12.Nov.2012 General Discussion

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 2.0/5 (6 votes cast)

It sounds like QB musical chairs will continue for another week. Hearing Mannion will start vs Cal. Hey, maybe we will see Richie Harrington before all is said and done. Does Riley have an eligibility left? Maybe he can Pete Rose us and call his own number.

Those who noted Cal is no longer an easy win are spot on. Should be a win based on match ups, but you gotta think this team is shot. The win cap theory is at stake (given that Nicholls State is back on the schedule. What a championship week game that will be!). I think there's a line piling up to tell me how wrong I am if Riley notches that 9th win vs the mighty Colonels. And for the mathematically challenged, a win cap of 8 means he has to win 9 (some don't seem to grasp that; ala how there are 11 numbers between 0 and 10). 

Hoops appears to be exactly what I thought (same as last year, only a little worse defensively). I'm basing that off the stats and comments I read here, though, as I didn't actually watch the games. Seems Burton is still throwing head-lopping passes. I'd rather have a guy who doesn't make the highlight reel pass, and doesn't make the mistakes that come with those passes.

Like Jimi Hendrix sang, Manic Depression is a frustrating mess. He could have easily substituted "OSU athletics".

Jump to Bottom
  • slamadam says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    don’t know if i can recall a game where a team scored 23 unanswered points and lost. only the beavers. i’m a little more optimistic about the hoops team. new mexico state was in the dance last year and gave indiana a good game. way too early to tell anything though. as far as the cal game goes, to me it’s got an eerily similar feel to it as the washington state game in 2010. hopefully this group has a little tougher resolve than that team did. i’m strangely looking forward to the nicholls state game, if for no other reason then it may be the smallest visitors section in the history of renovated reser. when eastern kentucky came on a thursday in 2002 it was bad, but this may be worse.

  • homefry says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +5 (from 5 votes)

    I’ve watched both hoops games—looks like a decent team that just played their first two games of the season. Need a scorer to complement Starks…depending on matchups that could be Brandt from the outside, or Collier/Burton/Moreland down low.

    Regardless of what others think, I find OSU hoops very enjoyable to watch compared to the last 10 years–the talent is there, the team seems cohesive, let’s see how it plays out.

    I think we beat Cal with relative ease…they are a mess, and I think the Beavs are still playing as a team.

    Call me polyanna, the only reason I’m on this site is that I’m quite cynical and enjoy the repartee. However, change does not happen from 3-9 to BCS in one year. Likewise, going 0-18 to 21 wins last year doesn’t happen in one season. Enjoy the ride~~just remember it could (and can) be worse.

  • osubaby says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Angry,

    Curious to know what you think about Dylan Wynn? A few weeks back you failed to tell us what thought about Wynn during an interview.

    • angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Are you asking why I thought he came across as a weird guy? Or what I think about him as a player? Or is this question rhetorical? Don’t quite understand why you are bringing up Dylan Wynn.

      • osubaby says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Why he came across as a weird guy. I was watching an interview on Talkin’ Beavs from the other week and found his demeanor to be quiet interesting. I wanted your take on that.

        • angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I think I originally said the interview made me “uncomfortable”

          So, if you say he’s interesting, yeah, I agree that what I saw could be described as “interesting”.

          I’d have to watch the interview again to be specific (do you have a link?). From memory, I just remember he had a military intensity about him, uber confidence, and unusual facial expressions/gesticulations. Almost like Drago (“The Russian”) from Rocky IV. Drago made me uncomfortable, too. It could be an issue or insecurity with me…I don’t know. I’m not looking to rip the guy. It was just an observation and offhand comment that the interview made me uncomfortable.

          People got mad when I said that, and I don’t really feel like revisiting that shit storm so take it easy fellas.

          • bendbeaver says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            I thought he showed a good sense of humor in the Talkin’ Beavers interview when he batted the ball that was going to the one woman, than he gave the finger wag and throat slash. Usually guys can be pretty stiff in those things.

          • mckalk says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            His name doesn’t seem to be getting called as much this year. Did the extra weight he put on, slow him down a step?

  • FedUpBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

    Why doesn’t Riley do a beete job of selling recruits to OSU? He should be talking Pac-12 Networks, great conference, great school, within 40 minutes of all the activity at Oregon for a near super campus atmosphere, playing time, NFL offense that prepares for the pros and early starting opportunity. Just don’t get how our class is still ranked right with Colorado and Riley seems challenged at picking up recruiting after better seasons. Our situation is 10 times better than Colorado’s right now and a much easier sell than WSU too. We should have recruiting classes well within the Top 40 every year with the right attitude and being the biggest rival of the nation’s #1 team. It almost seems like Riley doesn’t believe enough in how great we could be and OSU’s potential to become much more of a heavyweight on the national scene. I believe we can be pretty good with some smart adjustments and improvements but this staff has to sell it to top recruits who want to hear confidence and excitement.

    • 10CentLine says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      i have wondered the same for a long time now. top notch talent comes to eugene, why not corvallis?. pullman is truly in the bush and yet they have smelled roses twice in the past 15 years and went to the sweet 16 in ’08. usually teams reflect the coach’s personality and it bothers me what seems to be a lack of confidence, fire and exitement in OSU football and hoops. if you can, check out the replay of our fiesta bowl demolition of notre dame. have not seen fire like that since that game…..no coincidence we needed erickson to get us over that hump that seems so cruely within reach.

      • rsteve503 says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -1 (from 5 votes)

        I dont think UO is loaded with talent like some SEC schools. Right now they get better talent than us, maybe, because they have a genius coach and cute unis and win big.

        ….I agree with angry. A coach who mails it in sometimes isnt acceptable. Riley is obviously NOT calling the plays all the time, like he said he would. and NEEDS to do.

        He is a ho hum coach. Winning isnt important, …just find your identity….Why would the really good players want to play in such a system? He is a nice guy, so the beat writers and polyanna fans jump up and down when he has a winning season, and pat him on the back when he loses. I would rether have a coach who aint nice, who really WANTS to win.

        Cal was competitive with UO for a half, like no one else has done this season……so better not mail this one in.

    • Krogercomplete says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      It is a good question, but we literally have no evidence of top recruits coming to Corvallis in large numbers, ever. There is a lot of speculation about why that is true, but it by and large has always been true. I am not saying it has to stay that way, and It feels like it has been on the uptick (someone should check those numbers).

      As for this season, we were 5 and 7 followed by 3 and 9. I don’t think there was any reason to think this recruiting class would be strong based on that performance. The success will help turn that around, but with a lot of early commits to other schools, only so much poaching we can do. I have no idea what these coaches are telling recruits, but I am going to go out on a limb and say there is a zero percent chance the staff is NOT mentioning all the things you list in your post. I mean, they aren’t talking about Bridge strategy the whole time.

      • 10CentLine says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        in football that is correct. but for OSU hoops it was very different. of course it didn’t hurt to have a HOF coach either but when ralph was here we almost always pulled the top oregon talent: a.c., blume, sitton, radford et. al. now the kyle singlers, mike dunleavy’s and kevin loves of the world all bail out of state instead of coming to corvallis. anyone think we will be able to ever pull local talent like we used to again?

        • ddd says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          what about washington, brandon stoudemire, ainge…………………………………………..

  • bone says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Any thoughts on the recruit we just landed today?

  • oneoldbeav says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I’m trying to figure the downside to announcing that Mannion will start against Cal, Riley must have a reason for waiting.

    Is it to keep Vaz engaged, thinking he may start? Is it that Riley thinks delaying the decision will effect how Cal prepares? Does he hope to keep Mannion hungry? Does he think Mannion would feel any less pressure if the announcement is made late in the week? Has he soured so much on Mannion that he is just hoping at this point that Vaz will get a day or two of practice before Saturday?

    Seems to me you say that the Cal game is too important to chance starting a QB who is unable to go full bore at practice all week, announce that Mannion will start and that you expect him to be even better than he was at the beginning of the season. And then, prepare to run the ball at least 50% of the time.

    What am I missing??

  • bendbeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

    Hoops defense is better than last years. I recommend watching the games.

    • VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I agree.

    • Jack says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Not only is the defense better. But Coach Rob called a great mix of zone and man at just the right times on Sunday as well. Menzies took Devon and Berto out of the game, and still we broke them down and took a game that we probably would have found a way to lose in the past.

      So it looks like Coach Rob is finally adjusting well on the fly to what good coaches do to stall our game. It was almost like he was saying, “Oh… so you want to play that game, eh?”

      That has been a fair knock on Coach Rob over his tenure thus far. If he sheds that knock, we could be good. Another knock has been finding answers when your floor leaders are taken out of the game. You can make good adjustments as a coach. But if the players you rely on don’t rise to the occasion when asked, all the adjustments in the world are for naught. Angus has been as advertised this year. He’s playing with a serious chip on his shoulder. Moreland needs more experience because NMSU’s size took him out of the game as well. But Angus had his way when he wanted it. He just had to get creative. Instead of taking it at NMSU’s defense, he had some really nice interior passing.

      Yes, Joe made a couple bone-headed plays. But it was only a couple. Doing a cost-benefit on Joe’s overall game forgives those plays by a bunch. He set himself on the blocks and battled hard on either end. And he was the recipient of some great passes from Angus because he was just in the right spot playing fundamentally sound ball. He can do better, but the overall negativity toward him here is unwarranted based on his play this year.

      The same goes for Barton. He was solid, fundamentally sound and contributed what he needed to contribute. I’ll have to go back and look at the stats, but I don’t think any of his were negative. He had a couple good fouls, but that was about it.

      And like I said, Devon and Berto were targeted. Berto had maybe one uncontested shot (out of 10 or so), and I don’t remember Devon even getting to his spots to take a shot. You tell me before the game that those two will total single digit scoring, and I’m not feeling good about our chances.

      And Ahmad was just unstoppable once he got the green light.

      You guys may not have seen the experts’ picks before Niagara, but we were only expected to win that game by about 72-66. And the overwhelming pick was NMSU ATS at +6.5.

  • Fightingbeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)

    The style of recruiting between Mile Riley and the ucks is like night and day. While the U of O has a very aggressive and pressured recruiting agenda, targeted mainly towards the recruit himself, OSU is more of a non-pressure and less aggressive technique targeting recruit’s parents, focusing on education, nice environment, etc.

    If you honestly put yourself in the shoes of a possible high end recruit this is what you would be faced with:

    U of O: Proven head coach and staff, top notch and up-beat facilities, great stadium, energized and loyal fan base, background of reaching National Championship, BCS, Rose Bowl games and lots of national attention.

    OSU: One of the nicest coaches in college football, questionable coaching staff, a beautiful campus, focus on educational goals, half + completed stadium, so-so facilities, background of recent losing seasons, no BCS bowls and not so happy and divided fan base.

    Where would you like to go…….honestly?

    Riley might have lower standards in recruiting.

  • ObjCritic says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I think the Cal game would be pretty simple if Mannion avoids the INTs, OSU should win. I suspect he could get away with 1, maybe even 2, but if it happens, like to see it be a great play by a defender instead of a knuckle ball on top of a wrong read. I don’t like writing as if INT’s are acceptable and lower expectations, I just think an agressive OSU could weather an INT.

    Avoid the TO’s, come in with a healthy winning mindset, and OSU wins. Throw stupid INT’s, contribute to what could become declining confidence, and you have trouble. Why does the latter sound so Riley-esque?

  • mike says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I’m interested in what recruits are leaning our way and what ones committed & still out there can impact our program immediately.
    Cal is tough – they have some talent and the ability to make a game ugly. Are the Grant HS kids on Cal playing a prominent role? Still, I think we roll. I think Mannion will be back to the player he was against UCLA and AZ.
    On Wynn, a friend close to the program said he’s the one player no one in the locker room messes with. If he changes the music, no one tries to change it back. He’s just real intense & tough, but a good guy.

  • Tim Tebow says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Put me in coach, I’m ready to play!

    • Beavergopher says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      You run too well. No chance of playing at OSU.

    • Sanchize says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      What’s going on in here guys? Is there anything I need to know?

      My owner’s name is Woody Johnson.

      *snicker*

      Get it?

      Woody Johnson… I can’t make that stuff up.

  • BeavInEugene says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +6 (from 14 votes)

    “you gotta think this team is shot.”

    You do, that’s obvious! Of course you jumped ship, threw a hissy fit and closed this site down after a loss to UW. Luckily, and THANK GOD this team doesn’t have your pathetic outlook on life. The Beavs will bounce back vs Cal. Not worried.

    Yes, there will be a line waiting to tell you, you’re wrong about the win cap being at 8 (never mind it’s already been surpased three times!) I don’t want to wait though. So Angry. How the hell is that nationally respected, amazing, offensive minded guru, who Riley will never beat, Mike Leach doing in Pullman? Investigation into player abuse and a 2-8 season. Yeah, hmmm let me think. 7-2 and ranked in the top 20 and at worst a 9-3 season on tap. Or what Leach has done with WSU? Yeah, that’s a toughy!

    • Jack says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -3 (from 5 votes)

      Your 2+2=-36.45 analysis is funny.

      I can’t tell you to go back and read everything again, because it appears you only read what you think is between the lines rather than the actual words.

      I guess that makes you being such a negative ninny a “you” thing.

    • angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)

      I’ve said this a handful of times already, but win cap applies to 12 game seasons and regular season.

      Regarding Leach, I’ve also said this at least a dozen times: 1 year with another guy’s players doesn’t tell much of a story. Leach has taken teams to better bowl games, and multiple times. He has a higher highs and lower lows.

      • VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        A regular dozen or a baker’s dozen?

      • BeavInEugene says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)

        1 year with the other guys players has been enough at UCLA, UA, ASU, as well as Texas A&M and Ohio State. Leach was fired from Texas Tech for player abuse, the same damn thing he is being investigated of as we speak. He won’t even have a second year to turn it around.

        He was a bad choice, and you wanted him SO bad! Riley is doing well and Leach is failing…big time.

        Your better bowl argument is complete BS! Save for the 2008 season when Leach went 11-2 his season are on par with Riley. He went to ‘better’ bowls because the Big12 had better bowl games then the Pac12. If the Holiday Bowl was the Pac12′s #3 game and not the Sun Bowl, Riley would have two-three Holiday Bowl Apperances. Just like Leach. You love facts and trends but you ignore them when defending Leach compared to Riley. Why?

        Also, weren’t you in favor of wanting Dan Hawkins from Boise to come here in 2003? Ouch! Very Thankful you’re just a fool with a website and not the actual AD. We could be Colorado!

        • BeavItOrNot says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +6 (from 10 votes)

          Eugene, keep it down, Angry will shut down the site for a day again if you question him. Or even worse, Angry’s Pollyannas (Angryannas) will get you.

        • ObjCritic says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Well, Sumlin was advocated for on this site for a head coaching job as well. Rich Rod and Grahm are flakey, Mora’s not been a proven winner anywhere.

          Who’s point are you trying to make?

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Agreed that Graham is flaky, but Rich Rod? I think he was just dumb for trying to take the spread to Michigan. He had to fight with the traditionalists who all talk fondly of Michigan football like Jim Harbaugh talks of Bo Schembechler. He was just set up to fail, and if there’s anything to be said about the man it has to be that he spent money buying out at WVU to go somewhere he should have known he couldn’t succeed.

            I sure am thankful guys like Sumlin and Dykes aren’t coaching in this conference. We’ll see what happens at Cal, though.

        • angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

          weren’t you in favor of wanting Dan Hawkins from Boise to come here in 2003

          No. This site didn’t exist in 2003, and I didn’t post on any forums.

          UCLA, UA, ASU, as well as Texas A&M and Ohio State

          All recruiting hotbeds.
          —————————————–
          I was in favor of Leach coming on as an OC, BTW. And never wanted him “so bad”. I said it would be nice if OSU could actually entertain free agent coaches. The search function is your friend.

          Leach has higher highs and lower lows. He’d be a better OC than Danny Langsdorf, who is horrible, so there is no debating that. He has a better record and more prestigious bowls than Riley. You can’t argue facts.

          If you want to judge his character, sure. He’s a headcase. A headcase with higher highs and lower lows.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Leach would be better than DL, but that’s setting the bar a little low. I still think Leipold should be the guy… even though he had a down year with a 7-3 record this year.

          • BeavItOrNot says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

            Here is what Angry said about Leach/WSU in June concerning his Beav’s 2012 predictions:

            “Washington State: Mike Leach, the guy Beaver fans said would never coach at OSU, now coaches for OSU’s doppelganger. Even without his own recruits, I think Leach will win this game and possibly big. Beavs simply have not shown they can stop an efficient short passing game. This is probably the most interesting game on the schedule. Beav fans are going to be left wondering “what if” as they soak in the loss.”

            I think it is safe to assume he figured Leach would some success in his first year with someone else’s guys. Or at least beat Banker’s horrible defense that could never stop Leach’s offense.

            • angry says:
              VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: -8 (from 8 votes)

              I thought he’d do better than Wulff. Most people did.
              But when we were talking about Leach years ago, I said I would rather have him as OC.

              What you’re trying to do is obvious and futile. Nobody is going to stop reading the site because I thought Mike Leach’s offense would be better this year. Give up.

              • Jack says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                I think you underestimated the dumpster fire that Wulff left. Their football and hoops teams were just out of control and loaded with 1AA players. I still don’t understand how Bone gets to keep his job with the poor dedication to his personnel that he has displayed at PSU and now Wazzu.

                • bone says:
                  VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                  I don’t know either.

                • angry says:
                  VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

                  Yeah, I mean, how many games would Riley win with WSU’s roster? Probably would have a shot at 2 but misuse timeouts and wind up with 1. lol

                  • Jack says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                    I think Chipster would have trouble getting to five wins with that roster. And I can only imagine his frustrated pressers after each loss.

                • mckalk says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                  Bone somehow beats Oregon St.

                  • Jack says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                    He does it by disrupting cuts by running his guys through the same cuts. It’s actually illegal, and refs should call it. If you’ll recall, Jared got chippy with Motum for doing just that once last year. That was an obvious foul by Motum, but it wasn’t called just like many other run-ins of the sort were never called.

                    Bone will be lucky to get to .500 this year, and he won’t beat the Beavs.

              • bendbeaver says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: +2 (from 8 votes)

                Is beavitornot trying to get people to stop reading the site? Seems like he’s just serving up humble pie. I’m surprised there hasn’t been more of it this season.

                • bendbeaver says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)

                  Leach has a similar conference record to Riley’s. Leach has a better bowl history because of a weaker schedule and a weaker conference.

                • BeavItOrNot says:
                  VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: +10 (from 12 votes)

                  I actually love this site – it’s the only one I read anymore for many reasons (format, recruiting insight, general knowledge, discussion on the two “bballs”). The problem is that it has become too unbalanced to the point that when the Beavs exceed just about everyone’s preseason expectations, nobody here seems to enjoy it because its not the Rose Bowl (apparently Angry’s only/primary measure of success). It got especially tired when Angry became laughably unhinged after our first loss of the season.

                  As far as Leach is concerned, Angry made excuses for Leach above (namely that you can’t win in Year One) and I was pointing out that he did not think that would be a problem in June when he predicted Leach would win, even big, against OSU. A little fact-checking can be useful when the hyperbole is blaring.

                  Some perspective around here would be nice. And when Angry is wrong, and his Angryannas are wrong, and things don’t go as badly as they all predict, he/they should step up and recognize that. Instead, we get “F**k you Riley” after OSU “falls” to 6-1 and the website is shut down for a day.

                  Critical is fine (I for one thought Riley overreacting to Mannion’s poor performance against UW and starting Vaz would lead to the Stanford loss – it did and I think that one is on Riley). But being negative just to be negative is not as interesting. And I think Angry and some others have begun to fall into that category where they simply assume anything we do will fail (Rod Perry vs Keith Heyward anyone?) without giving it a chance or really thinking about it.

