I just spent 4-years listening to and buying into a "process" in which the coaching skill set didn't match the recruiting successes. The use of the roster did not complement the talent on the roster.

I don't want Alabama's defense or what Georgia is doing because Oregon doesn't have their players and Lanning is not Saban or Smart.

We just had a head coach who also coached at Alabama and how did that go? Did Oregon ever resemble Alabama on a consistent basis? Did the emphasis on "physicality" which apparently was the only ingredient missing from the Chip Kelly years in terms of winning a National Championship, even get Oregon to the Playoffs? How about all those great recruiting classes which after 4-years led to an Alamo Bowl loss?

I want Oregon coaches to create an offense and defense that works well for Oregon with the players on the roster.

Kind of like the quote, "Be yourself because everyone else is taken."

Jonathan Smith has done an excellent job with this approach. He is not trying to out-Oregon Oregon because he knows he can't with facilities, recruiting, etc. So he is building a product which last year had the "Civil War" game determining the winner of the North Division.

When Chip was at Oregon, David Shaw was very open about not being able to play Oregon's style because he didn't have those types of players. Instead he stayed with what worked well for Stanford.

I don't want a "pro style offense" if we don't have the players to run it.

Maybe it should be expected given the circumstances, but in the last 5-7 some years going from Helfraud to Taggart to Cristobal and now a head coach with no head coaching experiencing in ...Oregon has been all over the place; Autzen is no longer an intimidating place to play; recruiting has been prioritized over player development or "coaching up;" the offense has been dull to watch and so on...BUT at least we have great facilities and lots of talented recruits visit the school.