20.Dec.2011 Thoughts on Banker Staying?

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)

I think most of us wanted Banker to get the Hawaii job, so my questions are simple:

1. Is anyone happy he's staying?

2. If so, why?

Jump to Bottom
  • silverstream055 silverstream055 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +4 (from 4 votes)

    Not happy at all. You know why….

  • NCAA_viOlation NCAA_viOlation says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +12 (from 14 votes)

    I’m happy because I’ll save money not buying season tickets next year

    • OSU4Life says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)

      You mean to tell me that I’m not alone???

      I wonder how much of the fanbase will NOT renew their season tickets next year?

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

    After the dreadful performance this year, not even being competitive in many games and losing to Sac State, something needed to be shook up…changed,…even if only for the sake of giving the fans and players something to grasp for hope.

    When Riley just moved guys around on the O line, it gave you some hope.

    Since a good part of that dreadfulness was on defense, Banker should have gone.

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

      Riley is not going to shake up the staff PRIOR to LOI day. Why would he? So he can scare away guys who have given verbals to OSU?

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

        Sure he would…. to give those interested more reason to want to be at OSU. Banker isnt a positive, he’s a negative.

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

    You guys were such wishful thinkers. I’m surprised Banker got an interview. The UH hiring committee could hardly ignore OSU’s last season record and they couldn’t have escaped fan opinion – even if they didn’t read angrybeavs. Oregonlive can be crude, but the sentiment against Banker was there. And, THEN, when Banker himself said a lot of OSU people would be disappointed if he didn’t get the job (and not for the right reasons) – talk about stabbing yourself in the back, although the decision had probably been made b4 then.

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

      Those were my exact thoughts, and I found it puzzling that he said those things while the process was still happening. And anyone that seems to delight in being so loathed is exactly the Assholes he’s perceived to be.

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

        Maybe he knew deep down that he did not do well in the interview? I would hope there would have been some hard questions about the regression of the OSU program thrown at him. Man, to have been a fly on the wall!

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

    Afterthought: Maybe Chow will hire Banker!

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

    Asking me if I’m happy with Banker is like asking me if I would be pumped about contracting Herpes. He and the rest of the coaching are like herpes too…the occasion in which it was contracted might have been fun at first but now we’re stuck with it for a lifetime…contract.

    What makes it worse is that the Oregonian article about it seemed to celebrate his stay and his comments reeked of a smug sense of superiority as he mocked the people ‘who might not be happy’ he was staying. Couple that with Bobby D’s analysis of how Beaver fans resembled the ugly

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

      Ugly side of society and I’m getting fed up with OSU football. I don’t deserve to be condescended like that. Assholes…all of em. Happy holidays to the rest of you though 🙂

      • osu2008 says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: +2 (from 2 votes)

        I’ve always thought BDC was a big asshole, even when times were better with the football program. The last couple of years though, Riley and Co. have all become the same way. The feeling I get is that they feel they are entitled to a “free pass” from accountibility because of their past success. This is part of the reason why I am not renewing my tickets or giving to BASF (who are also a bunch of assholes) until changes are made with football.

        The only coaches that seem sincere and genuine in the entire athletic program are Robinson, Rueck, and Casey, along with some of the minor sports coaches. They appreciate the fanbase and support. Maybe that’s part of why their programs are on the rise or successful, while Riley has made OSU Football the new Pac-12 doormat.

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

      Good point. These guys come off as feeling against/above the fans.

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

        It’s just a culture that lacks gratitude for its fans, which is probably what keeps fans from getting animated about any of the products they are there for. The input,concerns, and creativity of the fans is actively stifled with insults and sarcasm- then they extend their hand for donations. It’s disgusting.

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

        The problem being – BDC, Riley and on down the line are like stacked dominoes – it’s taking far too long, but at some point, one is going to fall – mostly likely BDC and there could be a shake-up except worst case re-arrangement would be Riley as AD.

        OT: Marketing & technology. I follow the women’s bb team somewhat and on the oregonstate.edu/ women’s bb/ emagazine there are profiles of some of last year’s team members who are no longer with the program, at all – a year later! C’mon – there are still work-study scholarships and with every young person being IT-astute someone should be able to keep just that little section of information up-to-date.

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

    im happy he’s staying because sometimes it’s nice to be able to put my feet up on the empty seat in front of me

  • brownale9000 says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -3 (from 5 votes)

    Look at our national defensive rankings since Mark Banker took over as the DC.

    2003 – 7th
    2004 – 18th
    2005 – 85th
    2006 – 59th
    2007 – 8th
    2008 – 23rd
    2009 – 46th
    2010 – 86th
    2011 – 83rd

    Some of you would explain this by saying that Banker came into the program really, really smart…then turned stupid in 2005, then somehow got smarter – peaking in 2007, then he’s gotten significantly stupider since.

    I would explain it by saying we didn’t have very good athletes over the last two years. We had great athletes in 2003 and again in 2007, coinciding with our best defenses.

    I’m not saying the bad defenses of last 2 years is 0% Banker’s fault…but a lot of it comes down to the athletes on the field. I think Banker is a slightly above average defensive coordinator overall, but he can be very good when he has the athletes on the field to carry our his plans.

