Irene goodnight, Irene goodnight
Goodnight Irene, goodnight Irene
I'll see you in my dreams
-Leadbelly
The contingent who dislikes this site must be pulling their hair out tonight. It's been hard to be wrong of late. Believe me when I say I'd like to be and I'm trying my best, but the Beavs just won't cooperate. Anyway, the first scrimmage is complete, and as predicted, the defense got steamrolled today, giving up 712 total yards. The powerhouse linebacking corp, led by vocal "leader" Keith Pankey, gave up 150 yards on the ground. Frankly, Mr. Pankey, your "leadership" was invisible as your linebacking. The secondary, meanwhile, couldn't stop Cody Vaz and Obum Gwacham, on their way to yielding a whooping 562 yards. How are they going to stop the four first round quarterbacks in this conference? You answer that however you need to in order to sleep at night.
Some will say, "But Angry, Paea didn't play!" Yes, well, keep in mind Quiz, Wheaton, and Phillipp didn't play, either. That's right, the first team defense was trounced by Jordan Jenkins, Ryan McCants, and Mitch Singler, et al.
This is the problem: you need the defense to be dominant this time of year. Not good, not adequate, but dominant.
Why?
Because the defense knows the offense's playbook. It's that simple. They practice against these guys daily and know the plays, yet they still can't stop them. The defense has an advantage; they should be stifling. A good friend of mine who was at Reser today told me he saw wideouts blowing by corners with ease. Worse, the backs ran over, through, and around linebackers. Arm tackles, missed tackles, lack of determination and passion, and generally more of the same problems we were told would be resolved. Lipstick on a pig, I suppose.
The defense's one bright spot? Blocking a kick by…you guessed it: all-conference placekicker…Max Johnson! I'm sure that didn't have anything to do with Max's skill set or anything. *Cough*
Incidentally, Riley was on The Jim Rome Show today at 11:35 local time. Rome talked about the slow starts, and asked what Riley would do differently this year to prevent that. Mike didn't have much of an answer, and his confusion showed in camp today.
The one positive from all this: the Vegas line versus TCU is beginning to look like an early Christmas gift for the Angry household.
And if the defense shut down the offense you’d be whinning and complaining about how awful Katz is. You’re so predictable it isn’t even funny.
Take a prozac and relax man!
Speaking of Prozac, why do you have a different gravatar?
I think TCU is going to embarrass OSU. They’ve got a stable of rb’s and wr’s, an experienced qb, and OSU’s LB’s will be “flailing around” and not making plays. Poor position, inability to shed blocks, poor angles, arm tackles, will all be on display. OSU and its fans need to quit kidding themselves, the D talent – particularly LBs – has been declining steadily since 06.
And there’s this guy – still getting time at safety (from OregonLive’s Buker): “Riley’s No. 1 quarterback, (Nolan) Ryan Katz was mostly right on track, going 12-for-17 for 134 yards and one spectacular touchdown, a deep ball in the end zone that bounced off safety Suaesi Tuimaunei’s hands and into the waiting arms of flanker James Rodgers.”
Langsdorf is going to have to be BSU creative and diverse to get the beavs to 8 wins.
Angry,
You are writing a report and forming arguments on a scrimmage you didn’t even see. “A friend of mine who was at Reser…..” I have no idea why you bother writing about OSU. You should be using my name….. LOL
<3 that song
Mississippi John Hurt's version is great too
Stumbled across this overview of the scrimmage. You do realize that the number one defense only played a few series, right? Also, since 138 plays were played and the average number of plays per game is 60-70, that means that, in reality, they played about two games worth of snaps.
So the reality is the defense only gave up about 356 yards over two games worth of plays and only 75 yards per game on the ground, if you split it 50/50. I would take that every week for the Beavers if their offense is clicking.
This also includes the fact that a sack was awarded for just touching the QB, so the stats are a little skewed.
Katz had a 70% completion rate which was really good, and averaged 12.5 yards per pass, which is fantastic. So he played well, though in an unreal environment. As for Vaz and Obum, you really cannot add their yards together since most of Obum’s yards were on Vaz throws. And against the second string defense. So I am not sure how those stats work…
But the vast majority of the total plays were by the second and third teams anyway.
So your anger over this team is a little misguided on this one. At least in my opinion. But oh well, I guess I didn’t really have to read it.
I knew someone was going to say this.
