|
Post by bvrbred on Aug 23, 2024 12:22:57 GMT -8
Oregon State was a bottom dweller even at the G5 level during the 1972-97 period. Forerunners of today's MWC included the PCAA and WAC. Against schools in those conferences (SJSU, SDSU, New Mexico, Fresno State, etc) I doubt our record was much better than .250. I have memories of losing to Grambling, Montana, and Idaho. Don't think those would have even been considered G5 in today's standards.
If you're talking about a long term record, digging your way out of a 25 year hole is going to take a long time. Also, 1997 is now 27 years in the past. Does anyone besides myself remember when Kansas State was equally terrible? Probably just some KState fans. It used to be talked about on TV 20+ years ago. Not anymore.
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 23, 2024 12:40:48 GMT -8
Oregon State was a bottom dweller even at the G5 level during the 1972-97 period. Forerunners of today's MWC included the PCAA and WAC. Against schools in those conferences (SJSU, SDSU, New Mexico, Fresno State, etc) I doubt our record was much better than .250. I have memories of losing to Grambling, Montana, and Idaho. Don't think those would have even been considered G5 in today's standards. If you're talking about a long term record, digging your way out of a 25 year hole is going to take a long time. Also, 1997 is now 27 years in the past. Does anyone besides myself remember when Kansas State was equally terrible? Probably just some KState fans. It used to be talked about on TV 20+ years ago. Not anymore. But it really didn't take long. As you noted, OSU was really bad during the 70s, 80s and most of the 90s. But that really changed over a couple of seasons. Riley went 5-6 in 1998 and had the win over Oregon. Then Erickson stepped in and went 7-5 in 1999 and then 11-1 in 2000. And yes, Kansas State is a great example and very comparable to Oregon State. I should add that the change in scholarship limits gave schools like OSU a better chance to stay competitive. But my overall point was what was happening within OSU during those periods.
|
|
|
Post by krmamakr on Aug 23, 2024 14:00:03 GMT -8
The more I hear about the qb situation, the less confident I am about this team reaching its full potential this year. It just sounds like the qb play has been nothing but underwhelming. We have seen this before (look at the years from Mannion to Luton). Underwhelming qb play seriously limits football success in today’s football. I’m hoping our defense and run game are as advertised, because I’m hoping to get more 2022 than we do the years between Mannion and Luton when it comes to win/loss results. Anyone else feel the same way? Btw, I’m predicting 7 wins this year (not a bad year at all considering the absolute mess we had to face). Wins include Idaho State, San Diego State, Purdue, Colorado state, Nevada, UNLV, and San Jose State. I suspect you're right about the QB situation determining how good we can get this year. Mediocre QB play means a win floor of roughly 7, as you say. The BeaversEdge guys, who have been watching practice, had this to say (paraphrased) about the QBs: Ben: Some days looks good. Other days looks bad, throwing picks. Best of the three at sustaining drives. McCoy: Really doesn't have it. Had nothing good to say about him as a QB at this level of play. I had the same impression of him watching highlight vids of the Spring game. Seemed like another Garretson; fair run, fair pass, not really great at either. The walk on, Montiel, was better at fitting the ball into windows. Johnson: Most talented of the three, especially as a runner. Has only had about five series with the first team. Tendency to tuck and run too soon. Other tidbits: All three tend to be late getting the ball there on timing routes. Interestingly, as to Johnson, one of the journalists asked Gundy about three/four weeks ago if he didn't think it was time for Johnson to get more first team reps. Gundy got kind of testy, saying he called them like he saw them or words to that effect. Starting to look like they were giving the other two more needed developmental time (Johnson had missed Spring ball and had more ground to make up) and it hasn't worked out. Yet. Ben named a captain:
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2024 14:43:08 GMT -8
Oregon State was a bottom dweller even at the G5 level during the 1972-97 period. Forerunners of today's MWC included the PCAA and WAC. Against schools in those conferences (SJSU, SDSU, New Mexico, Fresno State, etc) I doubt our record was much better than .250. I have memories of losing to Grambling, Montana, and Idaho. Don't think those would have even been considered G5 in today's standards. If you're talking about a long term record, digging your way out of a 25 year hole is going to take a long time. Also, 1997 is now 27 years in the past. Does anyone besides myself remember when Kansas State was equally terrible? Probably just some KState fans. It used to be talked about on TV 20+ years ago. Not anymore. Nevada and Boise were members of the Big Sky until 1992 and 1996, respectively. I am not including the record against the Big Sky, except for the two games with Boise. The others were members of the PCAA or WAC or were independent. The PCAA became the Big West in 1988 Record against: WAC Arizona State 0-3 Boise State 2-0
Brigham Young 3-2
Colorado State 0-1 Fresno State 3-6
Hawaii 1-1 Long Beach State 0-1
New Mexico 0-1
Pacific 2-1San Diego State 0-2 San Jose State 4-1 (San Jose State won 24-14 in 1979 but forfeited the win at season's end) UNLV 0-3 WAC Utah 0-2 Utah State 1-0 Wyoming 3-1 Total 19-25
The 1996 loss to Montana is burned into my brain. I do not remember the loss to Grambling in 1985, and I definitely do not remember the loss to Dennis Erickson's Idaho back in 1984.