                  • angry says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: -5 (from 9 votes)

                    I’m so sick of this “unbalanced” argument.
                    Your mindset is that we should cheerlead after the Washington game because we were 6-1 and not 1-6. I don’t view life that way. If want my team in a Rose Bowl, and they hand a game over to a poor team, I’m going to be pissed. I don’t see any silver lining in that. You do because you don’t think it’s Rose Bowl or bust, where as I do. I could care less about 5th tier bowls. Since it’s my site, that’s the perspective you’re going to get. If you want to read about silver linings and delude yourself that they matter, go read BeaverBlitz.

                  • BeavItOrNot says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +5 (from 9 votes)

                    Thank you for making my point for me – with you it’s either “cheerlead” or say “f**k you to Riley” and shut your site down; its the Rose Bowl or a “5th tier bowl”; its agree with your perspective or be deluded somewhere else.

                    Well guess what, I can be upset that we lost to a Washington team that is not as good as us (imagine that!) without wearing a clown suit because of it; I can be happy with the Alamo Bowl or the Holiday Bowl even if those bowls are not the Rose Bowl (especially when making a bowl at all was seemingly in jeopardy); I can read this site, enjoy it, and still think your “perspective” is inconsistent and sometimes just silly. By the way, I agree that BeaverBlitz et al. have their heads in the sand. I just think this site has become too unbalanced in the other direction.

                    Your basic argument that it always one extreme or the other is the root cause of the problem. I think we need to add a little sense to the mix sometimes.

                  • angry says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: -4 (from 6 votes)

                    I can be happy with the Alamo Bowl or the Holiday Bowl even if those bowls are not the Rose Bow

                    You talk about not wearing a clown suit, they you say you’re happy with the Holiday Bowl/Sun Bowl. Come on, now.

                    If they made an Alamo Bowl, I’d call it progress but also a disappointment (since they controlled their RB destiny and lost that fate by giving a game to a bad team). Alamo is a B- bowl game, which is a step up for OSU. So yeah, minor progress. You might notice that folks around here don’t like the mediocrity bowls. We’re never going to like them no matter how you try to spin it.

                    “Add a little sense”?
                    You’re now being manipulative, trying to spin this into a mental health issue, inferring there’s something wrong with people who want the program to take the ever elusive next step and nitpick the things preventing us from taking those steps. There isn’t anything wrong with criticizing small details. Now that recruiting has picked up, small details are going to determine more outcomes.

                  • BeavItOrNot says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +5 (from 9 votes)

                    Stop creating straw men to rebut. I said some sense was needed to combat your extremism. I never said anything about not paying attention to details or criticizing small details when it’s called for. Dude, read a little more carefully.

                    You are the tea party of Beaver fans.

                  • Krogercomplete says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

                    It is the Ricky Bobby, “if you’re not first your last” mentality that bothers me, and that ironically (or not) has only increased in prevalence/intensity with the Beavs’ success this year. It is the death rattle of the uber pessimist watching their “perspective” slowly lose relevance.

                    Even Ricky Bobby figured it out t the end.

                  • angry says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: -2 (from 6 votes)

                    I’ve never written or spoken, “if you’re not first your last” in my life. If you’re not first, you’re probably second, third, fourth, etc. And you’re probably going to an irrelevant bowl game. Last? Probably not, that’s reserved for CO for the foreseeable future. There’s a handful of trolls who are somewhat obsessed with analyzing the blog rather than the Beavs. Seems like you guys could talk about this forever.

                    It is the death rattle of the uber pessimist watching their “perspective” slowly lose relevance.

                    Yeah, that’s what it is.
                    /sarc

                  • BeavItOrNot says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +9 (from 9 votes)

                    So now anyone that questions your analysis or dares to criticize it is a troll? Do you get the irony of that? Probably not. Your whole blog is about criticizing how others roll, but the moment someone questions your opinions or “perspective,” you call those folks trolls. I wonder what Bob D and Mike Riley would call you.

                  • angry says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: -3 (from 5 votes)

                    a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

                    Yes, the fact that this thread isn’t about me or this blog, yet that’s what you want to talk about incessantly, makes you a troll. You’re trying to engineer a reaction. I’ve seen this over and over on the internet.

                    And now more false statements, such as this blog is about criticizing others. You know that’s not true. When someone does their job I note it (e.g. Praised Riley’s play calling early in the year, credited the refs for calling a good game last week, etc etc, hundreds of examples).

                    In the past week, a handful of anti-angrys have popped up, obsessed with the win cap theory, and in general obsessed with saying “you’re wrong”. Yeah, when you author a few hundred posts in public you’re going to be wrong sometimes. The weird thing is that some of these things I’m apparently wrong about haven’t even happened yet. lol

                  • krogercomplete says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)

                    The Ricky Bobby reference is just an illustration. I also don’t think you ever had sex with Amy Adams on a bar table. How about this, “if you’re not in the Rosebowl, you don’t matter,” or however else you’d like to phrase it. I think you understand.

                    As for the troll reference, this site is very much about the Beavs, but it is also very much about your opinion of the Beavs. It’s your beaver blog, that is the nature of it. You share your opinions of the Beavs, and people talk about that. Sometimes you get called out, and that is also the nature of a forum like this. And sometimes there are folks who read the blog every day, but seldom post, until someone says something they feel compelled to respond to. Sometimes people are just trying to stir the pot, but sometimes they have legit complaints/comments. Focus on the substance.

                  • angry says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: -2 (from 6 votes)

                    if you’re not in the Rosebowl, you don’t matter

                    But that is true.

                    Do you think anyone knows or cares who played in the 2007 Emerald Bowl? The game has no prestige, and no relevance to the sport. I believe the Beavs took a financial loss playing that game. If your objective is to play another game, then yes, the game has relevance to that particular Oregon State fan with that goal. Nobody else, though.

                    If you’re point is that a bowl game shows improvement this year, then yes. It does. But the ante’s been upped, and as soon as it was, classic Riley showed up and choked. That’s a story worth discussing more than improvement (which was bound to happen since we’ve noted over and over that recruiting has picked up). See: http://angrybeavs.com/football/6613

                  • krogercomplete says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)

                    My point is you are defining success in an extremely limited fashion. BSC bowl = successful season; anything less = mediocrity that no one should care about. I’ll admit I don’t know exactly where to draw the line at what constitutes success and what doesn’t, but I wouldn’t draw the line at the BCS bowls, and I think what constitutes success will change from season to season depending on the circumstances. Getting to a BCS bowl is an elite accomplishment, but there has to be room for “success” short of ellite. Maybe your perspective is more nuanced than I appreciate, but it has that all-or-nothing feel to it.

                    I will say that finishing the regular season 9-3, ranked in the top 20, and bound for the Holiday Bowl constitutes a successful season in most every year, with most every team in the country, and this particular year for the Beavs, is frankly incredible.

                    I walked into this argument with my phrasing, but, if we want to talk about what people around the nation actually care about or remember, we are going to go down a useless rabbit hole that will exclude most everyone from consideration. Maybe no one today gives a shit about the 2007 Emerald Bowl, but they don’t care about the 2007 Fiesta Bowl either. You could argue people only really care about the national champion, and that even the champions from a few years ago people forget about and slide into irrelevance. Or maybe, on a national level, most people only really care about the SEC.

                  • angry says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: -2 (from 6 votes)

                    You really think a Holiday Bowl after this year’s start is a success? Remember Holiday = Sun.

                    I said I’d be (grudgingly) content with an Alamo Bowl (formerly Holiday Bowl) since OSU has never made that game, it shows progress, and has a smidgen of prestige (which will help recruiting).

                    If we wind up in the new Holiday/Sun bowl, though, that’s mediocre. And after Riley’s only fast start, it’s a kick in the balls. Expectations change throughout a season. If you asked me at the start if I’d be happy with an Alamo Bowl, I’d say yes. If you asked me after week 6, I’d say no.

                    This is pretty normal with everything, not just athletics. If a band releases a good record, you anticipate the next one and expect it to be great. You expect the iphone 5 to be better than the iphone 4. Etc. But nobody would expect Apple to create a great phone from the get go, they only expected it after seeing prior versions. Well, over the first six games we saw good, so we expected improvement and greatness down the stretch. When most of us skeptics finally gave in and said we believed in the team, they laid in egg in the big game, in typical Riley fashion. To me it confirms why you can’t trust in this guy. He will always break your heart and always revert to the mean. He simply is average to good, not great.

                  • BeavItOrNot says:
                    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)

                    Check out the +/-’s of the posts above and ask yourself, who’s the troll? Can you be a troll on your own blog? I guess so.

                  • krogercomplete says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)

                    To answer your question, yes I will be happy with the Holiday bowl, and I know which bowl it is. The holiday bowl is not a mediocre outcome. The abuse of this word is unreal.

                    The fact that you would have only begrudgingly been happy with the #2 bowl in the conference on the heels of a 3-9 season is telling, but it nicely frames the gulf between us, and there is not much more to gain through this back and forth. As to the fast start, of course it raised my expectations in the moment, but I tempter my ultimate conclusions with some broader persepctive. If we end with three losses, it doesn’t much matter when in time the losses come. It is difficult to get through a college football season only losing three games, and most teams don’t accomplish that. And it is incredibly difficult to maintain an undefeated season. Almost always, no matter the team, no matter the coach, something doesn’t go right and the magic ends. There is a let down of some kind. That much you can typically count on, and its not just Riley.

                    When I step back and look at where we’ve come from this season, I see success.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -3 (from 5 votes)

          Dan Hawkins in 2003?

          That one came out of left field.

          I personally didn’t want Leach because he’s just Riley, only weird. Don’t forget also that the Big XII only played 8 conference games per year. So Leach just did at Lubbock what Riley has done at Corvallis, namely created teams who played better than the crap recruiting sites would predict given their arbitrary systems… and moronic followers who pay money for that stuff.

