I explored this option in Sunday's comment area, but I think it warrants its own post.

There have been mutterings that the program's collapse is due to talent deficiency. I find this argument hard to accept for two reasons:

1. Oregon State has never had good talent. And I actually think the talent has improved at every position except running back.
2. The current decline began after the 2009 Civil War. The Beavers had the same talent in the Las Vegas Bowl (as the CW), but looked like a completely different team, confirming the problem was mental.

I believe the bigger issue is a string of difficult games that have subconsciously deflated and defeated Mike Riley. Follow this time line with me:

• In 2009, Mike Riley believed he could take OSU to the Rose Bowl.
• Riley lost a close, emotional game to his rival, who he then watched play in the Rose Bowl.
• The Beavers missed out on a respectable bowl, and wound up in the Las Vegas desert wind.
• During the Vegas Bowl, Riley's countenance was that of malaise, depression, disinterest. The players were also disinterested and unprepared. This was the start of a trend.
• Riley had a chance to make amends for that loss the next year in a big time game versus TCU. Again the Beavers suffered a difficult loss that took it's emotional tole on Riley.
• Rinse and repeat versus Boise State.
• After the team grinds out a few 3 point wins, the Beavers have more heartbreak in Washington. The Beavs' emotions leg down for the rest of the season.
• Beavs suffer three more humiliating losses in Washington State, UCLA, and Stanford.
• Riley loses a 3rd straight Civil War. Ducks go on to the National Title game; the chasm between the two programs has never been larger.
• The Beavs opens the 2011 season by losing at home to Sacramento State. The team looks clueless and mentally unprepared.
• Riley gets embarrassed on the national state as Urban Meyer and Chris Speilman question his coaching and suggest the Beavs aren't in the same stratosphere as Wisconsin.

Since the 2009 Civil War, the Beavers are 5-11 for a 31% winning percentage. More alarming and telling is the malaise since that game. Before then, they were able to emotionally engage and give maximum effort. It made loses more bearable. But since that game, the Beavers have "checked out", with their only inspired victory coming against USC, a team they always play well (for some reason).

So what is going on?

If you have access to the 2009 Civil War and Las Vegas Bowl, go back and watch them. Note Mike Riley's body language, countenance, and emotional involvement. What you will see is a sad, defeated man with glassy eyes. We even saw Riley's defeatest attitude last week when, as time was expiring, he let the clock bleed rather than trying for a touchdown; a touchdown that would stave some embarrassment and give his team confidence to build upon.

Riley seemed briefly inspired this spring after hiring Coach Brennen. That waned during fall camp and now it's gone entirely.

In the comment area of my last post I wrote this response to a commenter:

I don’t know if Riley even realizes that he’s not preparing as hard. Could be a subconscious thing where he knows how much effort (and luck) it took to get to that point (i.e. cusp of a Rose Bowl). I think he is depressed/defeated and more unprepared than ever. I think it’s subconscious. The guy has never had fire, but he at least needs to find the tinder bundle within.

I think this sums it up. I don't think Riley has consciously checked out. I think he thinks he is still trying, but the thing about depression is it's hard to be objective. That's why depressed people ultimately seek outside help. They cannot see the forest from the trees and untangle the subconscious web of emotions on their own.

I actually find Riley's plight to be sad, and I find myself more empathetic than angry this morning. Maybe people are right. Maybe we do need to rally around the guy and support the team rather than criticize? Nah. But I can definitely sympathize better now that I realize what is going on.

The guy needs to admit there's a problem, seek help, soul search, and dig out of this. If he can't do that, then he needs to resign. Our head coach is a defeated man.

Feel like I attended a clinic–"the dichotomy of how football, how it should and should not be played."

Every time I try to form an argument that this is due to poor recruiting, freshman, time zones, or any other bogus excuse, I always wind up deleting the sentence and coming back to the same, simple conclusion: the Beavers pay no attention to detail, and there is no accountability.

That is the bottom line, and both start at the top.

That is why last week I asked for Riley's resignation. I understand he won't be fired. I understand the process will be:

1. Give him this season to right the ship.
2. If he doesn't, then a coordinator will be fired in the off-season.
3. Give him next season to finish the rebuilding job.
4. If that doesn't happen, another coordinator will be fired.
5. Give him the next season to right the ship.
6. Rinse and repeat.

This is OSU, an ag school where change happens slower than grass grows on the Tundra.

I get it.

I've been a Met, Jet, and Beaver fan for most of my life. I can deal with loses. Many losing teams are even fun to watch if they play the game correctly. What I can't deal with is lack of detail, being unprepared, or lacking intensity. These are three problems that originate from the top. When I say "the top", I mean Riley, but I also mean above him. If the AD cannot reprimand or fire his subordinates, then he has set the tone, whether intentionally or not, for chaos. A coach who cannot be fired rotates QBs. A coach who cannot be fired keeps incompetent friends on staff. A coach who cannot be fired comes to games unprepared. Etc.

Why do studies show professional players perform their best in contract years?

Why do they perform their worst after signing long term deals?

Obviously because having food on the table and money in the bank are motivating factors.

It is truly scary how quickly the wheels are falling off. A vicious cycle is about to ensue. A cycle where donors bail because the product is poor, the product becomes even poorer because donors have bailed, recruits decommit because the product has become poorer, and the product becomes poorer because recruits decommitted. Etc.

