While I understand that the point spread, and the relative positions of the two teams were highly discussed and pronounced--I think another ancilairy element may have played a big part in all of this.

Dan Lanning in FOUR YEARS has NEVER lost to an unranked opponent.

This wasn't any non-ranked opponent...this was an opponent who had not won in a long time versus a P4 team, and just lost to TULSA for crying-out-loud? The fans, the coaches, and the team knew that Lanning never loses to an unranked opponent. They knew we would easily take care of business, and they were mentally on cruise-control.

Now add it being 140 degrees on the field....who wants to be in that game with a such a lowly opponent, and dealing with such vicious heat?

EVERY coach loses games he shouldn't, and we have been spoiled with HOW we have lost, when we lost to great teams. Good-gosh....Cristobal beats Ohio State in Columbus and then goes and loses to like a 4-win team at Stanford? Mario lost a bunch of those, and lost two games with unranked opponents just last year.

So until now....Lanning had never lost to such an unranked opponent, and I think this team was simply not ready mentally from a variety of angles.

OK. Lanning just lost his first game he should not have lost. He, the coaches, and the team will be better as they just passed a negative milestone, but an important mental one that will help them for years.

I was thinking about Rick Neuheisel's famous comment that most Duck fans are familiar with: "It's not the X's and the O's, but the Jimmies and the Joes that make the difference." Seeing how we had a clear talent advantage with our Jimmies and Joes last Saturday, perhaps "The Weasel's" comment needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Nowhere was this more apparent than along the defensive front. I'm flabbergasted that the Cowboys were able to do what they did to the NFL-quality talent we have assembled on our defensive line. The upperclassman group you'd expect to create havoc was rendered absolutely ineffective. This is all the more befuddling when you compare last year's Oregon/OSU game to this year's (211 yards of total offense vs. almost 600).

Which leads me to question: Is it still the Jimmies and the Joes that make the difference, or has today's game morphed to where a schematic shift in philosophy can gain an advantage over even the most talent-loaded opponents? (Last year OSU ran a traditional spread offense; this year they installed a simpler Air Raid approach).

I'm no expert when it comes to X's and O's, but I'm guessing our coaches are probably installing some new schemes for our Jims & Joes this week!

100%, They thought they were playing the same team as last year. Surprise! This loss is 85% on the coaches. Maybe it helps them the rest of the season maybe were going to do a Penn State.

8 minutes ago, John Charles said:

I was thinking about Rick Neuheisel's famous comment that most Duck fans are familiar with: "It's not the X's and the O's, but the Jimmies and the Joes that make the difference." Seeing how we had a clear talent advantage with our Jimmies and Joes last Saturday, perhaps "The Weasel's" comment needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

The Jimmies and Joes were the only reason the game was close in the fourth quarter... or at any point in the game.

Jackson putting their QB out of bounds on a long QB run saved a touchdown and the defense held them to a field goal. Jackson's pick six actually put Oregon up 7-3. Uiagalelei's interception enabled the Ducks to get a quick touchdown for 14 points right there.

Stewart and Dak Moore both had long TD catches... there's 14 points there.

There's 28 points that came strictly off talent.

This isn't a talent problem ... its a teamwork and mentality problem.