          The abuse allegations are crap lies, and you buying into them makes you a crap-eater. It’s nice that you can take that crap, smear it all over yourself and make yourself a smelly little fool. You, Craig James and Marquess Wilson all deserve each other. Weak-minded little crap-spreading quitters like you are below pathetic. I have no skin in the “Leach will/won’t succeed” argument. Frankly, I don’t care much except that I want to beat him when we face him. But you can take your libelous little crap-eating mind somewhere else if all you want to do is make a bed with quitters and liars.

          • BeavInEugene says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            The abuse allegations are crap lies?

            You have insider info you want to share or just an opinion? You’re an odd fella jack!

            • Jack says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: -4 (from 4 votes)

              Go ask the liars who made the accusations. One is being sued for defamation and will lose that lawsuit as he rightfully should. The other made accusations without any specifics and ran away and hid. And he still won’t specify what nobody else on the team he quit has even remotely pretended to see.

              Yes, they are crap lies. And you are a liar for bringing them up as if they were true. You’re worse than a liar for trying to smear someone with lies which have no foundation all for the purpose of your small-minded and petty half-rant. You need to check yourself, because you stink to high heaven.

              • BeavInEugene says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)

                If they are such ‘crap lies’ why was Leach fired from Texas Tech? Why is WSU and the Pac12 investigating the claims? I mean, if the mighty JackBeav says they are all lies, why even bother?

                Just out of curiosity though, since you seem to think I am spreading all these horrid lies. Where did I make that claim? All I said was that Leach was fired from TT for player abuse. That is 100% true and fact. That is the reason he was fired! Now, that doesn’t mean the claim itself was true or valid, but he was in fact fired because of the abuse aligation. And, he is in fact currently under invesigation by the Pac12 for player abuse. I never, once said these were true or that I believed them. I just pointed out the facts. You took that and starting ranting and raving like you’re part of the Leach family and made yourself look like a classless idiot!

                • Jack says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)

                  You took it to this level:
                  ” He won’t even have a second year to turn it around.
                  He was a bad choice, and you wanted him SO bad! Riley is doing well and Leach is failing…big time.”

                  You used the same hyperbole you accuse angry of using, except you do it in the opposite direction. And you do it so emphatically that the only way you can be right is if the lies are true. You support them and bring them up for your own purposes and you stink because of it.

                  I have no problem with the eating crow part of the argument if you would have left it there. A few jabs are fun. But when you start lying, I also have no problem calling you a liar. And when you transform your eating crow moment into some petty little display of hatred and self-loathing, I have no problem calling you out for that either.

                  Like I said, I have no skin in this Leach argument. But I don’t abide dishonesty.

                • Jack says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)

                  And while you correct yourself in this last post, Leach was not fired for player abuse as you strictly worded it. He was fired for allegations of the same which are now being shown as not only false, but unjust in the eyes of the law.

                  There is an investigation now because some namby pamby quitter with entitlement issues (something many of his teammates and students at Wazzu DO say) decided he could use that lie in order to justify his delusion. It was made into a distraction which needs to be expeditiously vetted so other liars don’t get the same idea in the future.

                  If you’ll remember, Wulff had many similar issues with players who were beholden to Doba and wouldn’t buy into a culture change. But Wulff seemed to capitulate and let those players slide. And he’s out of a job because of it. Leach may be a weird one with weird methods. But he’s not going to back down because someone with an agenda is out to get him. He didn’t do it before, and he won’t do it now.

        • Fightingbeaver says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

          Riley doing well……..what a joke. Riley is doing the same thing for the past 12 years……mediocre football. That’s all we are getting or will ever get from Riley. With the talent we have there was no reason for us to lose to UW or Stanford. The team was not prepared for those games, it looked like they did not even practice. Riley can’t carry through when things get a little tough…….but I doubt if he cares one way or the other anyway. He has his job and extension so he feels good.

          • BeavItOrNot says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

            What a dumb post. Have you paid attention to the recruiting and talent level stockpiled by UW and Stanford lately? I am not saying we could not have won those (road) games, but to suggest our talent level is such that losing them was a joke, well that’s a … joke.

            As far as your suggestion that Riley does not care if he wins or loses, I think that’s probably baseless. You could ask him though, maybe you’re right and he is just collecting the paycheck because his 401k has taken a big hit and he needs the money. Yeesh.

            • Jack says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)

              Losing to UW was a joke. There was no reason for that loss.

              But when you talk to Fighting, you need to remind him that he needs to be shocked that we’ve surpassed his three win prediction for the season and that his 1-3 September never happened. If you were in on that conversation, then you were probably as annoyed as I was.

              • Fightingbeaver says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

                You’re correct Jack. But I ate crow on the 1-3 prediction some time ago. Bringing it up again gets old. I also think we should and could have won the Stanford game. Good post though Jack.

              • Joe Avezzano says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                Joe Avezzano thinks the UW team that played OSU was not too bad that day and as the season’s progressed they’ve improved. With the exception of Colorado maybe, every P12 game is tough.

                Can we please stop being so dramatic about the UW game like the Beavers lost to a high school team or something? That was a disappointing loss, and Joe’s attitude toward UW is well documented, but laying all the blame at Riley’s feet is just silly and undignified.

                • Jack says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

                  Nope. UW sucked that day. We just sucked more. And their next game against Cal was more of the same. Our RB’s were falling down for eight yards a pop, and we decided not to do that any more. If anything, we can make the excuse that Wheaton wasn’t there, and that affected the passing game in bad ways. But that kind of gives more relevance to the need for more running game instead.

                • mckalk says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                  Joe, did you every beat the Huskies in your esteemed coaching career? I can’t recall if it was amongst your six wins. And I’m sorry, but I do blame you for all 47 losses, the tie I can forgive.

                  • Joe Avezzano says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                    Joe Avezzano chooses to be forward-looking. Dwelling on the past is a fool’s errand and a waste of precious energy.

            • Fightingbeaver says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: -6 (from 10 votes)

              What a lame post. Why don’t you re-read the post again. With the talent we had we should and could of won those games……who ever did the play calling sucked big time. And what is the big secret of who calls the offensive plays. I believe Riley is a liar and Langindork is and has been doing most of the play calling. It’s what you call “blind loyalty”.

              Why should Riley care. He has his job and an extension. He never was a coach to be the big time games. He is more than happy with toilet bowls.

  • MonkeyLuven says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    My recent realization is that this year’s team has had a chance to win every single game all the way down to the final play. Some of our wins came down to such game play. Though we had two, hard-fought losses, they provided teachable moments.

    Now at the end of the season, I see a decisive win at Cal, but have one question: Given our team’s mentality and style of play all season, do we keep it close with the ducks all game long, or will the Civil War be our first demoralizing loss?

    • Beavergopher says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

      You mean third demoralizing loss.

      • bone says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I think demoralizing is not the correct word. All the losses have been demoralizing. Maybe blowout is a better adjective.

        • BeaverFever says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Really, blowout is a better term to describe two games lost by a total of 5 points? I hope, for your sake, that I am missing the sarcasm.

          • bone says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Let me clarify. The two losses have been demoralizing, most losses are. I was trying to say that the civil would not be our first demoralizing loss, but instead our first loss that doesn’t come down to the last play.

    • oneoldbeav says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Monkey, good job on the AngryBeavs PickEm thing. But, how about SadBeaver, walkin’ away from all of us now!

      As to teachable moments I note that many of the wins provided them as well. Some lessons seem lost on Riley, still can’t believe there was good reason to abandon the run last week. Now he probably thinks Enger will be off his game so no chance to up the run count against Cal, I really hope I am wrong on that.

      • Sad Beaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Yeah seems I have a good feel for this year. Anyone think UCLA pulls out two wins to end the year(USC/Stanford)? They might be scary next year or they might fall apart. I give it 50/50, but its the best win on our resume I think.

  • ObjCritic says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I haven’t read into this development in detail, but the process smells bad and it looks like more post-season b.s. from the NCAA and the broadcasters….

    Remind me again why were supposed to keep caring who the “champion” is, particularly when within 5 years they’re typically hit with some recruiting violation.

    Is this really about determining, on the field, the D1 champion?

    http://www.oregonlive.com/collegefootball/index.ssf/2012/11/issues_and_answers_another_ste.html#incart_river

  • beaverkman says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

    Greg Biggins tweet DB Steven Nelson College of the Sequoas has decommitted from Georgia and is very close to committing to Or St. Is this the Rod Perry impact, a ton of DB in this class?

  • bone says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I can’t be 100% sure if the last two recruits actually gave a verbal, haven’t seen any “it’s a great day to be a beaver” tweets.

  • bigditch says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    7 more points and were all happy….stay positive and lets finish

  • ddd says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

    who cares if the 9th win is against nicholls state??? it is still 9 wins and the previous 8 came against quality teams. Did erickson not beat eastern washington to get 11?

    • Fightingbeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Erickson also beat the ucks big time.

      • Krogercomplete says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

        So hopefully when the team gets in its time machine this year it will finally be able to prove that Riley can alo beat that duck team from a decade ago. I am not sure what is going on with the ducks this year, not that it matters.

    • angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -3 (from 3 votes)

      I don’t care, I just think it’s funny and apropos he’d blow up the win cap theory versus that team.
      It’s legit 9 wins, though. All Riley has to do is beat Cal.

  • matt b says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    One game at a time fellas. Cal still has something to prove and could be dangerous but Beavers need to play aggressive. Cal, under Tedford, has always always been a sucker for the qb roll out and throw back to the tight end deep behind the lb and safety. They also cannot defend the bootleg with te/fb release to the flat. OS should be able to run over, thru or around the left tackle to get the Cal QB. But, next week, Oregon is dangerously thin at several positions and Stanford may beat up a few more guys. Oregon keeps losing important parts. This will not help them if they make it to the last dance.

  • beaverkman says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Good article from John Hunt (I think he is the best beat writer) on Rod Perry and how his coaching different things.
    http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2012/11/osu_football_under_rod_perry_b.html#incart_river

    • ObjCritic says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

      I loved this part:

      “There are constant reminders. Not only does Perry stress the picks in practice, but he also has his son, Rod, chart interceptions, tipped balls and passes broken up. Those all go on a big board in the meeting room, and that fosters the competition that keeps the picks coming.”