    Considering the fact that I like a lot of the younger players in our system right now and I fully expect the defense to bounce back over the next couple years, I’m neither happy nor unhappy that he’s coming back. (Comparing him to a case of herpes? Really?)

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

      Slightly above average? Really? I didn’t realize teaching horrible technique qualifies as being slightly above average. The linebacking core was more talented and should have been better than the linebackers in 2010 but really they weren’t. They may have even been worse. Mark Banker took over coaching the linebackers in 2011. Not a coincidence.

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

      2006 team had the most talent, and he finished with a middle of the road D (in terms of national statistics). 2007 team benefited from a weak conference–that D was not very good. Stats are sort of meaningless since a lot of this depends on schedule and if the conference is up/down. What we know for a fact is (a) Banker cannot stop the spread and (b) Banker teaches horrible DB technique. I also think he’s a poor schemer, but I’m not sure that’s a fact.

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

        Actually, I think Banker can stop the spread, but this team lacks the depth and speed to pull off the game plan for an entire game. The first quarter of the Civil War this year, the Beaver D had an answer for most everything Oregon tried to do. Oregon was stopped on multiple 4th down tries. The defense continued to play well early in the 2nd quarter, but guys were already starting to get gassed and by that time, Oregon was able to beat them upfield on the edges (with help from some holding penalties the refs decided to ignore). Mobile do present a problem for Banker however.

        • brownale9000 says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: +8 (from 8 votes)

          I agree.

          Last year, the offense was a far, far greater issue than the defense.

          If we could have run the ball, we could have kept our defense off the field a little bit more and we would have been fine…even against Oregon.

          Unfortunately, our offensive line sucked.

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

        how was 2006’s defense better than 2007? soley because of sabby? The defensive end depth and improved cornerback play in my opinion made the 2007 d the best since the Fiesta year regardless of schedule

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

          I think I agree with this. I don’t think we lost anyone from the 2006 to 2007 defenses. And we lost a senior QB and a couple o-linemen and Newton from the offense. That 2007 defense didn’t hold a candle to the Fiesta Bowl team, but it is the last time we beat Nikegon… albeit a Kempt/Roper led Nikegon team.

          I remember the DT’s on that team were rather stout. Who were they… Coker, Booth, Siegert and Lee?

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

            So that 2007 D might have been better, but the national rankings might have ended up around 20 to 30 if they had played the 2006 schedule… and top five if they played the 2008 schedule.

            In fact, I think that 2007 D on the 2008 team would have beaten Stanford and Utah, still lost to Nikegon in an embarrassing fashion, then gone on to redeem themselves in a feel good story against Penn State in the Rose Bowl… or not.

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

      Wait… so you’re saying that one great defense every five years followed by another good defense then three lousy defenses makes one a good/average/decent DC?

      What metrics were used for these rankings?

      And I guess we have to re-ask the age old question.

      If we’re going to blame talent, who is responsible for there being poorer athletes on the field?

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

        I disagree that talent levels coincided with any perceptible statistical rankings. Some were obvious to the eye (2010 LB’s), and could project to those rankings. But others had more to do with poor offensive output, poor schemes versus the spread, etc., etc., etc.

        So i wouldn’t stoop to blaming the players for their deficiencies. That’s too easy, and it’s just downright lazy and disrespectful. That’s not to say that I won’t wonder aloud while watching someone who shouldn’t be on the field getting someone else’s reps because of “experience” or “loyalty” or whatever other silliness drives our coaches to actually play the poorer talents over those who still need experience. It’s to say that when I see those poorer talents on the field, I think there has to be some reason other than, “that’s the best we can do.”

        I’m not going to be the pessimist who craps all over OSU and Corvallis while I whine about not being able to spend money or not being able to recruit to Corvallis. THAT’S the biggest slap in the face. Why would I accept the “glass completely empty” theory for OSU football? So I could be happy with the 28 years I had to endure before someone got a clue?

        If we want to blame the talent, first blame the people who put the talent on the field. I’m pretty sure we all know there’s a fine line between talent levels on all these football rosters. And we know a team effort makes those talent levels rise above that line. Whose job is it to keep the roster stocked with levels somewhere around that fine line so they can be taught to rise above it on a consistent basis?

        The “blaming the players” and “blaming OSU” and “blaming Corvallis” arguments don’t fly on their own. There’s a common denominator people who adopt any one of these arguments always ignore.

        • brownale9000 says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

          “So i wouldn’t stoop to blaming the players for their deficiencies. That’s too easy, and it’s just downright lazy and disrespectful.”

          But laying 100% of the blame on the coaching staff isn’t lazy?

          Because many on this and other sites are doing just that.

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

          This is not meant as a dig at Jack, and I am not trying to incite a war with this comment, but Jack’s post has me wondering: when is anything actually the players’ fault?

          There trend I notice is to find a way to blame the coaches for ANY deficiency, and some go so far as to label any criticism of the players as “disgusting.” I do not come to this with many specifics, as I have not played or coached a down of organized football in my life, but am more interested in what others view as a situation where you really do blame the players and not the coaches.