None of the defensive units stopped any of the offensive units. Jordan Jenkins and Ryan Katz went hog wild on the first team.
Again, defense needs to dominate this time of year. Dominate. If you think giving up 70% to a rookie QB and 5.5 average to a walk-on running back is dominating that’s a you problem.
You’re grasping for answers in order to maintain hope and optimism. Look at the gestalt of this scrimmage.
Well, actually, the number ones only went four series (27 plays) and only had one Touchdown. That is a little over one quarter or work (on average). So for the defense to go against the offense, albeit neither at full strength, and only give up six/seven points over a quarter, is not bad.
And as you said, the one touchdown was on a seemingly lucky play.
So I am still not sure what your problem is with the defense. The second string defense may have some issues, since that is who McCants ran against,
I guess I am not sure what your point is. Your stats were skewed to make a point that wasn’t there, and your impression of the team is based mostly on the reserves. Now, I am concerned that the reserves didn’t play better, especially on defense, so I think that depth is still an issue on both sides of the ball. I just really cannot see anything bad about what the first team did. Again, with missing some big weapons on both sides of the ball.
That’s because you’re an optimist with a ton of hope, and I am a realist who sees 70% passing by a rookie QB as a terrible sign. You didn’t address the yards per carry averages against the first team defense either. Or the fact that the LBs are arm-tackling and being run over, something not shown in statistics.
You’re going to take from the scrimmage what you need to in order to feel how you want to feel.
If there’s hope to be had it’s in improving over the next two weeks, but I’m skeptical of that since after four years neither are Keith Pankey’s arms suddenly going to grow nor is he going to suddenly realize how to tackle or take correct angles.
Can Tony Wilson learn more in two weeks? Sure. Pin your hope on that.
Pot – kettle -black? So your reporting of 712 yards of offense without any mention of the extremely high number of plays is not bending stats and facts to make your point?
And what about those arm tackles. Are you talking about when Ryan McCants BLASTED a linebacker en route to a five yard gain? Is that the arm tackle you are talking about? Because that was against Zane Norris, not a starter.
So while your point on Jenkins getting 5.3 yards per carry is a solid one, you conveniently left out that some of those carries came against he second team defense. Also your comment:
“Or the fact that the LBs are arm-tackling and being run over, something not shown in statistics. ”
is basically silly. You didn’t even watch the scrimmage, so you cannot say what Pankey did or didn’t do. Even if you have a ‘reliable’ source, if they were arm tackling that poorly, then there would have been at least four attempted field goals. The fact is the defense stopped the offense on downs twice, blocked a field goal and got burned on a 34 yard pass to the best receiver in the conference.
So go ahead and “take from the scrimmage what you need to in order to feel how you want to feel.” but your points are you just trying to build on the negative. Heck, you probably didn’t even realize that Katz had a 70% completion rate until I said something. You know what else, there were three drops too. He could have done even better.
Are you that guy Peter71 from blitz who is always making self-deprecating fat jokes?
The bottom line is we see different things. The defense should be stifling since they know the offenses’ playbook. They aren’t. If you want to debate and dispute this for your reasons go ahead. I also suggest you start a blog so you can write about how promising yesterday’s performance was and I don’t have to waste time addressing your points. I’ll be proven right in two weeks…hopefully you come back then and man up.
Yeah, that is me. Fatty McGhee! ;)
I think your point about the defense being stifling is a little odd since you offer no quarter to the offense for knowing their personnel or their defense. Basically your agenda of being negative and mine of orange colored glasses cannot be proved by a scrimmage. None of it matters until they start playing and then we will find out if they are as good as I think or as bad as you do. I am sure you will let me know if you are right.
But I do agree with you that there is reason to worry about the linebackers, as there is any time you replace very productive players like Bubba and Kristick. I just don’t look for the negative. But maybe that is my big flaw. Too much positive not enough objectivity.
As for your last comment about starting my own blog, I am glad that you are accepting of people with different opinions than you have. I guess that is all a part of your plan to have stimulating conversations. I will most definitely ‘man up’ as you put it if they get shelled at TCU. But if the Beavers play well or if they win, I hope you do the same testicular exercises or whatever is involved in ‘Manning Up’.
Angry,
I don’t think there’s any reason to be abrasive here. Osborne gave an assessment based on his opinion, and he said as much. I’ll welcome that assessment in the spirit of debate. I will take from it some ideas with which I can agree as well. He doesn’t have the childish, foul-minded tunnel vision badAntiDiscussion strives to attain.
