they write in essence that they disagree with Chip, that Chip is wrong. I think that is rude at the very least.

by DONALDUCK on Nov 17, 2009 2:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll buy that.

My favorite description of the whole internet boom is that we’re actually in the Misinformation Age, because there is so much garbage you have to sift through to get to what you really find important.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 10:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, that’s the downside of the extreme dissemination of information and the ability of any Joe Schmoe on the street to start a blog and write about it. But I’d rather have more than less. At least we have a choice.

I think you’re right about the meta-journalism. Unfortunately, I think with media prevalence being what it is, it’s here to stay.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You said it, brother.

Blount. Yawn.

by fowlball on Nov 17, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Do you really think the team is distracted by this? They’ve dealt with this the whole season.

Blount writes a letter, the media flips out. Blount is reinstated, the media flips out. Blount doesn’t talk or play, the media makes a big deal out of it. And let’s not even go into what the media would do if Blount had talked.

The team knows what the situation is. The best players will play, and practice is a competition every single day. This is such a massive non-story, and is not a distraction to the team.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Back to this original point…

keeping Blount away from everyone Kelly is inherently making it a distraction.

First, is it a distraction. On some level, maybe. But even if we grant that it’s a distraction, it’s very wrong to assume that it’s a bigger distraction than the alternatives. In fact, I would argue that it’d be a much smaller distraction than letting Blount talk to the media or play.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

I think you let Blount talk to the media. Talk about the hurdles (maybe only in a general sense if you really want to keep the specifics confidential). Let the media get their story. They write it, they include quotes from Blount, and it’s over. It’s ripping off the proverbial bandaid. I don’t think letting Blount talk to the media for one press conference would be all that distracting. In fact, I think he’s doing a disservice to Blount by NOT letting him talk about it. If LGB really wants to pursue a career in the pros, he’s going to have to address the media about these things. This would be a great learning experience for him.

I do agree with Kelly’s decision not to play him until he’s earned it. But I think if you let Blount talk about the other stuff, the media stops harping on that piece so much.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

He's a man! He's 22! Go after him!

As good as LGB looks at times though, I think the chances of his being an every-Sunday NFL back are slim to none.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

They write it, they include quotes from Blount, and it’s over.

I could not disagree more. As Matt and I both said about, this story will NOT go away, no matter how much is said, it will always stick around.

Also, not having Blount to the media likely helps him with pro teams as it shows that he can simply work hard and not be a distraction.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's my main point

Who is it bothering to not have Blount of Kelly talk to the media about it? The team… not a chance. The fans.. not me. Kelly or Blount… maybe, but I submit whatever answer they give will be dissected, spun, reworded and asked again later… so saying nothing only really bothers the media itself. WHO CARES? If Schroeder, Miller, Canzano, or any other “Journalist” doesn’t get their foder, I lose no sleep over that whatsoever. Kelly and Blount have been dealing with this for months now. I think they’re fine with what is going on, and that is all I care about.

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

As I’ve said, both Kelly and guys on the team have been annoyed at answering these questions. I couldn’t begin to tell you how much that’s affected their mindset. But you’re not inside their heads either, so you can’t say with certainty that it doesn’t bother them.

You let him talk about it, you get the last round of questions and it’s over. The questions move on to football.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You let him talk about it, you get the last round of questions and it’s over. The questions move on to football.

This statement is based on the assumption that Blount will be able to answer every question that the media has, which is laughable. What if the media asks Blount where he is on the depth chart, how many carries he expects, and on and on and on it goes.

The media and fans will never be satisfied, and there were always be something to speculate on. You can claim all you want that there’d be less speculation, but there is no reason to believe this. You let the media start pulling at the Blount thread, and they will keep going and going and going.

