Jamal Fountaine's Thoughts on the Ducks... Hint: They Ain't Pretty

Hardcore_Husky

Jamal Fountaine's Thoughts on the Ducks... Hint: They Ain't Pretty

In his days at Washington, Jamal Fountaine's Huskies were 5-0 against Oregon, But 20 years later, the Ducks routinely whip Washington without breaking a sweat. And Fountaine is sick and tired of it.

Read the full story here

[Deleted User]

Disagree. Chip Kelly is the reason Oregon went to 4 straight BCS bowls. He took mediocre Mike's 8 win recruits and turned them into world beaters. It's yet to be seen if Helfrich is made from the same mold.

RoadDawg55

I disagree as well. It makes no sense to say that Chip Kelly had nothing to do with great players wanting to play at Oregon. Great coaches win, and elite recruits want to go to a school that wins. Oregon's recruiting got much better under Kelly than it had previously been, and the reason is because they were winning.

I see his point about the assistant coaches at Oregon, but I'm not sure how true it is. Sure, it helps to have good, loyal assistants, but Allioti's defenses got much better under Chip. I remember him having some shitty defenses under Bellotti. I doubt he became a smarter coach, but because of Chip, he got better players. Great coaches raise the level of everyone around them, and that's what Chip did. It's important to have good assistants, but the head coach is what truly matters.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Great article Coach Baird!

TheKobeStopper

What does this have to do with Tebow?

[Deleted User]

RoadDawg55 said:

I disagree as well. It makes no sense to say that Chip Kelly had nothing to do with great players wanting to play at Oregon. Great coaches win, and elite recruits want to go to a school that wins. Oregon's recruiting got much better under Kelly than it had previously been, and the reason is because they were winning.

I see his point about the assistant coaches at Oregon, but I'm not sure how true it is. Sure, it helps to have good, loyal assistants, but Allioti's defenses got much better under Chip. I remember him having some shitty defenses under Bellotti. I doubt he became a smarter coach, but because of Chip, he got better players. Great coaches raise the level of everyone around them, and that's what Chip did. It's important to have good assistants, but the head coach is what truly matters.

This is the most true statement there is. So many examples where an assistant was considered good under a great head coach but when he's with a shitty coach is exposed.

Oregon was a fine program before Chip but Chip took them to the next level. In college football it's all about coaching and in particular the head coach.

RaceBannon

A lack of causation?

Passion

Jamal Fountaine = Great Guy.

MikeDamone

UO has Holyfield roaming the sidelines? No wonder they kick ass.

I admire Fountaine's hatred of Oregon, but yeah...

Southerndawg

I enjoyed the read, and will go against the grain in saying he's right on a lot of counts.

He is dismissing the role of the head coach which is a mistake, but great assistants are the difference between winning at a high level and something just north of mediocre. RoadDawg made the comment, did Allioti get smarter under Kelly? Ya, I actually think he did. Allioti learned from Kelly. He was coached up by the head coach. Great assistants don't necessarily make great head coaches, but they do learn, evolve, adapt, develop and execute the head coach's vision. And when they don't, a great head coach will either develop them or replace them.

He's also right that at the end of the day it is about the players. They are executing the game plan. But he is also dismissing, to some degree, that the player's ability to execute is tied directly to the coaching staff's performance.

Missing from the discussion was his take on where the program is now and where he thinks it's headed. What does he think of Sarkisian and Co.?

HillsboroDuck

Southerndawg said:

I enjoyed the read, and will go against the grain in saying he's right on a lot of counts.

He is dismissing the role of the head coach which is a mistake, but great assistants are the difference between winning at a high level and something just north of mediocre. RoadDawg made the comment, did Allioti get smarter under Kelly? Ya, I actually think he did. Allioti learned from Kelly. He was coached up by the head coach. Great assistants don't necessarily make great head coaches, but they do learn, evolve, adapt, develop and execute the head coach's vision. And when they don't, a great head coach will either develop them or replace them.

He's also right that at the end of the day it is about the players. They are executing the game plan. But he is also dismissing, to some degree, that the player's ability to execute is tied directly to the coaching staff's performance.

Missing from the discussion was his take on where the program is now and where he thinks it's headed. What does he think of Sarkisian and Co.?

Jamal's silence in this article speaks volumes.

TierbsHsotBoobs

HillsboroDuck said:

Southerndawg said:

I enjoyed the read, and will go against the grain in saying he's right on a lot of counts.