He likes his team and sees a little more than he sees while you like your team and don’t see what you want to see. There’s a middle ground.
Angry sent me an email saying I should fess up here on how wrong I was.
But they only lost to TCU by eight, so i really don’t feel I was overly wrong.
Now, if you look at the rest of the season, well, then I deserve to eat a big huge pile of crow with extra crow sauce. It was a nightmare and the defense was not good in many games. though I will say that I think the offense was the real culprit. I mean, you hold UCLA to 17 points and still lose? Lame.
But I said I would so i will. I was wrong. Angry was right. Hopefully the football team does what the baseball team is doing and takes a big step forward next year. I will say that I bet we win our first game…
I think Osborne has some valid points in this argument. The length of play and D-unit participation do have a lot to do with the offensive output. ngry has some decent points as well.
I think the first unit LB’s are a worry. Our #1 O has a lot of great talent, and if Katz can hit his marks there’s not much a defense can do to stop it. Jenkins is a quality back who can embarrass defenses other than our own, so I’d say 80% of his production can be owned by him and his blocking alone. 5% is probably due to Paea sitting out… maybe more, maybe less. And the other 15% is our LB’s doing what they’ve done for the last two years.
We knew what we had in the middle of the D coming in. It’s going to be hard for Wilson to play up to 75% of what Bubba played, and Pankey is a slow SS playing at the Sam.
On the flip side, the 2nd unit front seven did own the offense. But Vaz and Lomax are turning out to be spectacular QB’s, and our depth at WR is Pac 10 quality on the second team. Depth needs to be developed at CB and the O-line. The Depth that exists on the D-line is surprisingly good. The depth in the middle is better than the starters… with less experience.
And I think Dilbeck will get more looks as the year goes on. He looks like the second coming of Meeuwsen to me.
The silver lining is that our defensive recruiting is better than it was, and the future looks bright. The bad news is that our defensive recruiting was worse than it is now, and those guys see the field due to experience.
I hope for but don’t expect a good start to the season. If anything, I hope for Banker to see the tape and start plugging holes with the fresh talent. Bibbee and Doctor are spectacular LB talents by all accounts I’ve heard, and Akuna is only held back by his reps (and a hip pointer?). They may make some mistakes, but they’re in the position to make those mistakes rather than stuckin clutter or running some poor angle. It’s like the old joke… They have muscles in places where the other LB’s don’t have places.
And let’s own up to something we all really know. Danny Langsdorf is 20 times the coach Mark Banker is. I think he’s twice the coach Dick Bumpus is, but that has to be proven on the field.
Edit: Bumpas, not Bumpus
JackBeav, I thought you didn’t like Dilbeck?
I like Dilbeck. I’m not a fan of LaGrone for whatever reason. I’m told he was tooled by Gwacham and Reese more than a couple times.
I also had a friend who watched the scrimmage, and here’s what he got from it.
The D-line depth will not be a worry. Tuivailala is a pretty solid 300# with great feet. Chrichton has good hands and great speed and leverage. Glover is really strong with good hands, but he’s not so great with the footwork. Rosa is starting to look like his HS tape… finally. Even Seumalo is getting some good reps in. Kell… average at best for now.
The LB back-ups are better than the starters. Nobody mentions Uani Unga in yeserday’s play, but I’m told he was more than solid in shedding any block he wanted to shed, being in position and laying a couple solid hits on people who usually make defenders miss. Doctor and Bibbee were always in pursuit, but Akuna could really only redirect (friend said he looked gimpy on his right side). He also said Wilson had trouble in drop coverage, but he was willing to stick his nose in the middle, and he was taking good angles from the inside out. While Feti Unga didn’t show the same angles, he showed better power in the middle and quickness in coverage. Robinson and Pankey should carry dance cards and have the TE’s punch them on every play.
The secondary was playing catch-up most of the day. I’m told they were so conservative that they were backing up before the snap. But there were challenges on the ball in flight, so someone must be listening and/or learning. It’s just that our receivers are that much better than our DB’s. Tuimaunei must just be cursed. He looked good, but receivers just have career luck against him. My friend said he expects a ball to actually pass through Tuimaunei’s body for a TD sometime this season. Dilbeck was impressive, but he needs a little better form in run support or he’s going to have some shoulder problems due to tackling.