          Obviously you cannot blame specific players or player groupings for some these macro trends, and with regard to more micro-level stuff, my guess is it can be difficult to draw those distinctions when you cannot observe exactly what happens during the course of practices and what is happening on the sidelines during a game (and when you can’t pick apart game film afterward with all that as a frame of reference).

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

            We all criticize (and praise) individual players and plays. And it’s fine to do so. But when you start picking on the team as a whole because of some nameless “poor talent” on the team as a whole, then you’re just wrong. If the wrong players are on the field, then it’s the coaches’ jobs to put the right ones in. If they’re the right players, then it’s the coaches’ faults for not teaching them well enough to play the scheme or altering the scheme enough to mitigate their weaknesses.

            And NEVER should the coaches blame the players for a whole game performance. Even an objective critique of a key play here or there is pushing it on the part of the coaches. They are the ones who are paid to take responsibility for the performance of their team. They need to take responsibility for the losses, and the better coaches make the wins all about the players.

            So when I hear Banker last year ask the question, “Who would you play?” in response to why Pankey was on the field, I wonder why the person or people he asked didn’t answer, “Well… anybody.” When I hear that the coaches put the best o-linemen on the field this past year, I have to call bullshit. When I see DB’s in position to make a play on the ball but running over WR’s, I have to wonder what they’re teaching these kids. When I hear opposing coaches talk about the stale schemes and play-calling or not adjusting to the obvious weaknesses in those schemes, I have to wonder why the coaches who just stomped us into oblivion are wrong, and our coaches are always right about it being an issue of execution.

            When I hear someone describe their performance in terms of “woulda, coulda, shoulda” I almost immediately know I’m hearing an excuse. That’s when I know it’s time to place the blame on the person or people making those excuses.

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

            I somewhat agree. It’s the coaches’ responsibility to put the right players on the field, and to teach them proper technique. That being said, they could teach the guy correctly and have the right guy on the field, but that guy still might make his own error. e.g. wrong angle, simply gets beat, etc. Someone has to lose on every given play, and sometimes that person will be a well-coached/great player.

            I feel like it’s natural to criticize both. For example, last year when Craig Robinson played Calvin Haynes. We were right to question CR for playing CH, but we were also right to criticize CH’s game when he was out there. Does the coach playing a crappy guy give said crappy guy every right to destroy the team chemistry, play selfish ball, etc? A player has some responsibility to his teammates.

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

            That’s pretty much the point I was trying to make. When a good player just makes a mistake or gets beat, then there’s honor in the event. They know they got beat or made a mistake. The coaches know it. The fans know it.

            So who needs a rehash from the coaches when something like that happens? Either they did or didn’t see it coming, and it’s the coaches fault for not calling the right play or the player’s fault for missing.

            But when players miss all the time, either they shouldn’t be on the field, or the system is broken.

            A lot was made of playing frosh this past year. And they made mistakes which were apparent to all. But their mistakes were often caused or compounded by the mistakes made by the veterans our coaches insisted needed to be on the field for one reason or another. And those veteran mistakes were a common theme for most of the year.

            Coach Rob had an excuse for the performance of his team last year versus this year. He was building a new program, and he was loathe to just throw out the old like they were garbage. he wanted to teach them they could be winners in all phases by the time they left OSU. And it did bite him in the ass. But it was a foundation laid by the previous ass hole that bit him, not his own.

            Whose team did our football coaches take over four years ago?

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

            But when players miss all the time, either they shouldn’t be on the field, or the system is broken.

            Gotcha, agreed.

            It’s hard to rationalize it like that when in the heat of the moment, though. I know I’ve bashed Pankey’s play…called him horrible, etc. Blamed him. But, I also would say things like, “Why isn’t Doctor in there?” etc…and after the game, when I calmed down, I always questioned Riley’s personnel choices.

            So, deep down I think I/we know if there is a better option he should be on the field, and therefore the Pankey situation was the coaches fault. I think we all know that. But in the heat of a game, it’s more instinctual for fans to yell at the player. I think this is because most fans think the coaches always play the right guy. You see that defense a lot on this forum (i.e. “You guys think you know more than the coaches!?”).

            And if there’s not a better option (than Pankey, for example), that ultimately goes back to scouting and recruiting.

            At the end of the day, all roads lead to Riley & co.

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

        bingo. i cant seem to find a single redeeming quality about him at this point in time

      • brownale9000 says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        “If we’re going to blame talent, who is responsible for there being poorer athletes on the field?”

        Certainly the recruiting effort is part of the equation. But I never said it wasn’t. Many on here seem to think that this is a one dimensional issue: coaches. Easily solved by plugging in a new coach. Any new coach.

        I think the issue is more nuanced than that.

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

          I think most of us understand it’s coaches, recruiting, and institutional (i.e. the mindset that being average/making any bowl is okay). Don’t know if I am alone in this, but I also blame fans who tell themselves (and ultimately the University) that this is the best OSU can do.