      I advocated a few years back for some kind of empirical measures to motivate players and measure improvements. I suggested some kind of “point system” for form tackling because tackling had degraded so much, and people thought that was too much. Probably was, but an organized coach and teacher can break down the game elements into empirical measures to emphasize, monitor, and improve player performance. Perry seems to have done that this year.

      Reynolds should be solid next year, praying that Martin makes substantive gains between now and next fall….

      • beavsbeavsbeavs says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

        Martin showed well in his lone start this year. I think he’ll be fine. Everybody hates on him but I think he gets put in unfair situations quite a bit. Often times when the Beavs go to a nickel package, Jordan Poyer elects to be the nickel corner (I’m not sure why but I have a feeling it’s because it’s an easier position to get picks from) which forces Martin, the no.3 corner, to be stuck on an island with the opposing teams no. 1 receiver. So i’m not surprised when he doesn’t win a lot of those battles. He has also been the victim of quite a few bogus PI calls this year.

        • Beavergopher says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          The PI’s have gone way down with Perry. Seemed like we got one on every downfield throw the last couple years.

  • beaverkman says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

    Albany just beat UW in Seattle 63-62.

  • homefry says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    just saw the finish–great put back by Gotti on a missed WA free throw to put UW up 1…Albany got the ball out-of-bounds with 7 seconds-guard just drove around his man to snag an easy lay up.

    Great reaction of UW fans while the Great Danes pranced on the court!

  • osubaby says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Watching Standord replay, right before the half Vaz got rocked on a late hit not called by the refs and was slow to get up. I believe this may have been what caused him to struggle later on in the game. He just never looked great in the 2nd half.

    • beaverkman says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Was that the one where Kelly missed his block?

      • osubaby says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        It’s where he overthrew a wide open Cummings. Not sure about the block, the replay didn’t show it. All the underneath routes were working but the down field throws looks like shit.

  • homefry says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

    Just some gambling reading material if you care…this guy knows his hoops and I’ve been watching his picks for several years now–he’s not a tout-this is all free material. His take on the first two hoops games..

    If you take away all of the dumb decisions, the sometimes too crazy risks on the defensive end, and poor shooting, Niagara could be really good. They’re young, a roster with only two seniors in 6’8” Scooter Gillette and 6’8” LaSalle transfer Devon White, is paired with a ton of freshman and sophomore guards. Nothing is pretty on the offensive end, in fact, I would describe it as chaos, but somehow they got the job done last year. Simply put, the talent on this team is high. Now, defensively, this team had major problems last year. They forced teams to beat them from the perimeter by playing a zone, and it burned them. Towards the end of the year, they still played a zone but they moved it out further to start defending the perimeter. It paid dividends as they closed the year winning five of their last seven, and increasing their forced turnovers by quite a bit. I don’t know what system they’ll employ this year, but note this: Offensively, the way this team is put together is a quantity over quality team. If they can get up a ton of shots, force the opponent to play fast with them, they’re going to have a chance to win every time out. The energy is there (sometimes too much), and when they play in that free-flow game, their style is awfully
    tough to compete with. I don’t want to make this sound like this team’s a world-beater – I’m not. The defense still needs to improve more than anything, but they will force turnovers and get after it defensively against teams who don’t treasure the ball.

    Which leads me to Oregon State. They return five of their top six, losing Cunningham to the NBA (big loss). They were one of the fastest teams in the country last year, and that should very well continue. Their non-conference home game possession totals went a little something like this: 79, 75, 71, 65, 67, 77, 74, and 74. That’s pretty fast. Niagara wants to play the same way. Possessions are going to be there, somewhere around the 75-77 range I would assume which would put this point total somewhere in the high 150’s or low 160’s. Both teams force a ton of turnovers leading to transition points, and both teams convert on those transition points. I’m a little lenient on taking an over that involves a team traveling across country and I’m a
    little lenient about Craig Robinson bustin’ out a zone defense he used rarely last year, but the value is probably there in doing so. Both teams are essentially playing against a similar style to what they’ve been practicing against since September, and that’s got to mean something for an increase in offensive production.

    Lean: Over (W)

    New Mexico State and Oregon State will more than likely approach close to 80 possessions. New Mexico State loses their two slowest big men, so they project to be a bit faster this year as awkward as that sounds (ranked 22nd in pace last year). Oregon State will be playing its second game on the weekend, but they’re basically facing a similar style to what they faced on Friday night, so nothing out of the ordinary here. These are two of the fastest teams in the country, and this game should play like it. A little hesitant on OSU playing two in three (especially after playing 82 possessions Friday night), and for as a high of a
    total as this is, it’s still early in the season. Probably be kicking myself in the junk for lying off of this one, but have some doubts. Regardless, wouldn’t surprise me to see both teams go over 70 with ease. In regards to Oregon State, they just scored 102 points in 82 possessions for a 1.24 ppp average, which is insane in game 1 of the season. The first blog post at the site noted
    that in 128 scenarios last year where a team scored 100 points, only ten instances saw a team put together the same efficiency in the next game. We should see a drop in Oregon State’s offense based on theory, but as fast as this game is going to be played, in addition to the fact that they’ll like the style (the same style they played Friday and same they have been practicing against since, well, last year), there is a strong chance this one sees the same amount of scoring, if not more. And, even if Oregon State is to come back to the norm (87 of the 128 instances saw teams drop in efficiency by at least 0.20 points), they probably still score 80 if this game gets to the 80 possessions I project. Just a lean to the over…if it’s available. (L)

    • angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I’m looking forward to Thursday’s game. Is ‘Bama any good?

      • beavsbeavsbeavs says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I would say that they’re a notch below the beavs. I watched them play South dakota st last week and they barely hung on (although SDSU has a guy named Nate Wolters that everyone needs to see play at some point this year if they haven’t already, one of the best players in the country). Defense is pretty good but their offense is really crappy.

        • angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Cool.
          Last year they were pretty good. Guess they lost some guys? I was hoping they were still good as I want to see the Beavs get tested.

          • beavsbeavsbeavs says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Yeah they lost their two best big men from last year but they have some good guards. Should be a good test of our perimeter defense,

      • GoBeavs90 says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)

        Bama is a really good matchup for the Beavers. OSU’s defense is a defense that will pack the paint and make you have to consistently make outside shots. Alabama has one guy who can hurt the Beavers in Trevor Lacey. He’s their best player, shooter and scorer. Beavers will likely key in on him and try to limit his looks. Nobody else is going to concern the Beavers as far as outside shots go.

        Two of their guards, Trevor Releford and Rodney Cooper can score as well, but they won’t hurt the Beavers much from three. OSU is going to make them try and make shots from the outside like they did to NMSU guards. They’ll try to force it in the paint but the Beavers have Eric Moreland, Angus Brandt and Devon Collier to protect the rim when the guards get in the paint. This will allow guards to play heavy on ball pressure against Alabama guards knowing they have rim protectors behind them. The pressure should lead to turnovers and the Beavers and OSU is one of the best teams in the country in the open court.

        Alabama only has two guys that play that are over 6’8″, two 7+ centers that never play together. When Brandt and Moreland are in together, the Beavers should grab some offensive rebounds. The centers will guard Brandt and Brandt will pull them out to the third point line, this will allow Collier to go to work in the paint without having to worry about a shot blocker. Moreland will be able to cut to the basket and should finish against smaller players. If the centers don’t guard Brandt, Angus can just post up guards in the paint for buckets at will. Pick your poison.

        Alabama’s pick and roll defense has been poor at best. They showed a tendency to go under the pick and Wolters picked them apart in game one, Starks is a similarly good shooter and he will go off on Alabama. When they went over the pick, they rarely rotated back to pick man on the pop. That man will be Brandt often, if Alabama doesn’t rotate to Brandt, he will kill them. Brandt is the best big man outside shooter in college basketball, IMO, and now he’s no longer hesitating. That’s scary for defenses. Even if Bama goes over the pick and stays at home on Brandt, Starks is so quick he can get to the rim and showed ability to finish amongst the trees and he has the court vision to find teammates with the penetration in the lane that leads to threes for guys like Nelson. The Beavers have so many options on offense on a pick and roll, it’s ridiculous.

        Alabama is going to want to play a slow it down game with the Beavs. Their chances in an up and down contest with the Beavers would be slim at best. I still think OSU will be able to force turnovers and speed ‘Bama up at times. With OSU’s improved defense, better inside-out game, versatility, I think the Beavers win 83-71.

        The ideal 2nd opponent at MSG is Villanova. They’re better than Purdue, IMO, a win over Nova would be more meaningful come selection Sunday, I think. The Beavers winning the 2K Sports Classic would be a nice accomplishment, would give the guys confidence that they can beat anybody, this is big especially when they still have a huge game against Kansas in KC. Also gives the Beavers some nice exposure.

        Really looking forward to these games.

  • Jack says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

    Hallice Cooke was in a couple hours ago. One down, two to go.
    https://twitter.com/Hallywood_3

  • Dwill03 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Cliff siting Scout as saying Steve Nelson verbal’d yesterday as well. Offers from Oklahoma, Georgia, looks like a solid get. Hopefully instant impact. Perry getting a good group of athletes to mold. If they can now get Cav and Seumalo some beef to work with, this class may do a good job of plugging the holes.

    • Dwill03 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

      citing, F%&$!!!!

      • Beavergopher says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

        Watch him not qualify. Seems to happen all the time with the Beavs, so I wouldn’t get too excited until he is enrolled and practicing.

        • ObjCritic says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Supposedly he’s worked on and maintained his academics in JC. My concern is that he seems indecisive for a “committed” player. Maybe Perry’s NFL pedigree set the hook; I think that’s what we have to hope for.

  • Jack says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Don’t forget the other sports are receiving NLI’s today too. Baseball should have a nice class this year.
    https://twitter.com/Beaver_Baseball

  • ObjCritic says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Didn’t realize this: “Cal has been within a single score of the opponent in five of its eight losses this season.”

    OSU’s average margin of victory is about 10 points, loss margin 3.5.

    On the recent DB recruits, is Arnold a OLB candidate, or staying at safety? His strength is supposed to be run support.

    Looks like the Beavs are improving DB quality and depth, still be great to see a few DT’s. Although now I’m a little concerned about LB quality and depth based on Bray’s remarks that if there were more LB’s capable of executing, they’d be playing.

    • Jack says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Where are you getting that quote? Did they mean they were within a single score in all those losses after the other team scored?

      Nevada – 7 points
      tOSU – 7
      USC – 18
      ASU – 10
      SU – 18
      UU – 22
      UW – 8
      Nikegon – 42

      • whatever says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        It was posted as quoted on Oregonlive, but obviously that’s incorrect.

        Perhaps they meant that Cal has been within 1 score in the 4th quarter in 5 of their losses, which is true.

        • ObjCritic says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Yeah, that’s where I got it and I didn’t fact check.

          Perhaps your interpretation is correct.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          That’s a little misleading. In their first two losses, they did come back despite many many mistakes and tie it against Nevada and tOSU… before they made more mistakes and lost. Against USC and ASU, they came back to start the fourth quarter within one score of the lead/tie, but they never possessed the ball when they were within that one score in the first quarter. And the UW game was so pathetic they should have just called it a tie by mutual forfeit and sent everyone home.

          • ObjCritic says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            “And the UW game was so pathetic they should have just called it a tie by mutual forfeit and sent everyone home.”

            Thanks for the laugh Jack.

  • Beavergopher says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Bray’s comments were troubling. Need some speedy OLB’s.

  • Jack says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Cheikh N’Diaye is in!

    I’ve heard rumors about LJ Westbrook and some wacky tobbacky from last week. Anyone know what’s going on there?

    • Beavergopher says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Is everybody a pothead out there?

    • GoBeavs90 says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Heard Westbrook was expelled and a good chance he’s not going to be a Beaver.

      • Jack says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        That’s along the lines of what I’ve heard due to a second strike against. But I’ve also heard there was an appeal process for him.

        I’m thinking even an appeal doesn’t save the ship offer though… unless it’s a probationary thing for Coach Rob, and it gets pushed to spring. Regardless, Coach Rob has to go back out and recruit or leave the spot open.

        • Beavergopher says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          That sucks. Dumb move kid. He was supposed to be pretty good and a good get for CR, correct?

      • Jack says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Never a bad time to bring up my fave. He’s that killer I always want on my teams. Names like Nate Wolters or Danny Ainge (without the weird temper tantrums) come to mind when I watch this tape. He would soooo compliment Cooke, N’diaye and the other underclassmen on the roster.

        • GoBeavs90 says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I feel more like he’s a shorter version of Gordan Hayward. Nice outside shot but can also go off the dribble and get in the lane and score. Really versatile. He would be a good fit.

  • Beavergopher says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Is the tall kid a project or does he have some legit skills?

    • Jack says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      He’s both. He’s not a blue-chipper, but he’s also not just some big lump in the middle with gangly arms and no coordination.

  • Beavergopher says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Related to the guy at U Dub?

  • bone says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    With the whole holiday bowl being the new sun bowl is correct. The holiday bowl takes the 3rd place PAC 12 team, which we have accomplished before witty Riley. I will argue that it is still more prestigious than the sun bowl based on the conference we are matched up against. And the big 12 is much better and more deep than the acc and big east. Still disappointed no roses this year.

    • ObjCritic says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      San Diego is better than El Paso. The opponent has a chance to be compelling, and history has shown that if you give Riley a month to prepare for a game that doesn’t really mean much, he’ll usually do pretty well. LV and 3-0 Sun Bowl the exceptions.

      And for the first time, because of the presence of Bray and Perry, I think the extra practice time could benefit player development. One of my frustrations with Riley’s staff is the extra bowl practices have never translated into empirical player development the subsequent seasons; slow 1-3 starts were the norm even after bowl game years.

      All of these ancillary benefits aside, I think anything less than 2nd place is a disappointment because it doesn’t represent program improvement. And this year in particular, beating a bad UW team probably changes the bowl quality meaningfully. Now it seems like OSU has to pray for UO to get all kinds of beat up in a win over Stanford, get an upset win over Oregon (for a quality win over a #1 team) and have Stanford and USC lose out(?) for the best scenario.

      • BeavInEugene says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

        I think people really need to get over UW being bad. Yes, OSU could have and should have beat them. However, with games vs CU and WSU left. They should end up 8-4 (6-3 in conference) with wins over two top 20 teams in OSU and Stanford and could very well end up being a top 20 BCS team as well.

        8-4, 6-3 conference rating and a top 25 team is not a bad team!

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

          Not true. They’ve backed into it. The Apple Cup should have been their effort to make it to bowl eligibility. Just because they’ve been lucky enough to get W’s because the teams they’ve faced chose those games to lay an egg doesn’t mean they did anything but dress and walk out on the field for those W’s.

          I won’t complain too much since it bolsters our SOS and keeps Sark in place. But they are just a horrible football team.

          And then there’s the fact they still have to actually play against CU and Wazzu. I don’t think they get to 8-4.

          • angry says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

            I agree, they are horrible. I wouldn’t be surprised to see CO, WSU, or both “upset” them.

            • WFO says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

              I was disappointed that Utah didn’t run the ball down their throats. I didn’t watch the game but the final score didn’t look great.

          • JasontheBeaver says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

            I think you’re both nuts on this one, the Fuskies destroy Colorado and beat the Cougars by 2 touchdowns.

            • Jack says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

              We shall see. It’s not like I care. Those games are about as compelling as spending an afternoon placing dirt under my fingernails then cleaning them out… over and over.

            • Beavergopher says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

              agree

        • Joe Avezzano says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +2 (from 4 votes)

          Give it up, dude. No matter what you say about the possible relative unsuckiness of any OSU opponent, it is always the Beavers’ own fault that they lose to such teams. There is no point in pragmatically and begrudgingly crediting those teams for a few plays well-executed when that would diminish our own self-flagellation and rending of garments.

          • Jack says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

            That’s true for Stanford, not UW. Both were very winnable games lost by poor play-calling and execution on the offensive side. But one was hard fought with a lot of good defensive execution on our side while giving up a couple incredible plays, and the other was UW.

            • angry says:
              VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 6 votes)

              The only thing bad about the Stanford loss was everyone acting like it was over at +9. There’s nothing wrong with losing to Stanford if a team gives they’re all and comes up short. Pretty coincidental that everything collapsed when the coach put on his shit-eating grin, though.

              cue the angrybeav.com trolls.

              • BeavInEugene says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: -1 (from 3 votes)

                Everything collasped so to speak, when 1) We had Hogan wrapped up for an loss and at the last second he tossed the ball to the RB who ran untouched for a TD. 2) When Vaz fumbled in OS territory.

                Not exactly sure why you think either of those were because Riley gave a fist pump over a made field goal, but your mind is pretty damn myopic so I guess in your bubble its because Riley showed some emotion?. You hate Riley and blame everything and anything on him. But won’t give him any credit for the 7 (and eventual 9 wins).

                • Jack says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)

                  Glad to see you’re taking the rest of our games for granted. Tell me, oh lover of optimism and all that is great for OSU, which game are we going to lose? Let’s just send the other two teams postcards so they don’t have to bother showing up for what you say will be a loss.

                  Everything collapsed in the beginning of the fourth quarter. We began to march on Stanford with a good mix of runs and passes, and we got within their 40… still winning, mind you. Then we decided to look at their defensive set and run three pass calls for -1 yards, followed by a punt which netted something like 20 yards.

                  Still not giving up, the D bent, but Reynolds made a nice play to take the ball away. Then Stanford did make one nice play for a TFL before another weird pass call occured which resulted in the Vaz fumble.

                  The killer was when we had them at about 2nd and 18, and they got a first down just running the ball with Taylor on two plays. That led to them scoring the go-ahead.

                  And i want to note here that I am baffled as to why Shaw would go for two when up four. That in my mind was as weird a play-call as any I saw from our side. I thought when we shut that down that Shaw may have cost his team all momentum they had gained.

                  They followed with the kick out of bounds and an offsides, and we took absolute control with 4.5 minutes left on a short field and… dinked around with a couple low percentage pass calls before punting on 4th and 2 with 4 minutes left.

                  It was over after that.

              • Joe Avezzano says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: +1 (from 7 votes)

                Riley’s grin was the reason the Beavers couldn’t hold their lead? Seriously? As an actual reason, not just for dramatic effect?

                Angry, there are many factors that determine the outcome of these contests, the vast majority un-knowable by the spectator. For this reason it seems foolish to point at something like smiling because of a good play and saying THAT is why we lost.

                • angry says:
                  VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: -5 (from 13 votes)

                  Obviously the grin didn’t lose the game (hard to believe that’s how you read the comment).
                  Do you think a real coach, like Mike Tomlin or Chip Kelly, has that reaction? They’re running over to their D and telling them to make a stand. What the Beavs needed most after that FG was a stop. Riley had a look of relief, like he thought he had the game won. D suddenly got sloppy and bendy after two great quarters. They let up because they had margin for error.

                  • Beavergopher says:
                    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                    Angry, I have to defend you. I had the exact same reaction. MR reacted like he won the powerball.
                    He could have clapped once for the made FG. I was pissed that they did not get a TD which might have iced the game at that point. Saban, Kelly, or any hyper successful coaches would have been pissed that they squandered an opportunity. This is the difference between good and great coaches.
                    How many games were lost in 2010 by red zone issues, three vs seven points.

            • Joe Avezzano says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

              Joe Avezzano submits that every poor playcall or play poorly executed (or both) features a good defensive play.

              Food for thought.

              • Jack says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)

                If you must… go ahead and show how repeatedly skipping the ball to wide open WR’s, throwing well behind them or over them while choosing not to take what the defense has given you over and over in the run game makes for better defensive plays than I made just sitting on my couch watching from 700 miles away.