Rivals headline is “Scrimmage Success”
Can’t help but laugh at that. Such low expectations if you’re calling that performance a success. Bad to put that notion in the players’ heads, too.
I think the D should be better at this point. But I’m not ready to write them off. I’d have to see film. There’s too many intangibles, I’m more concerned with Tuimaunei’s non-catch. Wasn’t that part of his issues? I guess he made a play on the ball, which means he didn’t blow the assignment.
My concern with the D is just the same at is was before they took the field. I don’t know that I’ll really have an assessment until they get rolled by TCU…who ‘should’ roll them, or maybe after Louisville, who at home, we should hold our own with. I just know that there is no indication, minus the 2ndary, and Big P, that they should be all that good. The offense, if Katz doesn’t implode, is expected to be really good.
We’ll see though.
Everyone is assuming that Louisville game will be a win. Does anyone know about that team? Because if they have a D1 running back on their roster we’re probably going to lose. Again, Jordan Jenkins is running guys over. This is a LB issue, and it’s not going away. Paea will only fix a portion of the problem.
Can’t believe I’m reiterating this point, but both Ungas are probably upgrades at this point over Pankey and Wilson. Something tells me the coaches won’t admit this and make the change until we start Pac-10 play.
“Hmm I wonder why we start slow” –Riley
Your own words…….
“You’re going to take from the scrimmage what you need to in order to feel how you want to feel.”
Or in your case what your friend saw or felt or thought he saw or…… felt or you thought he felt and saw and read….. then watched and called you and then you guys felt…. together? Is that how it worked?
I got an idea, why don’t you actually go next time!? Then you can try to pretend like you don’t have an axe to grind. Oh but wait….
“You’re going to take from the scrimmage what you need to in order to feel how you want to feel.”
So the same garbage will spew from your mouth…..
Because I’m gainfully employed in California.
Yet, you can’t afford cable?!?!?
No, I purchased it. I might be unemployed soon. It’s not a matter of being unable, more like unwilling or hesitant/resistant due to circumstance.
Hey badAntiDiscussion,
You don’t get to play the entitlement card. At least the entitled learn to write at a higher level than a C- in HS frosh composition.
Wait, are you upset because angry’s writing (and you’re reading) original material based on second hand reports and actual stats?
Or are you upset because the original material you’re reading doesn’t jive with your own second hand take… a take based on material written by people who thrive on access alone, and write (and act) accordingly.
Neither is a valid argument, but it would be nice to know which stance you’re taking.
To clarify, your argument is a red herring based on a bandwagon fallacy which is based on a fallacy of composition. The bandwagon fallacy is formed by a long-standing appeal to popularity which has simply petrified and entrenched itself in some fans’ minds. It’s the nature of fandom, and it’s forgivable.
The ad hominems are just a small mind on display.
If you want to effectively counter angry’s posts, you should target what you think are his naturalistic fallacies. Be an adult and own some ideas for once.
Hey Jack$hit,
That is amazing writing!!!! You must be a genius. I would love to meet you in person, maybe bask in your brilliance.
Don’t you owe some debate 101 book a reference citation for that stupidity. “Red herring!!!” I showed your reply to several people in the office and they actually laughed out loud. I thought to say “lol”, but surely would not have your intellectual standards.
You poor sap. That’s not even half a thought.
And yes, I am a genius, but that has nothing to do with your poor demeanor.
Show this to your co-workers…
I would love for you to meet me in person. Bring your family. Bring your imaginary friend.
Your poor grammar, spelling and general stupidity will not protect you from a physical craziness you would not understand.
I feel bad for your pathetic self in anticipation of you just being you.
And look at your post again. Can you honestly say that you understand what you read? There’s a reason our language has certain standards. I would enjoy even a remote understanding of it from…
… never mind. Ain’t gonna happen. I’ll put it in words you can understand.
I wait you see for ungfae yiu get it for ung. Yur neegative two mich yu stoopeed pirsun yoo.
DOH!
Look at that. I didn’t even have to pretend that I showed your waste of my time to some imaginary office.
lol
“physical craziness you would not understand” Please explain?
I think that the scrimmage is mostly worthless when analyzing game type stats. It is not a game situation, it is too artificial. The real value of a scrimmage is player evaluation. The notes about some players on 2nd team playing well will show in film. The next scrimmage, the coaches should put those 2nd teamers with the 1st team to see if they can hack it or just always look good against the 2’s. It is also a good way for the fans to evaluate the players.