          Those are the biggies, and they’re all intertwined. The coaches are probably a symptom of (a) the fans sending the message that being average is okay and (b) the University accepting their message. Why try harder if you don’t have to? Even when OSU is good at a sport, it’s a pleasant surprise rather than expected/demanded. Expectations are: “Just be average; if you surprise us, great.”

          The way for fans to change the tone is through their dollars. That’s their vote and voice.

          • sparkyd73 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Angry,
            Can you please explain how you feel the fans are sending the message that what is happening in the football program is acceptable? I’ve seen you post similar messages in the past and I’m not sure I understand what it is that you would expect from the fan base.

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

            They’re sending the message it’s acceptable in several ways:

            1. Many fans make excuses. They say, “We were just near a Rose Bowl!”…but they don’t take that further and realize how down the conference was those years. An 8-4 Rose Bowl team is actually an embarrassment to the conference. The Big 10 would be scoffing at OSU if they made it, and those Big 10 schools would crush the Beavs on the field.

            That’s just one excuse. There are many many many more.

            2. Fans continue to donate and attend games. A donation or ticket purchase is the same as a vote in a political election. If someone doesn’t support political party xyz’s results, but then votes for them, that is incongruent. It sends a message that they do in fact support party xyz. Or at the very least, party xyz doesn’t need to do anything differently.

            3. Fans have been told over and over that there’s a cap on what can be accomplished in Corvallis. They’ve accepted the message. They believe it. They view anything above average as icing on the cake.

            What I expect from the fan base is simple: higher expectations.

            But, also more energy and ideas. OSU is only as lame as it wants to be.

          • sparkyd73 says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Thanks for the answer.

            I’m not sure that I agree that the fans are sending the wrong message. That may have been the case when things were going better. But, I would contend that was more because the average fan is not ever vocal unless something is really wrong. You used the political analogy and I think that was very similar. The average person deals with their daily life without spending a ton of time even thinking about their local politician. Until they get fed up with the direction that things are going, then you see major shifts in power. There are always the “party liners” that are going to rationalize everything. Those people keep the same message regardless of what is happening around them. Same is true with the Beaver fans, when things were going well the only people that made any noise were the two parties (everything is rosey party and the sky is falling party), now the average fan is becoming noisy and BDC has even acknowledged it. He said that fans are coming out of the woodwork and saying things that they haven’t liked for the past 5 years. The noise is getting to the point where they will not be able to ignore it.

            I also disagree that stopping the support through donations or ticket purchases is a way to voice your displeasure. I like the JackBeav idea that you designate where your donation goes. But, people stopping the purchase of their tickets can be interpreted multiple ways. People that continue to donate and buy tickets still have a voice.

            I think sometimes we make up our minds about how things are and even if they change we don’t recognize the change. I feel that things have been changing over the past year. I don’t think the average fan is satisfied and I don’t even think that they are being silent any more. There are still some party liners out there spewing the excuses, but they are now the exceptions not the rule.

            You can be proud that you have played a role in providing a place for a few Beaver fans to find that voice.

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

          It is more nuanced than that. But it also cuts both ways. Change for the sake of change is equal to no change for the sake of no change. Insular thought breeds stale ideas just like too much change breeds anarchy.

          And the fear would be that Riley would seek another like-minded individual who simply abides by the current standards. So I would be happier if Banker himself were to affect change within his own system. There can be syncretism without new blood. But there can’t be any without new ideas. Since the players are always changing, the system needs to change to accommodate them, not the other way around. You can only recruit so many players who fit a static system. But you can change the system to fit the players you can get.

          I think the rankings provided show more that a stopped clock is correct twice a day, not that anyone is a good or bad coach or that the system is good or bad.

          I know Banker has the knowledge to make changes work. But I dislike his lack of will to do so. If he feels dissociated from the fans, it’s not because the fans have changed. We didn’t like losing for three decades as much as we don’t like it now. It’s just that we know we don’t need to lose anymore. We don’t need to ho-hum our way through Saturdays in the fall.

          The coaches don’t have the same passion as we fans do. It’s different since most of them attended different schools and now are paid very well to coach our team. Sure, they care about the kids and want to win. But they have somewhere else to go if it all falls apart. Where do we go? To another school?

          They’re here because we invited them to be here. If they’re just going to lounge around in my recliner while hogging my remote, then I’m going to ask them to leave.

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

            Haha, awesome ending.

            In most comment I was going to write “it’s even more nuanced than that”, but didn’t feel like elaborating. Glad you did! It’s probably even more nuanced than that, too.

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

            I’m not a very nuanced guy…the defense was shitty, the offense was shitty…what’s Riley, Banker and Langsdorf’s plan? I’m a pretty patient guy (except with Pettibonehead), I’m very curious to see what they come up with. My guess is they have one more year to right the ship.

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

          It’s certainly more complex than just coaching, but you can’t ignore what Harbaugh did at Stanford and is doing at SF and ignore the value of good coaching. Hell, you can’t look at UO’s on-the-field improvements and consistency and ignore the value of good coaching.

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

      I think the apologist lose track of time and forget how long its been since Riley and Banker have fielded a good team. The Matt Moore-led Sun Bowl victory was in my opinion the best bowl performance since the Fiesta. That’s right, Matt Moore, with Bernard at running back….its been awhile.