He is dismissing the role of the head coach which is a mistake, but great assistants are the difference between winning at a high level and something just north of mediocre. RoadDawg made the comment, did Allioti get smarter under Kelly? Ya, I actually think he did. Allioti learned from Kelly. He was coached up by the head coach. Great assistants don't necessarily make great head coaches, but they do learn, evolve, adapt, develop and execute the head coach's vision. And when they don't, a great head coach will either develop them or replace them.

He's also right that at the end of the day it is about the players. They are executing the game plan. But he is also dismissing, to some degree, that the player's ability to execute is tied directly to the coaching staff's performance.

Missing from the discussion was his take on where the program is now and where he thinks it's headed. What does he think of Sarkisian and Co.?

Jamal's silence in this article speaks volumes.

ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION JAMAL!

HillsboroDuck

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HillsboroDuck said:

Southerndawg said:

I enjoyed the read, and will go against the grain in saying he's right on a lot of counts.

He is dismissing the role of the head coach which is a mistake, but great assistants are the difference between winning at a high level and something just north of mediocre. RoadDawg made the comment, did Allioti get smarter under Kelly? Ya, I actually think he did. Allioti learned from Kelly. He was coached up by the head coach. Great assistants don't necessarily make great head coaches, but they do learn, evolve, adapt, develop and execute the head coach's vision. And when they don't, a great head coach will either develop them or replace them.

He's also right that at the end of the day it is about the players. They are executing the game plan. But he is also dismissing, to some degree, that the player's ability to execute is tied directly to the coaching staff's performance.

Missing from the discussion was his take on where the program is now and where he thinks it's headed. What does he think of Sarkisian and Co.?

Jamal's silence in this article speaks volumes.

ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION JAMAL!

I don't even remember where this particular gem originated, but it always reminds me of PurpleMuncher/PeopleMuncher whatever his name was. Did he ever resurface?

TierbsHsotBoobs

HillsboroDuck said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HillsboroDuck said:

Southerndawg said:

I enjoyed the read, and will go against the grain in saying he's right on a lot of counts.

He is dismissing the role of the head coach which is a mistake, but great assistants are the difference between winning at a high level and something just north of mediocre. RoadDawg made the comment, did Allioti get smarter under Kelly? Ya, I actually think he did. Allioti learned from Kelly. He was coached up by the head coach. Great assistants don't necessarily make great head coaches, but they do learn, evolve, adapt, develop and execute the head coach's vision. And when they don't, a great head coach will either develop them or replace them.

He's also right that at the end of the day it is about the players. They are executing the game plan. But he is also dismissing, to some degree, that the player's ability to execute is tied directly to the coaching staff's performance.

Missing from the discussion was his take on where the program is now and where he thinks it's headed. What does he think of Sarkisian and Co.?

Jamal's silence in this article speaks volumes.

ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION JAMAL!

I don't even remember where this particular gem originated, but it always reminds me of PurpleMuncher/PeopleMuncher whatever his name was. Did he ever resurface?

I actually originated that on Doogman way back in the day, directed at him.

I assume that he is blykmyk44 on Twitter.

BAMAdawg10

So when you were talking with Jamal, was he reading straight from the doog handbook, or do you think he studied and memorized it beforehand?

[Deleted User]

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HillsboroDuck said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

HillsboroDuck said:

Southerndawg said:

I enjoyed the read, and will go against the grain in saying he's right on a lot of counts.

He is dismissing the role of the head coach which is a mistake, but great assistants are the difference between winning at a high level and something just north of mediocre. RoadDawg made the comment, did Allioti get smarter under Kelly? Ya, I actually think he did. Allioti learned from Kelly. He was coached up by the head coach. Great assistants don't necessarily make great head coaches, but they do learn, evolve, adapt, develop and execute the head coach's vision. And when they don't, a great head coach will either develop them or replace them.

He's also right that at the end of the day it is about the players. They are executing the game plan. But he is also dismissing, to some degree, that the player's ability to execute is tied directly to the coaching staff's performance.

Missing from the discussion was his take on where the program is now and where he thinks it's headed. What does he think of Sarkisian and Co.?

Jamal's silence in this article speaks volumes.

ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION JAMAL!

I don't even remember where this particular gem originated, but it always reminds me of PurpleMuncher/PeopleMuncher whatever his name was. Did he ever resurface?

I actually originated that on Doogman way back in the day, directed at him.

I assume that he is blykmyk44 on Twitter.

I remember that fuck from the Times. I don't remember him on Doogman though.

BennyBeaver

first!