I think Angry’s points about the defense being poor are fair though, our defense cost us the Rose Bowl last year and we graduated our “best defensive player”. Remember, both USC and UO ran over us on key 3rd and 4th downs late to close the game. Zona simply passed in the flats all day and we couldn’t stop them. The outside linebackers refused to get to the flats in zone coverage to help. We moved into man and had to move guys out of the box, they beat us with the run. When we played cover 2, the receivers beat our safetys deep.
All of that said, I hope we go 1-2 in our first 3. Angry asked about Louisville. We shouldn’t underestimate them. Charlie Strong is a new head coach there, he coached defense at Florida for the last several years. That team is automatically upgraded because of him and should do a decent job of confusing Katz. We do have a bye before that game but that isn’t totally telling. They will have only played two games before match up, one before we begin our bye. That is really all of the film that will be out there on his schemes because he is a new head coach. Invariably, his defense will not be the same as it was at Florida because he is different personnel. All of that said, our best chance at a win may be BSU because our offense will be strong and their defense will be weaker. It will be a thriller of a shoot out at the smurf turf, that much is for sure. Expect a close one with both teams combining for over 70 points.
I realize the scrimmage is not an end all. Players have two weeks to improve, and there are dozens of variables that can explain bad performance.
Again, this is a gestalt issue for me. I’m an ornithologist by training, and when looking at silhouetted birds and trying to ID them we look at the over feel of the animal. This is the “gestalt”. Webster defines the word as:
: a structure, configuration, or pattern of physical, biological, or psychological phenomena so integrated as to constitute a functional unit with properties not derivable by summation of its parts.
So, there you have it. When analyzing the big picture, overall feel, or gestalt of this defense, it’s piss poor in two areas: linebacker and (to a lesser extent) scheme. Sorry, but you can’t change my mind on that. Only the players and coaches can. This LB corp (it’s a lack of talent issue, not a lack of effort) coupled with the Mark Banker philosophy of DB play is a perfect storm. You can get into semantics such as who played/who didn’t and the dozen of variables that skewed the stats, but at the end of the day defense needs to be dominating at this stage of camp and nothing anyone says is going change that.
I agree about the scheme and LB’s sucking. This is something that I have long thought. I am just saying, the scrimmage doesn’t necessarily provide substantial evidence but our gameplay will. This defense has been on the decline and it will really show this year. It will be the reason for most, if not all of our loses. I think the two fundamental flaws in it, are the cornerbacks and the fact that the goal is to make the ball carrier run deep and outside. I understand the theory but I think we get beat by the spread because we lack team speed. Forcing them outside allows them to beat us around the corner. Banker has given up greater than 30 points to UO since Chip Kelly got there.
Since that excellent group of LBs left (Darlin, Laroque, Doggett, etc) the defense has been in decline. The problem is not a CB talent issue in my mind. The main problem with the CB play is that Banker’s scheme doesn’t allow for turnovers. I haven’t looked it up, but I’d imagine we’re in the bottom % for turnovers created by the secondary.
I don’t like that our LBs rarely blitz, always play tentative, and the past few years have not had Pac-10 talent. I’m sorry but Keith Pankey is just not a Pac-10 caliber linebacker. If people want to call me a jerk for smashing the elephant in the room so be it; I’ll play the roll of martyr and figuratively “die” to get the message out there loud and clear. ;)
The importance of reiterating the Pankey issue is not to be a jerk or pick on this one guy, it’s to ensure this glaring error doesn’t happen again.
I’m ready to wonder aloud if Michael Doctor should get consideration over Pankey. If the MLB had solid experience, probably. As is, questionable, which makes for a good point of debate.
(Motivated) Talent trumps less talented experience. The Beaver coaches don’t seem to understand this, and it’s holding everyone back. But think about it, who wouldn’t take a 22 year old Randy Moss playing for a contract over a 40 year old Art Monk. Come on.
Hey guys, I would like to chip in here as an outsider; most of you would suspect that I visit this blog because there is negativity written about the Beavers (which as you know is like a moth to a light for a Duck fan) and it is true – I do come here because someone is willing to write negatively, or “objectively” about the beavers. But let me be clear, what really attracts me is that there is actually a blog that writes what one might consider a realistic view of how they see their team for good AND for evil – whether or not the view is accurate – its real to him (or her). How refreshing is that in the land for college football fan(atics)s. I would love to find an Angry Duck site. To be honest, I am sick of reading that the Dux have a team that has almost no flaws at any position. Reading, “there is a little work to be done here or there – but everything is working itself out and will be fine by the season start” is about as deep as I can find from my fellow homer blogs. Last year I read that our very young O line was really coming together and that we would be a real power-house on the BSU Blue. Uhhhhhh, I would have at least liked to have one Angry report to have read before the game last year so I wasn’t of the belief that the team wasn’t really capable of walking on water before our epic melt-down in front of the whole college football world.
I’ve read through the comments and obviously there are those with glasses half full and half empty here. But that is the beauty of this blog – you guys can have a real debate because someone is willing to take a critical side to begin with. How much better than a room of homers high fiveing (sp?) each-other about everything. That feels good and all until the first beat down is issued.
Keep up the good work all of you guys and consider yourself lucky to have someone willing to take the less lovable path in your behalf.
Thats all, I will step down from my soap-box now.
Wow, thanks.
If the blog you wish for doesn’t exist you should start it. Your writing (judging the post above) is articulate. What’s stopping you? Write something objective that voices your concerns.
You can do it at WordPress for free, or, if you want to set up a domain it costs about $160 for 4 years. I can give insight on how to go about it if you choose the latter. My email is in the contact section. If you decide to take on the project and need help you can write me there.
Thanks, but I am way to lazy and under-talented to take on a task such as that. You guys are uber-writers and far more plugged into solid information streams with your team than I am to mine. Plus, although I am no ninny, I am to probably a bit thin skinned to handle the onslaught some of your breathern lay on you. I would have to go to my happy place in a fetal ball, while sucking my thumb in a puddle of my own urine. I will leave that task to bigger men/women than I.
Thanks for the thought though.
Chins up while your fingers fly you cheeky sons of guns.
I smell franchise
Except what would you guys do about Alabama? Angrycrimsontiders.com?? That just sounds way too much like a female menstration help group. Angry and Crimson-Tide together is just too too much.
Yeah I mean it obviously works for this site because our helmet has the angry beaver on it. You’d have to do something like uglyducklings.com for Oregon.
Wow, Riley is seriously considering starting McAndrews. That is disheartening. Phillipp would ride the bench. Best lineman on the bench. This will be hard not to blow up about if it happens.
Yeah, I just read some Riley comment ( I think on Oregon Live) that the coaches do not believe in “gamers’. That you have to practice to play. I am thinking what the ????. Phillip is better than Van Wilder without any practice.
The defense KILLED the offense in the spring game. What does that mean? About the same as this…not much.
What does it mean that Keith Pankey is a starting LB? Everything.
The new DB, Ryan Handford, got toasted for three 60 yard touchdowns today, and not by Katz but Lomax and Mannion.
Darn, I’m not being positive. Okay, at least he didn’t get beat for four 60 yard touchdowns!
It will still be interesting to see the Beavs in action. I was sorrily disappointed in the Penn. State game of all the arm tackling. At this level of play “basics” should not be an issue. They may get beat, but it shouldn’t be on basics. Maybe they are better at specific positions ( opponents ) but at least execute as you should and know the basics of tackling and coverage. As a way out idea. Is it possible Riley knows he has less and the best way to get the most out of these guys is to have them embarrassed on national TV? Maybe Riley believes there is no way he is going to make a BCS game at large and the only hope is Rose Bowl. So try to prepare for PAC 10 play. Because what he has to do is turn 1 and 2 stars into 5’s. And the best teacher and motivator is failure. Just a thought. You know, 2 years ago I was a realist before the USC game, I was wrong.
Riley doesn’t have to turn 1 and 2 stars into 5. He chooses to. The Beavs are able to attract 4-star talent. They simply don’t want to.
I think sometimes Riley sometimes is hesitant to recruit 4-star talent. He always tries to recruit character guys, I bet he is nervous to get this bigger talents cause it is often the ones with troubled histories that choose schools like OSU. All of that said, I think at this point we should be able to land legit 4 star talent that don’t have character problems.
I’m told that Erickson didn’t have a problem with character. Did the Beavs have any more problems with the character of Erickson’s teams than now under Riley? Obviously the 2000 team had success. I think had they beat UW they would have been legit for a National Championship. At some point hopefully, success will translate into higher level recruits and better depth.