There is not a way to end this, and columnists like Schroeder will always try to invent something.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 10:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Or worse yet

“How do you feel about not playing” then someone takes Blount’s reaction writes a 500 word piece on how Blount is upset, Canzano calls a press conference to talk about how he is starting a Blount psychology fund to help him with his mental state, Schroeder and Miller start asking LMJ about how he feels about Blount being upset about not playing, Alston and Crenshaw gets pieces written about them and how they deserve to play over Blount and the Kelly is bombarded with questions of Blount’s attitude… I don’t know, I prefer “No comment”

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 11:08 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Actually, I think Blount’s episode has already shown he can be a distraction. But that happens on NFL teams all the time. The media is a reality. If I’m an NFL team, I want to see a guy handle this with maturity in front of the press, since he’s going to have to do that at the next level.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Nov 17, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The more I think about this

the more it just seems like metajournalism to me. In other words, the media reporting on the media’s reaction to the actual story.

by HoodRiverDuck on Nov 17, 2009 9:57 AM PST reply actions 1 recs

So so true.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 9:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I like to think of that as making up a story that isn't there

Brett Favre…….

The Ducks' 27-point margin was one more than the margins of all seven of USC's losses since 2004 combined.

by trumpetduck on Nov 17, 2009 10:12 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs

This could not be said any better

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow.

Summarized perfectly. Simple yet informative and true…

All Stoops suck like a broken RECord.

There is a time and place for everything...But its always Juju time!
Chug-a-chug-a-chug-a-JU-JU

Currently initiating Eddie Pleasant BLITZkreig upon Nick Foles. Standby for further information.

by CaDuck on Nov 17, 2009 4:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

From the Forde Yard Dash Heisman List

Funny blurb about LMJ and the quizz

Undersized Texan Running Back Playing College Ball in Oregon (35). Take your pick: LaMichael James of Oregon, the 5-foot-9, 180-pound freshman from Texarkana; or Jacquizz Rodgers of Oregon State, the 5-7, 191-pound sophomore from Richmond. Or maybe even the undersized New Yorker at Pitt, Dion Lewis (5-8, 190).

Story

The Ducks' 27-point margin was one more than the margins of all seven of USC's losses since 2004 combined.

by trumpetduck on Nov 17, 2009 10:14 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Anyone know Grigsby's status for Zona?

If he’s out, they could be in serious trouble. As we saw against Furd and BSU, beating us requires a strong QB and RB.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 11:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Sounds like he should be good. He saw some time at the end of the Cal game.

--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog

by jtlight on Nov 17, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

At least until we lay our first big hit on him

That is.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ring, ring

“Hello?”

“Yes, Mr. Pleasant sir, can you take care of this for us please?”

“Already on it.”

Kenny Wheaton #20; The Pick - 1994 v UW. Matthew Harper #20; The Pick #2 - 2007 v USC. John Boyett #20;...

by Matt Daddy on Nov 17, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

"Oh, and can you bring Mr. Ward along to help?"

"Done."

"...the noise is one aspect, but you can feel the intensity of their crowd." - Pete Carroll on Oregon's Autzen Stadium.

by JConant on Nov 17, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe Matt Daddy can talk them into taking OldAllioti off our hands. They can’t have NewAllioti though.

FINISH

by MarineCorpsDuck on Nov 17, 2009 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Reply fail. Supposed to go below.

FINISH

by MarineCorpsDuck on Nov 17, 2009 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Have we considered the possibility that the Juju does not enjoy is joking about injuries happening in Arizona? Just sayin’.

SAYIN’ THAT IT’S TIME TO PANIC

The Oregon Ducks: Sporting the single best fifth-string running back that college football has ever seen.

by ProbablyMonty on Nov 17, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not joking about injuries

I just want them woozy, like we did to Zach Robinson in the Holiday Bowl last year.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

OT but Glanville is out at Portland State

I attend PSU and this makes sense. Unfortunately he just wasn’t able to get it going. The team got worse each year even though he was handed a pretty good squad that seemed to finish second or third in the Big Sky every year.

It was an experiment, it failed and I wish Glanville best of luck.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 11:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Btw, Robin Pflugrad is considered among the top picks

So we might get to see more of him and his daughter Amanda in the years to come. I can deal with that. :-)

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 11:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Has Pflugrad been a head coach before?

