You could go with either Ashton Jeanty or Cam Skattebo every week they don't have a bye for the Go Go Gone award.
Hard to understand giving Lanning the Headset award, even though the Ducks did win. As stated in the article, Lanning made 4 bonehead reckless gambles, and 3 of 4 blew up, costing Oregon points. The 4th eventually didn't accomplish anything a well placed punt wouldn't have, though possibly because of another coaching error. Eventually this kind of reckless, low to no chance of success decision making will cost the Ducks another win, and probably another championship. That's not a headset hero, it is a headset hardhead that still hasn't recognized his biggest weakness, much less learned from and addressed it.
On the Lanning front, thinking of it in more the totality of the aggressive style then each of the individual choices in a vacuum with the team feeding off that mindset. Take the 3 plays in the first half. While neither of the 2-point conversions worked, the onside kick did (which led to an extra FG). He plays it conservative on all 3 of those decisions, that's one less point in the first half and that one point is the difference in the final score.
Its clearly live by the sword, die by the sword and doesn't always work (like against your Beavs in 2022). And at the end of the day, his team met the moment against the #2 team in the country.
So your thoughts on why Lanning is not a good choice for Headset Hero are clear. Who and why would you suggest is a better choice? Not sure there are any coaches who went the day without some questionable decisions. Keep in mind the Ducks did beat Ohio State; no small accomplishment.
Just noting, the same kind of unsound decision making by Coach Wilcox contributed to yet another regularly scheduled Cal loss. Other factors were + and - contributors for both the Ducks and Bears, but there is a difference between bold and stupid.
You could go with either Ashton Jeanty or Cam Skattebo every week they don't have a bye for the Go Go Gone award.
Hard to understand giving Lanning the Headset award, even though the Ducks did win. As stated in the article, Lanning made 4 bonehead reckless gambles, and 3 of 4 blew up, costing Oregon points. The 4th eventually didn't accomplish anything a well placed punt wouldn't have, though possibly because of another coaching error. Eventually this kind of reckless, low to no chance of success decision making will cost the Ducks another win, and probably another championship. That's not a headset hero, it is a headset hardhead that still hasn't recognized his biggest weakness, much less learned from and addressed it.
On the Lanning front, thinking of it in more the totality of the aggressive style then each of the individual choices in a vacuum with the team feeding off that mindset. Take the 3 plays in the first half. While neither of the 2-point conversions worked, the onside kick did (which led to an extra FG). He plays it conservative on all 3 of those decisions, that's one less point in the first half and that one point is the difference in the final score.
Its clearly live by the sword, die by the sword and doesn't always work (like against your Beavs in 2022). And at the end of the day, his team met the moment against the #2 team in the country.
So your thoughts on why Lanning is not a good choice for Headset Hero are clear. Who and why would you suggest is a better choice? Not sure there are any coaches who went the day without some questionable decisions. Keep in mind the Ducks did beat Ohio State; no small accomplishment.
Also, not challenging the interception play call with a time out could easily have been deterministic in Ohio State's favor.
Just noting, the same kind of unsound decision making by Coach Wilcox contributed to yet another regularly scheduled Cal loss. Other factors were + and - contributors for both the Ducks and Bears, but there is a difference between bold and stupid.