      And they beat a pretty good Missouri team, probably one of the few/last wins against a spread team? Another over Utah once since then?

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

      I stand by the analogy. It totally works.

  • GoBeavs90 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

    Fire Mark Banker

  • DU1266 says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

    Brownale9000,

    Thanks for your analysis. I appreciate the additional look at this from another perspective. Did you play the sport and/or coach? You seem to know what you’re talking about from personal experience. I agree with some things on this blog, but disagree with a lot. Mostly that comes from three things 1) playing the sport, 2) coaching the sport, 3) I have sources inside OSU that brings me information before it is released – if ever released – to the public.

    It’s always interesting to compare the points and thoughts on this blog to other points of view.

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

      Well, if you’re close to the program and feel we’re wrong, elaborate and shed insight. To say you’re close to the program and then say nothing just comes off as you bragging that you’re close to the program.

      If we’re wrong, where are the results proving it? It sounds like you are too close to the situation to be objective. If we’re too far, then bridge the gap and tell us what you know that will change our minds.

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

      Completely agree with what Angry said above me. I know some people on here will complain about everything regardless of the circumstances, but I actually do try to be open minded about these topics. If you actually know some information that you can anonymously provide that would help a lot of us understand the rationale behind this team/athletic department it would be much appreciated. Right now, with the information provided to us, the people on this forum have some very legitimate gripes with what is going on.

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

    I am unhappy because Banker, like most of OSU’s staff, appear to make the game complicated for their own players (he admitted as much after giving up 63 points to the Ducks, though he only admitted to it in that game). Second, he’s stubborn, and refuses to acknowledge change is needed.

    At TCU, look at Patterson’s approach to scheming and teaching defense, I love this because he makes the game simple for his team, they have a clear understanding of what to do, and they can quickly read and react and play with speed. This is an example of how you get the most out of players who might only be on the field for three years:

    “Our fronts and coverages have nothing to do with each other. The front is called by the use of a wristband. We break down our first 6 or 7 opponents and put the fronts on the player’s wristbands. We dont have to teach anything new to our players during the season. The team’s may change, but the fronts do not. We do teach during the season, but we dont have to re-teach our fronts.

    Also, he divides the secondary down the middle for pass coverages:

    “We divide our packages into attack groups. The 4 DL & 2 LB’s are one segment of our defense. We align the front 6 and they go one direction. The coverage behind them is what we call a double-quarterback system. We play with 3 safeties on the field. We have a strong, weak and free safety. The free and weak safeties are going to control both halves of the field. They are the quarterbacks and they will make all the calls…

    …In our coverage scheme we are going to divide the formation at the center every snap. We play with 5 defensive backs in the secondary…

    …[If the passing strength is to the defensive left] the FS calls ‘read’ left. The FS is going to talk to the LCB, SS, and the read side LB. The weak safety aligns on the other side and talks to the right corner and right LB…

    …Starting in spring practice, the 1st Mon. we teach Cover 2 (Robber). On Tues. we teach our Blue coverage (quarters)….On Wed. we teach squats-&-halves coverage (Cover 5). After that we are done teaching our zone coverages…

    …We don’t worry about formations any more. When you divide the formation down the middle, to each side there are only 3 formations the offense can give the secondary. The offense can give you a pro set, which is a tight end and wideout; a twin set, which is 2 wideouts; or some kind of trips set that the defense will have to defend. That is all they can give you.

    In 3 days we teach our kids to line up in all 3 coverages against those formations…when we start talking about our game play, we never talk about lining up. All we talk about is what the opponent is going to be doing and how we are going to adjust to it.

    Unless the offense lines up in a 3-back wishbone or a no-back set, there are only 3 ways the offense can be aligned and still be sound. Unless we want the coverage to overplay something to one side, we don’t worry about formations…. “

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

      Brilliant. The more complicated that you get, the less likely you will be successful subbing frosh, sophmores and juniors in to keep the players fresh. No wonder why they do not have to redshirt an entire class at TCU. With the moderate talent that OS can recruit, they would be best served to sub a lot and have guys focus and go 100% a few plays at a time. Joe Staley of 49ers made a comment early in the year about offensive line calls. Harbaugh brought in a system of line callls that were really simple and the oline play has improved a bunch this year, especially in relation to the run blocking.
      Obj-these comments are much more helpful than what we personally think of the Assistant Coaches.

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

    OT I see that Austin Flynn, a JC DE will be choosing between Arkansas and the Beavers. Unless they plan on moving him inside, getting another DE instead of a DT does not make sense.

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

      I think they might move the OL Mitchell to DT…

      More of the band-aid approach.

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

    I would like to see Banker gone but resigned that he’s here for the long run. I was encouraged after the CW performance by the D. If the O had shown up the D would have had a chance. They shut down the ducks on 4th down three straight times if I remember right and Banker did throw in some 3-4 to mix things up and Banker didn’t scream at the DBs if they turned and looked for the ball. All positive steps.

    OT– what do you all think about tOSU sanctions and implications for the ducks?