What will make me bail is not the losses. It is how the Beavers play the game–the mental component. I cannot witness weak, unprepared players with no attention to detail. I just can't. Sound fundamentals are mandatory. The fundamentals have never been good at Oregon State. It's why I've been a critic for years. But, I take no solace in being right. I'd rather the problem be corrected than be right. And I am officially right. When Urban Meyer mocks the team, there is no debate.

How do I know the issue is coaching? Because I closely watch other teams. For example, Boise State. That is the most sound, fundamental team in the game. While Chris Peterson might not have won vs Sac State or Wisconsin, I know a Peterson coached team would showed up with a sound game plan (i.e. mitigating weakness/playing up strengths), executed it perfectly, and if they lost it would be because the opponent was just better. However, I constantly leave Beaver games with a nagging "what if?" feeling, and to me this says the Beavers are not necessarily worse than their opponents, but instead they are just much more psychologically and fundamentally unsound. They are mentally weak, making critical errors at the most inopportune time. They don't understand how to seize moments. Has anyone preached the importance of third downs to this team? They don't seem to get it. All of this starts at the top. Demanding results from players, preparing them for what to expect, how to handle it, etc.

I watch Peterson or Kelly interact with their QBs. It is intense, demanding, and has a point. Leaders emerge from their programs. I watch OSU interact with their QB, and it is an unstructured mess that hopes for the best. You can see it in each coach's respective eyes–I don't need an interview or admission of guilt. The problem with Oregon State is simple: Accountability has become an illusion. Attention to detail, which was always poor at OSU, is now non-existent. The latter is what drives me nuts and is testing my patience. I think that's true for all of you, too. If the players were sound and giving maximum effort we could deal with these loses. When was the last time you saw an OSU player dive for the sticks and give the extra effort that's the difference between winning and losing? It doesn't happen. The players are now representative of the coach, and the coach is representative of the higher administration and placated fan base that is willing to forgive and excuse.

I have ideas on how to resolve the issue, but they're not worth discussing in detail. The short of it is that your money talks. Use that right wisely and make sure the appropriate people know how you feel.

This loss is on the coaches and offense. The QB circus killed all momentum.

I'm having a hard time understanding why both the coaches and fans (who have seen him in person) rave about Mannion. The guy throws a wobbly spiral, holds the ball high near his ear, has a long delivery (was told he compacted this…yet another pre-season hype/lie) and short arms it. He looked okay on short passes, but I'm left wondering what people saw in practice that I am not seeing in the game.

The performance component is Mannion's fault, but to be fair he's been put in a position to fail.

I feel bad for the defense. They're playing well for the most part (i.e. 1st and 2nd down). Given the offensive performance, they must know it's futile, so you have to wonder how long they can keep it up. As always, they can't get off the field on third downs. Appeared to be demoralized as the half approached.

After the game, the ardent Pollyannas will rave about the first half run defense, latch onto Fernando's sack, and whatever other positives ensue. Post game, Riley will talk up Russell Wilson and say the team needs to find their identity. It's predictable, just like "run left, run up the middle, pass short of the sticks" is predictable. Everything is predictable.

Urban Meyer & crew are all over Riley, having an aneurysm watching the Beavers. If a Hall of Fame coach criticizing the program is not a sign to the delusional Pollyannas, then nothing will be.

For me it's not about winning and losing. I could deal with loses if the team looked like a D1 team; if the team was prepared; if the team was fun to watch; if the coaches played their best players; if the coaches adjusted schemes, etc. I am not sure I can make it through this season. Not because of the loses, but because of the coaches stupidity and my ensuing frustration. The Beavers absolute failure to execute basic football.

Riley has dropped the ball, folks. The circus is officially in town.

Considering the opponent, time zone, and QB upheaval, like you guys I'm not expecting a good day. Earlier in the week I tried to make a case for how the Beavers could win this game. Speed on the edge and kick returns are the two advantages I see. However, after rethinking matters, I just don't have faith the Beaver's coaches will exploit that. They'll remain true to their rigid beliefs (e.g. pounding the ball up the middle, face guarding WRs, etc) and fail to make pre-game or in-game adjustments. Three times is a trend, so this is the trend several times over.

I just don't see the Beavs slowing Wisconsin's run game; therefore, if the Beavs are to win the game, this is what needs to happen:

• Great kick and punt returns to shorten the field
• Take the crowd out of it with early success
• A +2 turnover ratio with good returns into Wisconsin territory
• Exploit the edge w/speed
• Convert 3rd downs
• Stop Wisconsin in 3rd down passing situations (i.e. force at least 4 Wisky punts)
• Fake punt for a 1st down or TD

If the coaches go to Wisconsin thinking they can play a standard, balanced game they'll leave with yet another early season, out of conference, blow out loss. This game will require both creativity and passion to win. Those are two of the staff's biggest weaknesses. Wisconsin has a better coaching staff, game plan, QB, RB, and offensive line. Wisconsin's LBs appear slow, and their secondary is questionable, but I have no faith that OSU will exploit those vulnerabilities. I expect to see Ward left, Ward up the middle, followed by a predictable pass short of the first down marker.

Until the Beavers win a big road game I refuse to pick them. The question is how bad the loss will be. I think the Beavers have a much better defense than UNLV, so that combined with Wisconsin's penchant to run makes me think this will be a short game. Translation: Wisconsin won't have time to run it up too bad. I think the Delta will be fairly large (25 points), but Wisconsin won't reach that 50+ stratosphere that many are predicting.

38-13, Badgers

The pregame post was getting cluttered, so here's a new area to comment.

Any topic is fine.

Gameday thread will be available tomorrow at 7am.