                So you and I made just as effective a defensive play as the 11 defenders on many of those plays which you are submitting.

                Recognizing a lack of execution is a part of play-calling. So I don’t buy coaches who reason that they were simply fooled 14 times, shame on the players for not executing.

  • VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Who would ever have predicted that after a dismal 3-9 season that BDC would need to clear space for a shiny new Sun Bowl trophy? I can barley contain my enthusiasm. I’m hoping that he will put it on a road show, so we fans in the outlying areas can catch a glimpse. Sun Bowl…Sun Bowl!!!

    El Paso es magnifico! JB

    PS: My close personal friend Jeff Tedford asked me which tropical location is the shortest flight from Corvallis. As a master of the “hasty departure” from Corvallis I was honored to help.

  • Ackrite says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

    I know angry is taking a lot of shit for the win cap but I think the general idea is true. Whether it is 8 or 9 wins it doesn’t really matter? Riley isn’t going to consistently win 10+ game and compete for bcs games. My question is can we do better long term? If we fire Reilly, and hire the next chip does he stay more than 2-3 years? I would rather we try to shot the moon and fall short than stay in the middle. I think that is angry’s point, he isn’t happy staying in the middle with the hope of a down year in the PAC 12 the leads to us being in the RB at 9-3

    • WFO says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

      You pretty well nailed it. Whether we like it or not that’s the situation and I don’t see it changing.

      The thing that I can see pushing Riley’s cap upward is being surrounded by better coaches. The difference that Bray and Perry have made in one year really brings this into focus. Langsdorf needs to go. Special teams have been underwhelming. I think it’s time for new blood at those positions.

    • Fightingbeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +5 (from 13 votes)

      I read Angry’s comments relating to Riley’s shit ass grin this way……..a winning coach takes the game all the way till the final second is off the board. (blow-out scores not included). They do what it takes to keep scoring ( 7 not 3 points) and their play book is open and used to its fullest until game is over. Riley uses various versions of the same play or plays over and over again. How long does it take for the opponents coaching staff to figure our his juvenile game plan and adjust…..that’s right not long at all.

      I attended the LSU game. Our team played the hard the whole game. The defense was tired and worn out during the 4th quarter. We were ahead in the last minutes of the game. And if you watch the tape of that game, Riley did the same shit ass grin on the sideline. The play calling went conservative, three and out, his planned defense went out on the field and could not stop LSU any more. We lost the fucking game. Riley has done the same thing against Utah, ucks, and other teams in which we went ahead and Riley went flat line. He is not going to change. Riley always waits until the last minutes of the game to try and pull it out, i.e. get aggressive.

      No matter what anyone believes or says Riley is not going to change. We are sadly stuck with him. Yes, I want to see the Beavers get to a respectable BCS bowl, so fucking what.

      • angry says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -1 (from 7 votes)

        Yeah, I am surprised people can’t see the pattern and put two and two together. They’re blinded by 7-2. I guess I understand that. Sucks to be perceptive.

      • Mud&Sticks says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

        @ Fightingbeaver: Amen!

      • bendbeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

        So fighting, it doesn’t take long for teams to adjust to Riley’s juvenile game plan, but somehow the Beavs are 7-2? It’s so predictable, and yet teams can’t stop the offense despite knowing what’s going to happen? Woods averaged 6.3 a carry against one of the strongest run defenses in the country, a defense that knew the game plan? I guess you’re saying that the Beavs are just that overpowering. Or maybe you should think through your points for a smarter discussion.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          The Beavs were/are that overpowering in the run game. That’s why I’m so upset with both losses. We went away from that strong run game and decided to play into the relative strengths of each defense instead.

          Stanford has the run defense stats they do because they lead the nation in sacks and can cover the edges well.

          So obviously the play calls should go away from Storm and Terron punching them in the mouth by running successfully up the gut.

          What obviously needed to happen were some quick outs, fly sweeps, five step drops and roll-outs.

  • alex says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +7 (from 7 votes)

    Riley is not mediocre. 8-9 wins in the regular season is not mediocre- it’s good. 3rd place in a 12-team AQ league is good. It’s something that most of the 120 FBS football teams would envy.

    Mediocre would be 5-7 wins a season, and middle of the pack in your conference.

    The problem is, good is the greatest enemy of great. Probably the most frustrating thing with Riley is you always have the impression he’s capable of more. Like he has the ability, the intelligence, the players, but just not the motivation or passion to take it to the next level.

    But the ultimate question will always be: who do you peg to replace him? In the current PAC12, who would you take over Riley? Kelly, and maybe Rodriguez? I like the Oregon method of hiring up-and-coming DC/OCs and developing coaching talent, but to dump Riley for a new head coach….you’d have to be very, very sure you had THE guy.

    • Numbers says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

      You don’t replace Riley. But if you were a proactive AD, you would insist on replacing his assistants, like langsdorf, with winners.

      • Numbers says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

        Reply to my own comment. But the ducks showed how to do it right. You don’t gamble and blindly replace a winning and above average coach. You supplement his weakness. Ducks had Belloti, a good but not great coach, they added chip as an innovative offensive coordinator, and grew from there. That, in my opinion, is what is needed at OSU. Look how we’ll the addition of brays and Perry has worked for Banker. Imagine now anew and innovative offensive coordinator to fill the obvious Riley deficiency gaps.

        • WFO says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

          I really think Riley is a good playcaller. He just has too much loyalty to captain one-kidney and he just can’t cut the cord. The best thing would probably be to cut Langsdorf loose and put Bray on the payroll. Then Riley could call the plays and probably coach QBs.

          I really feel like special teams has been mailing it in for years. When was the last time OSU had a block of any kind? Or a fake? Opposing teams should be shitting themselves worrying about that shit.

          • oneoldbeav says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Two particularly good points there, WFO.
            1) Something has to be done PROACTIVELY to keep Bray.
            2) Special Teams has been if not mailing it in then, at least, not much of a factor lately. The mention of Hekker’s passing performance in the Pro’s being an example of an unused weapon at OS(U). Now THAT could have been a way to make opposing teams worry!

            As to Riley coaching QB’s if Langs was let go, what about Locey carrying more of the load?

            • helmsley says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

              Did Riley NEVER use Hekker to pass? I read that the St. Louis coach made the decision to sign Hekker because of his ability to throw; so was STL going with Hekker’s high school record?

              • helmsley says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                Answer: For a guy who says his team “ran a couple of fakes” during his college career at Oregon State, Hekker has proved a more than capable passer and a downright weapon on punt fakes. For the record, he was four-of-five for 35 yards for the Beavers.

                • JasontheBeaver says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                  From what I recall, Hekker was a qb in high school. Punter was the only thing he could do at osu and still get a scholarship.

                • oneoldbeav says:
                  VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                  Yeah, Hekker was used to pass; my point was that he wasn’t used nearly as much as he could have been. Always felt that using him once or twice in very unexpected situations would give all future opponents something else to plan for/worry about.

            • angry says:
              VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

              Hekker’s NFL performance so far has been mind boggling. Maybe he’s receiving great coaching in St. Louis.

              • helmsley says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                His punt for minus-4 yards was rugby style, rolling out to his right before striking the ball. That’s a style used in college, because the coverage team gets to leave the line of scrimmage right after the snap. Rolling out gives the coverage unit an extra second or two to get down field.

                “A lot of those college teams, they do that rollout rugby punt,” Fassel said. “(Hekker) did that about half the time, which meant he never really got to focus on one craft, which is a professional pocket-style punt. … His rugby days are over.”

                That’s because coverage rules are different in the NFL: you have to wait until the ball is struck before running downfield, so there’s no advantage gained by punting rugby style.

              • helmsley says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

                I once suggested that but was informed that Bruce Read had had professional experience so that wasn’t the difference?

          • JasontheBeaver says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

            Speaking of fakes, did anyone see ole Shank-a-game’s fake punt with a nice completed pass OUT OF THE END ZONE?!
            Now I’m all proud of him that he’s blowing up in the pros, pointing out to anyone who will listen that he was a Beaver… you’d never know I went hoarse at Camp Randall screaming about his backward punt.

          • michaelm says:
            VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Speaking of special teams, I find it unusual how few punts have been returnable this year. By my recollection, Poyer hasn’t attempted to return more than five punts all year. I wonder if it has something to do with the blocking scheme, but it may be unrelated to anything that the Beavs are doing, I’m not sure.

    • Fightingbeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: -3 (from 11 votes)

      Mediocre is going 12 years without getting your team to a BCS bowl. It seems like a lot of members who tolerate Riley as had coach have not been following Beavers for more than a few years. And if you have why don’t you want to see our team reach the next level?

      • bendbeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

        Do you think it’s really “not wanting” the Beavs at the next level or is it just having a different reaction to you if they don’t?

      • alex says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

        Again, that doesn’t define mediocre. There are tons of teams for which that’s true.

        It’s consistently good, but never great.

        • Jack says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

          Wait… what doesn’t define mediocre? That we’re just like tons of teams who can be consistently good but never great?

          Or is the second sentence separate from the first?

          I’m confused because they seem to be redundant ideas.

          • krogercomplete says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

            Here is the definition:

            me·di·o·cre
            ?
            adjective
            1.
            of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate: The car gets only mediocre mileage, but it’s fun to drive. Synonyms: undistinguished, commonplace, pedestrian, everyday; run-of-the-mill. Antonyms: extraordinary, superior, uncommon, incomparable.

            2.
            not satisfactory; poor; inferior: Mediocre construction makes that building dangerous. Synonyms: meager, low-quality, second-rate; so-so. Antonyms: excellent, superior.

            There is a bit of variation here, but at the high end, mediocre means ordinary or moderate; neither good nor bad. At the low end, it means bad.

            Bend’s observation is correct–no one is saying they don’t want the Beavs to make it to the Rose Bowl.

            • Jack says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

              So we should all be agreed. The low end is not the definition that’s being used. The “just like a ton of other teams” definition would be the one.

              Maybe we should define it as we would any other sport.