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

      A game is played for four quarters. The Quacks rushed for over 300 yards, you don’t lose too many games with those kind of rushing stats. The fourth down stops were nice, but they were also typically Kelly,crazy ass decisions. He just as easily could have pouch punted.

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

        If Kelly had punted, wouldn’t that have been a win for the D also? The offense and Hecker put the Beavs defense in tough positions early in that game and the defense played well. They just got tired easily because the offense couldn’t sustain any drives to keep them off the field.

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

    Does anyone have a link to tonight’s game?

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

    To be honest I go back and forth on our coaches… But that in itself is because they are hot one game and cold the next (after September as they are cold before). So my only hope for this coming year is this:

    Banker, pissed he didn’t get the UH job and that the fans are calling for his head coaches way beyond his mediocrity to prove everyone is wrong, grabbing 3 five star DL’s to boot.

    Riley get off his happy pills, helps with play calling, and decides almost to losing is not good enough and he coaches out of his mind.

    Langsdork decides he doesn’t want bad records to tarnish his resume for a future HC job so he picks up an “OC for Idiots” guide and has the Beavs racking over 40 points per game.

    At this point one can only hope.

    • OSU4Life says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)

      Is there an “Idiots Guide” for Athletic Directors? If one does exist, we must send a copy to Bob DeCarolis! Quite possibly the biggest idiot of them all? He’s definitley the most arrogant.

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

    No wonder I couldn’t find any links. Somehow I thought the game was tonight. As to Banker, it is what it is. I don’t think we are all going to run to Eugene. ‘better the devil you know than the devil you don’t’, Who would they get to replace, and if they had the opportunity to replace a coach, would they hire on the cheap. I don’t know how a program so entrenched into “no change” is somehow going to be clairvoyant to pick just the right coach. Don’t you think if Banker got the job in HI that Riley would look for someone just like Banker?

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

    Hearing Agwuenu and Flynn committed…

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

      I expected that to be the case. Would love the Agwuenu commitment but the Beavers need DT. All they’re getting is WR’s and JC LB’s and DE’s. The band-aid approach is going to cut it.

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

      Nice, Agwuenu should help immediately. Hopefully Bishop is back at full strength next year. With Wheaton, Cooks, Bishop, Boom and Agwuenu all receveing, Mannion has a nice variety of targets who can all make plays after reception. Plus they have some other young guys who will be getting more playing time. I’m a little concerned with tight end, but that is all moot if the O-line doesn’t show improvement. Anybody know if Chris Brown can catch a ball?

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

      http://arizonastate.scout.com/a.z?s=43&p=2&c=1140914&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2farizonastate.scout.com%2f2%2f1140914.html

      Says ASU is in the lead and that he could sign later today. We shall what happens. Much prefer he is a Beaver, obviously.

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

        I wouldn’t touch a Todd Graham offer with a ten foot pole. That being said, ASU has its… um… charms. I wouldn’t die if Agwuenu chose them. What’s another WR at this point?

        CB Bryan Harper de-committed from UW a couple days ago since his position coach Demetrice Martin was hired away by Mora at UCLA. The hot rumor was that Harper would follow Martin and stay close to home. But will he give Heyward a listen before that? UCLA already has some half dozen CB commits, and they’re looking like a likely spot for Adams to end up as well. And, to top it all off, Beaver was high on Martin at UW and will now be revisiting UCLA.

        I like Harper a lot. He’s pretty much a Poyer type athlete who just likes to have the ball in his hands.

        I’ve also liked Dalis Bruce for a long time, but I’ve heard nothing about him other than the schools he really wants to go to haven’t offered. Welcome to Plan B-ville?

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

      What’s the word on Flynn? Impact player or role player? It was my understanding OSU has been pursuing him for a while.

      I actually like Agwuenu, not because its a position of need, but he just seems to have so much physical ability and potential (from admittedly limited film). Its rare OSU gets those guys.

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

      Is Flynn a DE or DT. He is listed at 255 and might have added weight since then. If he can get up to 280 that is big for OSU DT’s.

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

        I thought we wanted D1 DTs, not OSU DTs (Paea excepted)

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

        Pretty sure he’s a DE.

        I suspect OSU is going to play substantially more 3-4 not as a proactive strategy, but as a consequence of their inability to recruit DT’s.

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

          I think they have been working towards a 3-4 for a while. They just haven’t had the right personnel.

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

            Disagree, its not a goal, its a reaction.

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

            You must have some inside info then. That is a big leap considering publicly they have stated numerous times that they did not have the personnel to play the 3-4. Why would they say that if the goal wasn’t to move there? Don’t criticize just to criticize.

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

            I am not criticizing just to criticize, I was brief because I was typing on a phone and it may have come across that way.

            The staff, including Riley and Banker, have said repeatedly there’s nothing wrong with their schemes, its the player’s execution and missed assignments that are the problem. Conversely, I’ve never heard them say their goal is to switch to a 3-4. If there are quotes to that effect, I’ve missed them.

