Study Suggests Oregon is Doomed for a Downturn with Helfrich
Comments
-
This article does a great job of proving one thing. The minute anyone talks slightly negatively about Oregon, it's fans go into pissy little faggot tantrums.
Let's be honest, this site is an alternative to the humorless drivel on places like dawgman. A lot of what is posted here is self depreciating towards the team this site is named after and a lot is tongue-in-cheek. There are some duck fans here that contribute to such discussions and give the huskies a good natured ribbing as well. However, as AZDuck has demonstrated in this post, they get all serious and turn into 12-level pussy mouthbreathers the minute anything negative is slightly suggested about the Ducks. -
I enjoy a little good natured ribbing among rival fansbananasnblondes said:This article does a great job of proving one thing. The minute anyone talks slightly negatively about Oregon, it's fans go into pissy little faggot tantrums.
Let's be honest, this site is an alternative to the humorless drivel on places like dawgman. A lot of what is posted here is self depreciating towards the team this site is named after and a lot is tongue-in-cheek. There are some duck fans here that contribute to such discussions and give the huskies a good natured ribbing as well. However, as AZDuck has demonstrated in this post, they get all serious and turn into 12-level pussy faggots the minute anything negative is slightly suggested about the Ducks. -
Not the case.bananasnblondes said:This article does a great job of proving one thing. The minute anyone talks slightly negatively about Oregon, it's fans go into pissy little faggot tantrums.
Let's be honest, this site is an alternative to the humorless drivel on places like dawgman. A lot of what is posted here is self depreciating towards the team this site is named after and a lot is tongue-in-cheek. There are some duck fans here that contribute to such discussions and give the huskies a good natured ribbing as well. However, as AZDuck has demonstrated in this post, they get all serious and turn into 12-level pussy mouthbreathers the minute anything negative is slightly suggested about the Ducks.
Why should I have any patience for wishful thinking unsupported by evidence or analysis? -
With Helfrich finishing his second season, it seems too early for any comparisons to be made. There are things re. Oregon and Helfrich which I find to be positives for Oregon's future.
First, how did the ducks get to where they are? My answer is that Chip had a brilliant offensive system that he developed out of the lime light in New Hampshire.
Next Chip needed the horses that would make his system go. He turned to Willie Lyles and the openly dishonest running back coach, Gary Campbell to cheat their way to a good roster.
The ducks started to win; win a lot. Once they became "big time" through winning and Nike fashion, the recruits wanted to come to Eugene. Oregon was not only a good football team, but Nike made them a fashion showcase that eighteen year old kids loved. Winning is the best recruiter that there is.
Now along comes Helfrich. He learned the duck system under its inventor and geru. He's bright and honest which, after establishing a winning program, it is an asset not a liability.
I've followed Mark since he was in high school and knew his father, a local banker in Coos Bay. His original plan was to go premed ot Oregon, but couldn't leave football so he played QB at Southern Oregon followed by climbing the coaching ladder. He has the tools to keep getting better.
He will run a clean, disciplined and fair program. He may not be a great speaker, but players and fans alike love him.
If it weren't for their terrible fan base, I could be a fan except when they play the Dawgs. I can't go on hating the program forever because its roots are firmly planted in Chip's dishonesty. I don't like Uncle Phil's support of the program, but wouldn't mind it if those donations were going to the Huskies and we could learn something about promoting the program from Nike.
I believe that the ducks biggest problem will be when a clever defensive coordinator comes up with the perfect defense to stop the Kelly system. I don't have a clue re. Helfrich's imagination. -
Who has been having a tantrum in this thread? Looks like it is you.bananasnblondes said:This article does a great job of proving one thing. The minute anyone talks slightly negatively about Oregon, it's fans go into pissy little faggot tantrums.
Let's be honest, this site is an alternative to the humorless drivel on places like dawgman. A lot of what is posted here is self depreciating towards the team this site is named after and a lot is tongue-in-cheek. There are some duck fans here that contribute to such discussions and give the huskies a good natured ribbing as well. However, as AZDuck has demonstrated in this post, they get all serious and turn into 12-level pussy mouthbreathers the minute anything negative is slightly suggested about the Ducks.