              In hoops and baseball, I would define it as being in the 90th percentile before I give anyone a B+ or an A. And I don’t consider a C or a B as anything other than average or commonplace.

              That would mean making the round of 32 in the NCAA Tourney in hoops and getting at least a 2-seed in the Regionals for baseball. I personally would say being in the Sweet 16 or the Super Regionals would be my standard for excellence. But we’re talking where to set the bar for consistent expectations if we’re going to consider any of our teams better than mediocre. And if those expectations are the norm, then the higher level can be obtained every couple years and the program will be considered better than mediocre.

              That makes OSU baseball an excellent program and OSU hoops a mediocre program on the low side.

              That would also require being in the top 12 in football every couple years to be considered more than mediocre. I would expand that to being just eligible for an at-large bid to a BCS game since I mistrust human polls. So I’ll accept a top 15 finish every couple years as something better than mediocre and top 25 as an expectation.

              I won’t accept a top 25 finish every so often as anything more than mediocre. And my parameters also don’t accept someone like Kansas as anything excellent since they reached a high point then fell off into obscurity (which is less than mediocre… and we’ve been there too). A top 25 every now and then is something a decent non-AQ team strives for.

              We actually still have a chance to make a top 15 finish this year even with one more loss. It would take a nice bowl win, but it’s possible. Of course, if we would have just taken care of business up to now, or if we take care of it from here on out, then I would say it’s a definite.

              It will also be a new condition for football and set new expectations going forward.

              • BeavItOrNot says:
                VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

                You cannot come up with a new definition for average. Average would be the 50th percentile, would it not? There are 127 FBS college football teams. Any team that finishes in the top 25 is finishing in the 80th percentile or better. That is decidedly not average. If it were average, average would mean something other than what it means. And therefore, mediocre would too.

                You cannot use letter grades because there is an equal distribution here from 1-127. Any team that finishes better than 63rd in the nation is better than average.

                Now, before Angry or an Angryanna can come in and use their “perspective” to misconstrue the argument, I don’t think anyone would be happy with the Beavs finishing 63rd in the nation. But to suggest we are only mediocre is to misunderstand the meaning of the word (or relatively basic math). Once again, there is a chasm between the truly mediocre teams and the elite teams that play in BCS bowls.

                • krogercomplete says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

                  What I think we have here, really without question, is a good coach doing a good job at OSU. Some argue Riley is a great coach doing a great job considering what he has to work with. Maybe, maybe not. We can all agree he is not elite, and neither is the program. We should also all be able to agree he is not bad.

                  People want the program to be elite, and I understand. But anything less than elite is not “mediocre.” I think what folks are really saying is they want an elite program (or “greatness”), and if its less than elite, they just don’t care, and they won’t tolerate it. Ok, fine. But stop using the word mediocre.

                  I also understand the sentiment that the Beavs should take a stab at greatness by bringing someone else in, but I think those that make the argument assume that what Riley has been doing is mundane and could easily be accomplished by just about anyone else we hire. So to them, its really all upside. Maybe we basically stay the same, wallowing in “mediocrity,” or maybe we achieve greatness. I don’t happen to see it that way, and I think it is more likely the program slides than improves if we replace Riley, and there really is the potential for a huge slide. Just look at Colorado. Jesus. Maybe this is too conservative a position, but that is quite the gamble unless you can identify someone specific who would take OSU to the next level, someone that OSU can actually get, and someone that will stay for any length of time.

                • Jack says:
                  VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                  Rating: -1 (from 1 vote)

                  I see. So getting to 6-6 is mediocre?

                  And who said getting to the top 25 was average? It’s not. But mediocre teams aspire to reach it every year with a couple breaks. Good teams expect to be in it every year with the belief they might be great with a couple breaks. Great teams don’t think twice about anything below the top 15 and have a tendency to fire coaches if their team remains below that bar for more than a couple years, let alone the horror of being mediocre and outside the top 25.

                  And a B is pretty average.

                  I now fully understand this schism. We don’t need to talk about it any more.

              • alex says:
                VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
                Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

                Mediocre: 50th percentile
                Top 25: 80th percentile
                Top 15: 88th percentile

                (I agree that Top 15 is a better metric for “elite” since bowl selection can be arbitrary and outside the team’s control)

                Point is, the gap between truly mediocre and top 25 is far greater than the Top 25 to Top 15 gap.

                On one hand, this is a semantics game. But it’s relevant because a truly mediocre coach should be immediately replaced, no questions asked. This is an easy call because 50% of coaches would do a better job. Toss in a decent compensation package and a good selection process and you could easily do better. But that’s not the case with Riley.

                If we could attract someone of Chris Peterson caliber, I would be all for firing Riley. But the point is, that would be a stupid move unless you already had a proven commodity committed.

  • ObjCritic says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

    It’s about time there’s an article on Fred Thompson:

    http://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/index.ssf/2012/11/oregon_state_football_11_month.html#incart_river

    As I’ve said before, I thought it was easy to forget Fred because of the 6-0 winning streak; not because of a lack of caring or anything like that, but if the Beavs were struggling to defend his name probably would have come up sooner.

    Nice to know the players continue to recognize him when breaking the huddle.

    • Beavergopher says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Sad story. Had the same thing happen at Minnesota this spring with one of the seniors that was set to graduate.

  • Timber2002 says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    So Cal 4* OL Alex Redmond decommitted from the quacks yesterday. Says he wants to play in a pro style offense. Beavs don’t appear to be in the mix, why not?.

  • Jack says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

    Teenage girls tweeting:
    A: “You kidding? U of O, not OSU. I’d rather be a duck than a dumb beaver.”
    B: “Funny… that’s the only kind of beaver you could be if ur a duck.”

    Good to see the younger generation carrying on tradition.

    • ObjCritic says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Another one I heard I like:

      What do most UO fans have in common with all OSU fans?

      Neither attended the University of Oregon.

      • GreatWhiteHunter says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

        I never understood this jab. Does one have to be an alumni to be a fan?

        • JasontheBeaver says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)

          It’s pointing at the supposed majority of duck fans that are bandwagoners because of their recent success.

          • GreatWhiteHunter says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            I should re-phrase… I understand what the jab is getting at. But it sounds moronic. Who really gives a shit if a fan when to school at their team of choice? Only college graduates should be fans of college football?

            • GreatWhiteHunter says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

              I should stop trying to type on my iPhone. I give OSU grads a bad name.

            • ObjCritic says:
              VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
              Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

              I think its fine to be a fan of a college you didn’t attend, but to align yourself with them after they’ve started winning, and no other apparent reason, and then to invoke the term “we” when talking about said college team, is pathetically vicarious and stupid. At least, IMO.

        • CraigBeav says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Yes, or at least have a direct family member who is. This is my elitist club.

        • rsteve503 says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          No — most fans of a college team are so because it represents, in their minds anyway, the region or state. Tribalism is expressed in funny ways.

        • Joe Avezzano says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

          No, it’s not a criterion to be a fan. But if that person flunked out of Springfield or Churchill HS and is now sporting a shiny new zero sticker on his Rav4 and wears green clothes everywhere he goes, he is a ridiculous self-loathing poser.

    • BeaverFever says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)

      Where do you hide something from a duck fan? Under their workboots.
      Where to you put something you want a duck fan to find? Under their bong.

      • Joe Avezzano says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        If you think there is a difference between weed consumption rates at UO and OSU, think again.

        Jokes about Lost Ambition degrees and smelly hackey-sack children are fair game, but the pot one doesn’t fly.

  • Jack says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Pigs seen flying in New York!
    https://twitter.com/GottliebShow/status/269152666221936641

  • Jack says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Here’s something sad.

    i just heard AJ Lapray went all ducky and everything. He’s no longer a fave for me.

  • ncaa_viOlation says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Beaverblitz has an article about Oregon State still having a slim chance of making it into the Rose Bowl. The start would have to align, but they’re saying there’s a chance….you know….just to keep you reading.

    http://oregonstate.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1436980

    • Jack says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      There’s zero chance.

      Why would they do that?

      There’s a very slim chance that we get an at-large bid to another BCS bowl besides the Rose. But there’s zero that we get to the Rose.

      • FedUpBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Could be a very slight chance if we beat Cal by atleast 14 and ideally more like 17 points and then shut out Nicholls St. 45-0. If Stanford loses to UCLA but USc beats UCLA, then with those strong performances we could get enough votes to be both ahead of UCLA and at spot 14 with all the Pac-12 voters preferring to have 2 Pac-12 teams in the BCS. That same fact is what Stanford is thing may just happen if they do beat UCLA. In other words, there will be more incentive to notch that one team up a little and drop the two just below them a smidge down to make up for it. That’s why Stanford probably does have a 50% shot or just above and OSU still has a small hope. Our losses really aren’t any worse than Stanford’s so I think we deserve it with 3 losses if Stanford does.

  • BeaverBill says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)

    Fire Langsdork…. Hire Bray…. Train Bray up to take over as head coach.

    Bray’s competitive spirit with some knowledge is going to equal a good combo.

  • matt b says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    A year ago I said that the Beavers should study Kansas State and the whole ball of wax that Bill Snyder represents. It may be kind of boring but they have a model for a system that could work in Corvallis and that would require no more money and no 4-5 star recruits. They may not go undefeated. They never beat themselves. They rarely make mistakes with penalties or turnovers. They almost never lose the games that they should win. They recruit jc, they change positions on guys to put them in a position to succeed, their special teams always play at 100% and they always seem to have a plan. How come the OS coaches cannot do this?

    • bone says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Bill Snyder is one of my favorite coaches.

      • angry says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        He’s my favorite.
        Also respect Chip a ton (well, before the cheating. Still think his mindset is perfect, though).
        I think the rest of the upper echelon are overrated beneficiaries of recruiting hotbeds.

    • capitalcause says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

      It’s interesting to me that Wynn didn’t have many big name offers but the one’s that he did have were Oregon State, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State. All schools that sort of sit in the same recruiting bucket and teams that seem to do better than expected.

Write a Comment

  • Categories

  • Archives