Addicted To Quack [dot] com
Officially getting some more often than The VD Special since 2009.

by qrsouther on Nov 17, 2009 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Damn. I’m fairly convinced PSU will come after Steve Greatwood, especially after he showed interest in the Cal-Poly job after the 2008 season. PANIC!!!

"...the noise is one aspect, but you can feel the intensity of their crowd." - Pete Carroll on Oregon's Autzen Stadium.

by JConant on Nov 17, 2009 12:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know if they'll be able to match his salary demands though

They were paying Glanvile around $200k a year, not great.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 12:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe Matt Daddy can talk them into taking OldAllioti off our hands. They can’t have NewAllioti though.

FINISH

by MarineCorpsDuck on Nov 17, 2009 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Old Alloiti clearly is employed by our Chargers.

The display our defense mustered forth last Sunday was very old-Allioti esque

There is a time and place for everything...But its always Juju time!
Chug-a-chug-a-chug-a-JU-JU

Currently initiating Eddie Pleasant BLITZkreig upon Nick Foles. Standby for further information.

by CaDuck on Nov 17, 2009 4:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Greatwood’s current base is $170K, with another $30K in what I assume is endorsement money or incentives.

"...the noise is one aspect, but you can feel the intensity of their crowd." - Pete Carroll on Oregon's Autzen Stadium.

by JConant on Nov 17, 2009 12:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Canzano's dream column

“Blount accepts head coaching position at Portland State”

--Dave
Addicted to Quack, SBN's Oregon Ducks blog

by Addicted to Quack on Nov 17, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Rec

Awesome. And his assistant is MB’s wife.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Jerry was Canzano’s boy. Had him on every week. I’m curious to see if Clownzano burries PSU. I heard on Primetime on 1080 The Fan that Glanville rubbed a lot of people the wrong way and made a lot of enemies at PSU. Nothing specific, but Isaac was saying that pretty definitively.

FINISH

by MarineCorpsDuck on Nov 17, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

He was so convinced

That because he was Glanville he could make everything work. He tried to do things his players weren’t capable of and really just proved himself incapable of motivating talent.

I watched a few of his practices (since they are open and I’m a PSU student) and he often seemed not to get involved. Now Mouse Davis on the other hand, yelled a lot at his players, which may or may not be good but it shows that he is involved.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 3:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

hell it's as much on topic as LGB.

or at any rate, a less objectionable topic.

by gamedaytribe on Nov 17, 2009 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Lets Be Blount

Okay enough already with the non-story of LGB getting his uni dirty from sandbox writers like Schroeder who can only peel back the minimal layers necessary to make their deadlines. They must also proudly extol the virtuoso performance of Sean Astin in “Rudy” to a level of exalted mania that most “Rocky Horror Show” drag queens would find excessive. Coach K said from the beginning….“this is not about football. It’s about the man.” Personally, I think the coach should further incite these lemmings by not playing him AT ALL for the rest of the season just to make that point unmistakably clear.

by ACDuck on Nov 17, 2009 11:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Somebody posted this link on Moseley’s blog.

FINISH

by MarineCorpsDuck on Nov 17, 2009 12:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

That video is now private. Apparently the University made them take it down (JShufelt found this twitter link) because they didn’t have authorization to use the mascot. Who cares really? It was just a fun video. I hate stuff like this.

FINISH

by MarineCorpsDuck on Nov 17, 2009 6:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Boo! I haven’t seen the video yet.

It's spelled "S-H-U-V-3-0-0-0"

by JShufelt on Nov 17, 2009 7:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

In a personal observation, tho' I may be wrong,

did the ASU QB go down at almost the exact same spot on the field as DD did two years ago? I lost my recording of the game and couldn’t check it out. RSVP

by DONALDUCK on Nov 17, 2009 3:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It was very close

DD was closer to the sideline but you’re right.

That was entirely Osweiller’s fault though, going head first like that is just asking to get hurt. To their credit the Oregon players went out of their way and tried to limit what could have been a much more dangerous hit.

And I love that everyone knew it didn’t “count” since it was so obviously holding.

"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely

by skywaker9 on Nov 17, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs