Now you are pissing me off.  I began a thread titled something like 'This is not football' after watching much of Oregon's thrashing of UCLA.

My point was then...and is now..that there is much more to football than physical skill.  (Sorry, Wanamker.  I know that you find this difficult to take since it implies that the coaches need to bone up/aren't infallible.)  Here we go:

Run the hurry up offense (at least occasionally), throw to the tight end, use 2 or three back sets, when kents is whipping your d-line use 2 or more tight ends or running backs, fake the run on pass plays in order to freeze the d-line and secondary (Boo, for instance, is pretty slick this way), use the bigger running back against kent, hand to the running back who pitches back to the qb who throws a pass, use five down defensive linemen at times to get a pass rush, put the qb under center and the running back(s) closer to the line in order to give the d more to think about and us more options, run the triple option, go empty backfield, etc, etc.

I know.   These aren't cure-alls.  But the lack of adjustments, imagination and using all the possible tools mean that we are giving it less than our all.  Maybe this stuff would've gotten us over in some of our losses.

It comes down to this:  we aren't significant winners and our fan base is basically non-existent and 100% unenthused.  And, we might be able to change that.  This might be in our control.  Could have our players feeling that, like Oregon, we KNOW that we have an edge, some superiority.

Or else you can go out scared and defeated like we did in columbus.