The football players during Erickson’s era had a really bad rep around campus. The heavy amount of crimes committed in 04-05 were most of Erickson’s recruits. He has career has been known for recruiting athletes with troubled pasts, it dates back to his Miami days. That said he certainly is a winner and did have a great season. He had a winning season his first year to get us to the Oahu bowl and the Fiesta in his second. Unfortunately, the 3rd and 4th seasons were not as strong.
A big problem in my eyes is that Beaver fans seem to think we can’t get a coach who both (a) knows how to coach and (b) has the personality (i.e. aggressive, good pitch) to land elite talent (whether it be 3, 4, or 5 stars, as there is elite talent in all those rankings). So, these Beaver fans, say, since we can’t get that coach, we better just be happy with what we have. That simply is not true. Erickson was able to recruit. Erickson won national titles and came to OSU and had them in a BCS game year 1. If you want to give credit to Riley for those recruits and Erickson’s coaching then you have to do the same for the next handful of years since Erickson brought on Browner, Newton, Koets, et al. Frankly, it’s a dumb argument since play calling, style (Erickson was much more aggressive), and coaching are just as important.
So, there are many coaches who could recruit well in Corvallis and who would like the job. Sure, the majority might be young, hungry guys, but there are guys out there. Also, Robinson and Casey have no problem recruiting elite talent to Corvallis. And Back in the day, Prothro had some great players, including a Heisman winner.
So, the talent level problem is specific to this coach. He has “coached up” a ton of average talent, and kudos for that, but the majority of those players should be your backups, reserves, your depth. Think James Dockery as a backup, with someone clearly better ahead of him. How good would that team be? See, now that is Rose Bowl caliber. You wouldn’t have to “hope” but instead “expect” to win. That the Beavers look to be going into this season with a line comprised of 4 walk-ons is not a “good story” in my mind but a story about a real problem in recruiting and philosophy (i.e. “we don’t believe in gamers, you have to practice”–Riley). Just play the best (and in this case most experienced) talent you God damn ego-maniacal ****. Sorry, I like the guy as a man, but his philosophy is so illogical and “aw, shucks”/loser mentality that it gets me going.
are you dumb?? but seriously
Also, have you noticed that as he is doing the national media thing, he is being questioned about the yearly slow starts? And the basic answer is that he does not know why the team starts slow. I would probably lose my job if I told my boss I did not know why I failed. Kind of a lazy answer, but I guess he feels pretty secure with his coach for life status.
Supposedly they’re really trying to get over that this year (as opposed to other years when they don’t try to start fast). Hah.
The reason he’s not in trouble is because he loses these (early) battles but wins the war. 8 win seasons are nice if it’s truly the best that can be done, but they aren’t nice when with a few tweaks (both personnel and philosophical) and you can win 10 games. Benching a 4-star talent who has a year’s experience as a starter in favor of a walk-on with zero game experience isn’t the best personnel decision. These seemingly minor (and to some fans reasonable) decisions make all the difference.
Usually I try to avoid reading this blog, but with you pushing it in O-Live comments sections all the time, I decided to bite and see what over-the-top negative post you have put out today.
After scanning the first pointless paragraphs of useless spun stats, I came upon the “A good friend of mine who was at Reser today told me he saw…..” part. Classic!!
Sorry Angry, but you should actually attend the scrimmages and not base your outlandishly negative posts off of someone else’s reporting (Buker, Cliff, or anyone else who actually takes the time to watch these practices?)
Then again, this entire blog is just a strange ploy for you to feel as if your negative ramblings in life should be deemed psychologically “normal”. People read it right?
Gainfully employed in California. Dropping a few grand to see a scrimmage is low on my list, especially when my best friend lives in the area.
No harm in that, but your negativity could be taken more seriously if it truly was your own. The “I have a friend who says this, and I’ll spin his words so it supports my previous opinion” routine doesn’t bode well for having the readers at least respect your negativity.
I know the point of your blog is to be a “critical view”, but criticism can easily come across as cynicism.
Anyways, after reading through some posts today I notice that the content of this blog has improved since I first came across it last year….so good job on that and I’ll check during the season.
It is my own. I have a friend who tells me what he sees, but it’s not as if that is the sole source–I read everything and talk to people, drawing my own conclusions in the process. I get up to Reser a few times a year to witness in person. It’s not like my friend or the many other Beaver blogs and news sources are writing these opinions.
But you’re entitled to any opinion that you want. It’s not going to change my stance that until this team wins the national title game, there’s valid room for criticism.