Tell you what, the next time I am feeling uppity, I'll wear a condom with the appropriate ribbing for your pleasure and you can keep your tongue in your cheek for it, okay?
-
Here's something I made for Oregon. On the top are the QB's for each year, the bottom are the coaches. Green is team recruiting ranking for the arriving class according to Rivals.
Here's my prediction:
How did I make the prediction?
Most people agree on a couple of things
1) Chip was an excellent coach
2) Mariota is an excellent college QB.
There is a dropoff in PPG between Chip's last year and Helf's 2 years. The system is still very similar.
I assumed Mariota did not develop much (influence stayed about even. Assuming that the uptick in points per game Chip's last year is due to Mariota. Also assuming that the dropoff post chip was due to losing his influence (could be due to roster turnover too, but that happens every year).
So, I simply took the rise in points by adding Mariota and subtracted it from the current points. Most of the additional assumptions I would make would make Chip seem like a better coach, so I think this is a good middle ground. This scoring amount would likely amount to a 7-2 or 6-3 in conference finish. Sounds reasonable to me. -
The evidence is pretty clear that these types of hires don't work out in the long run. It also shows they can have huge success in their first few years. Its fair to disagree with the conclusion and say he will be Tom Osborne or Oregon is like Michigan and will remain consistent. Saying there is no evidence or analysis is FS and shows you are butthurt over the conclusion.AZDuck said:
Not the case.bananasnblondes said:This article does a great job of proving one thing. The minute anyone talks slightly negatively about Oregon, it's fans go into pissy little faggot tantrums.
Let's be honest, this site is an alternative to the humorless drivel on places like dawgman. A lot of what is posted here is self depreciating towards the team this site is named after and a lot is tongue-in-cheek. There are some duck fans here that contribute to such discussions and give the huskies a good natured ribbing as well. However, as AZDuck has demonstrated in this post, they get all serious and turn into 12-level pussy mouthbreathers the minute anything negative is slightly suggested about the Ducks.
Why should I have any patience for wishful thinking unsupported by evidence or analysis? -
Not unreasonable, absent the evidence. The evidence shows that Oregon has two underclassmen 5-star running backs in Tyner and Freeman who have both played really well. I'm guessing that the offensive scheme will shift away from the QB toward the RBs. Whether that is enough to go 8-1 in-league I don't know. With what we have coming back Oregon should be able to win the North and contend for the league title in 2015.Muttzen said:Here's something I made for Oregon. On the top are the QB's for each year, the bottom are the coaches. Green is team recruiting ranking for the arriving class according to Rivals.
Here's my prediction:
How did I make the prediction?
Most people agree on a couple of things
1) Chip was an excellent coach
2) Mariota is an excellent college QB.
There is a dropoff in PPG between Chip's last year and Helf's 2 years. The system is still very similar.
I assumed Mariota did not develop much (influence stayed about even. Assuming that the uptick in points per game Chip's last year is due to Mariota. Also assuming that the dropoff post chip was due to losing his influence (could be due to roster turnover too, but that happens every year).
So, I simply took the rise in points by adding Mariota and subtracted it from the current points. Most of the additional assumptions I would make would make Chip seem like a better coach, so I think this is a good middle ground. This scoring amount would likely amount to a 7-2 or 6-3 in conference finish. Sounds reasonable to me. -
Wanna cyber?Muttzen said:Here's something I made for Oregon. On the top are the QB's for each year, the bottom are the coaches. Green is team recruiting ranking for the arriving class according to Rivals.
Here's my prediction:
How did I make the prediction?
Most people agree on a couple of things
1) Chip was an excellent coach
2) Mariota is an excellent college QB.
There is a dropoff in PPG between Chip's last year and Helf's 2 years. The system is still very similar.
I assumed Mariota did not develop much (influence stayed about even. Assuming that the uptick in points per game Chip's last year is due to Mariota. Also assuming that the dropoff post chip was due to losing his influence (could be due to roster turnover too, but that happens every year).
So, I simply took the rise in points by adding Mariota and subtracted it from the current points. Most of the additional assumptions I would make would make Chip seem like a better coach, so I think this is a good middle ground. This scoring amount would likely amount to a 7-2 or 6-3 in conference finish. Sounds reasonable to me. -
When did the Washington Huskies turn into coogs? lol.