            I combine there assertion that there’s nothing wrong with their scheme with the fact that they have been unable to land the necessary DT talent and secure enough quality DTs to run their scheme, and posit that they are changing not because they want to, but because they have to.

            My suggestions in other threads have been to simplify both offensive and defensive schemes to maximize the limited effective window of college players (I’d use 3 years), and the ability of the players you have.

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

            I would argue that you need even bigger guys up front to properly run a 3-4. First you need a NT the size of a bus and then you need two fast DT sized guys to play ends then you need linebackers that have good rush skills.. Tough to find the bodies for that scheme.

            There isn’t anything wrong with the standard 4-3 zones coverage, adjsutments to Bankers gap cancellation scheme are never made which is particularly painful when we play spread teams.

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

          He’s a DE, but if his listed weight of 275 is correct, then a 5-3 (which is really a 3-4 in a constant zone blitz) should be the way we play. He’s not a 4-3 DT. Then again, so few of our players are. Only Masaniai, Tuivailala and Vieru have the real size to play either a 4-3 DT or a 3-4 NT. But that 270-80 range is great for the 3-teq position, and we should have plenty of them. And 250-70 is ideal for the 5-teq, which is already filled by Crichton, Wynn and Fernando… plus a bunch who could develop at that position.

          I don’t know where the comments from our coaches were derived when they said we don’t have the LB depth to play a 3-4. The OLB’s in a 3-4 are really more like the DE’s OSU historically plays. Hell, that’s where they end up in the NFL. Why not play them there now? The inside LB’s are what we would call our OLB’s in a 4-3. And I think players like Doctor, Welch, Williams, Te’o, Akuna, Johnson, James… and even MLB’s like Unga and Cowdin and newbies like saulo and Skotte… all of them could fill that role. Unga, Cowdin and Skotte would be tweeners who could play the 5-teq as well, though I don’t see them as being as effective as the frosh we know. Hell, even Robinson and Wilson would be more effective at the 5.

          Yeah… I just listed 13 LB’s without mentioning three or four walk-ons. Apparently we have none.

          I will go scratch my head now.

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

      Well, I never said to us! They did commit, but to other schools. haha. Looks like ASU and Arkansas get them.

      I’m sure we have some low-hanging fruit lined up.

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

    OT: Vegas Bowl tonight. It is of interest to Montanans and perhaps to those of you who are Jonathan Smith-watching, because there are several former Montana and Montana State coaches and players involved in the game. – DE’s last game as AZst coach. Also some insights as to why and how Matt Miller (BSU) and Osweiler went the routes they did. (not really intending a pun).

    http://helenair.com/sports/football/college/montana-products-miller-osweiler-renew-rivalry-in-vegas-bowl/article_e7d04580-2ba5-11e1-a4a9-001871e3ce6c.html

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

      That should be a fun game to watch. As we all know, Boise does such a poor job playing after more than a week to prepare. And ASU was just hot to end the season.

      I say the tridents who call themselves pitchforks will pull the upset… and come within 50 points.

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

    Flynn to Arky.

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

    Plan B should be to start trying to poach DT’s and DB’s from schools that are in transition. I dont’ think Riley likes that approach, but this is competition after all.

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

      Doesn’t go with the family atmosphere.

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

      There’s just not much to poach. Those schools in transition had problems like ours, and a lack of DT talent/prospects was one of them. Unless Joe and Isaac can convince Ellis McCarthy that he will start immediately, there’s nothing more to do but look for the underrated players who might play without much development. And that’s next to impossible unless you have a line on a couple JUCO’s. Gauta? Laudermill? Pennel? Likely all are gone.

      I’m still intrigued by Sac St commit Edmund Faimalo. But there just isn’t much left.

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

        That’s a good point on the DT’s, thought there might be some good DB’s reconsidering their alternatives….

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

    OT: Beavs should cruise in a fairly easy matchup against Chicago St. at 5pm tonight. The Cougars are 0-11 and should be out of it come shortly into the 2nd half as long as OSU plays close to as expected.

    Looking for more of the total team chemistry we have come to expect and 5 or more players in double digit scoring. Throw in over 10 rebounds from Moreland and a couple ‘bully’ blocks as well as some sweet Cunningham jams and it should be a fun night as OSU climbs to 10-2 headed into Pac-12 play.

    OSU 84, Chicago St. 59

    Oregon St. @ Chicago St. Preview:
    http://beaverbyte.com

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

    http://socialstreamingplayer.crystalmedianetworks.com//radio/kejoam?from=external

    541-497-5356 i believe.

    Do you want to ask BDC a question directly on the Beaver show? If so, NOW IS YOUR CHANCE!

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

    This offer extends until 2 PM Pacific. Forgot to mention that.

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

    Better BDC interview than most. We learned that he is looking into Truax being open for Gamedays but making sure there isn’t a frat party atmosphere and that they are part of a top tier Nike program that is looking into branding issues on an ongoing basis. He did say any new looks from that effort would come in Fall 2013 and not next year. He mentioned some all white mockup for road games with an alternate white helmet that I have not seen. Besides that he seemed to rightly prefer orange as our main distinguisher and best home look. He seemed to be open to the idea of maybe altering or losing the angrybeaver logo. Also mentioned they would like to get a logo or signage on the outside of Gill that had its name or was similar to the lighted ‘OS’ at Goss or something. If we get these things it would be a great start. All are needed.

