http://www.kgw.com/sports/Inexperience-Or-Arrogance-Or-both-184959611.html Regarding the NCAA investigation: Since his prior experience was in small college football, most at the University of Oregon hope the Committee on Infractions will buy that as a valid reason. Or was it something much bigger? Was Lyles being paid for delivering at least one player to Oregon? (The player in question, Lache Seastrunk, has since transferred.) Sometimes the smartest person in the room thinks he can pull a fast one on anyone. Sometimes the biggest risktaker at the table thinks he can count the cards in the chute. Maybe Chip Kelly just thought he could get away with one? Or maybe he didn’t know what he was doing. (Though, if anyone actually told him this happened because he was clueless, he’d probably fight that person.) The NCAA rejected Oregon’s summary of disposition. That’s what most of us call a plea bargain. So now top university officials, perhaps Chip Kelly included, will be asked to appear before the NCAA’s supreme court justices. It’s likely they’re heading to Indianapolis in 2013 for sentencing. It isn’t likely to be overturned on appeal. And punishment may not be very severe. Who can figure out the NCAA infractions committee from one case to the next? We don’t know what will be done. But we do know what will be discussed. It centers on the risktaking coach, who doubled down on Will Lyles.
Going for it on fourth downs works most of the time for Kelly, and yet Chip is "playing against the odds"? I think that maybe most coaches are making the wrong choices by not going for it more on 4th down, and that his whole blackjack analogy is off. The column's idea is sort of fair, overall: the Oregon program either didn't know the rules or were breaking them intentionally. But to simplify that into two big bad adjectives makes it a bit sensationalisitic. Ed O.