    • brownale9000 says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I listened to part of the broadcast and it was interesting.

      Another complaint I’ve heard from a few people was addressed, the problem of burned out lights in Gill. The explanation was that the technology is old and not easily (cheaply) fixed. Pricetag: half a million bucks.

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

        They need to scrap the idea of repairing the old and just save up more to replace it with newer technologies.

        Re the all-white uni idea: If we lose the angry muskrat logo, I could go for looking like Texas for a game or two. I’m resigned to the fact that we’re Nike’s little bitch school, and we’ll get worse unis than Wazzu and ASU… if that’s at all possible. So go ahead. Adopt the taffeta-trimmed socks with pointy stripey things all over the unis… so long as the cartoon helmet (and field logo) goes away. Just bring back Benny as the secondary logo and stop trying to give us a look like a bunch of 50 year old men would think a teenager thinks is cool.

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

          Do all white and the Ducks will say “You’re copying us” as if no one else has done it.

          I’d rather they model after an example like the Chicago Bears (who use more orange than they used to) and come up with a traditional approach that has a slight modern look to it.

          I’d like to see a return to using more black, including matte black helmets with maybe an orange facemask. I’m a fan of the single block “O” and losing the angry beaver. I think the key to using orange is to use it sparingly, but make it an intense orange and make the color consistent across both school uniforms for all sports AND the clothing fans can buy.

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

    Cowdin signs, this (short) film doesn’t look too bad.

    http://cliffkirkpatrick.mvourtown.com/2011/12/21/lb-cade-cowdin-signs/

    Wonder if he’ll end up at MLB?

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

      I think they are pretty happy with Unga at MLB. When healthy he was pretty decent. Need help on both sides of him though.

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

        I think they are happy with him, and he can be effective if healthy, but Riley cites LB depth as a problem. It certainly seems to drop off quickly in the middle more than the outside.

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

    Most good defenses play conservative in their base package. The guys play fast and they know their assignments. What the beavs do isn’t disimilar from what LSU does in that regard.

    BUT when you are lacking talent you have to come up with creative solutions. Its not often the beavs are going to be stacked all pac-12 defenders. Oregon for instance has some deficencies against a power run- soluton stack the box. See the Stanford game. I wouldn’t be so hard on Banker if he made an attempt to make adjustments. Even Wulf’s crew did a better job making adjustments. When you are getting run all over first attempt to stop the run.

    I am also concerned about the remaining DT on the team. In looking over the roster it does appear they have several young guys. Does anybody know anything about bench guys other than they don’t look like they were highly sought after in high school? Because I don’t hear a lot of noise about recruiting another d tackle. Can Mansai and Selamo improve enough to be solid players? Possible, but its also possible Banker figures out how to stop a spread- that is to say not very freakin likely.

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

    Paul Chryst new HC at Pitt.

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

    Write up on the poinsetta bowl, finding the Andy Dalton nickname is worth the read, never heard that before:

    http://college-football.si.com/2011/12/22/2011-poinsettia-bowl-let-sleeping-frogs-lie/?sct=cf_t11_a2

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

    Here’s a blast from the recent past – Banker can’t go anywhere because his and Rileys’ wives are friends, now we get it:

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindbeaversbeat/2009/08/oregon_state_defensive_coordin.html

    In the article, Riley says Banker could take over OSU and do a better job than Riley himself…..

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

    with Banker staying, maybe the “mastermind” will no longer be “inexplicably unheralded:”

    sports.espn.go.com/ncf/notebook?page=pac10notebook0804032

    Its interesting to look back and see other perspectives (especially in a slow period).

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

    Steven Hill from CCSF is undersized but an absolute animal nt. Saw them play Butte. Butte had a nt like Castro, a 300lb+ monster that stood straight up and then got pushed back every stinking play. Not once did I see the Butte nt take a forward step. Hill, on the other hand, may not be heavily recruited becasue of size (appeared to be 5’10-5’11 and 270lbs). But in a rotation, he could be quite useful. He got into a few scuffles with the ol of Butte (really big guys) and Butte ( a smash mouth run team) made zero yards up the gut.

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

    One person happy that Banker is staying: Chip Kelly! I guess we get to watch Oregon celebrating on our turf again next fall. Serionsly, when was the last time our D was able to contain a mobile quarterback? He simply has no clue how to stop or slow the spread.

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

    Tweet from Dylan Wynn’s dad on Mark Banker not getting the Hawaii job:

    “Sorry for Coach Banker that he didn’t get the Hawaii gig, very very happy for my kid…”

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

      He’s a good man and a has a brilliant football mind. I just want him to use it for something other than an NFL mentality where the personnel are mostly static or you can plug and play with savvy players (professionals) all over the field.

      Wynn’s going to be in the NFL as an OLB in a 3-4 defense, and he’ll be really good. I just don’t like the farm system mentality here sometimes.

  • Recruiting Updates

  • Categories

  • Archives