Grambling, Idaho, and Montana were not G5 in the 80s. Idaho moved up to the Big West with Boise in 1996. Boise thrived, while Idaho flailed, leading to Idaho dropping back down to the Big Sky after a 22-year fling with FBS football.
Kansas State had more than a half century of generally awful football until Bill Snyder was hired. Kansas State was the worst team in that era. 137 total wins in a 54-year period.
Snyder almost immediately turned the team around. I know they were still talking about how great Kansas State had become so fast in the early 2000s. I think that that petered out after Snyder's first retirement.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2024 14:46:04 GMT -8
Oregon State was a bottom dweller even at the G5 level during the 1972-97 period. Forerunners of today's MWC included the PCAA and WAC. Against schools in those conferences (SJSU, SDSU, New Mexico, Fresno State, etc) I doubt our record was much better than .250. I have memories of losing to Grambling, Montana, and Idaho. Don't think those would have even been considered G5 in today's standards. If you're talking about a long term record, digging your way out of a 25 year hole is going to take a long time. Also, 1997 is now 27 years in the past. Does anyone besides myself remember when Kansas State was equally terrible? Probably just some KState fans. It used to be talked about on TV 20+ years ago. Not anymore. But it really didn't take long. As you noted, OSU was really bad during the 70s, 80s and most of the 90s. But that really changed over a couple of seasons. Riley went 5-6 in 1998 and had the win over Oregon. Then Erickson stepped in and went 7-5 in 1999 and then 11-1 in 2000. And yes, Kansas State is a great example and very comparable to Oregon State.I should add that the change in scholarship limits gave schools like OSU a better chance to stay competitive. But my overall point was what was happening within OSU during those periods. I forget if I posted on this board or the first board, but Kansas State has a lot more money for athletics for whatever reason. Also, Kansas State generally has had a much easier path to the Big 12 Championship Game than Oregon State has had to a Pac-12 Championship Game.
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 23, 2024 15:42:42 GMT -8
But it really didn't take long. As you noted, OSU was really bad during the 70s, 80s and most of the 90s. But that really changed over a couple of seasons. Riley went 5-6 in 1998 and had the win over Oregon. Then Erickson stepped in and went 7-5 in 1999 and then 11-1 in 2000. And yes, Kansas State is a great example and very comparable to Oregon State.I should add that the change in scholarship limits gave schools like OSU a better chance to stay competitive. But my overall point was what was happening within OSU during those periods. I forget if I posted on this board or the first board, but Kansas State has a lot more money for athletics for whatever reason. Also, Kansas State generally has had a much easier path to the Big 12 Championship Game than Oregon State has had to a Pac-12 Championship Game. KSU's 2023-24 budget was $93,251,000. So roughly the same as OSU's. Maybe there's more NIL funds for KSU players, IDK. Agree that they've had an easier path to Big 12 title games. But my overall point is they built a solid football program basically out of the ashes in Manhattan, Kansas. A city that has about the same amount of people as Corvallis (a little less) and is about 120 miles from Kansas City. KSU actually has a much worse football history than Oregon State and was really bad decade after decade until Bill Snyder arrived in the 1990s. Snyder had two stretches as coach, 1989-2005 and then back in 2009-18 after three mediocre seasons under Ron Prince. Now it's Chris Klieman, who has led the Wildcats to four bowls in five seasons (the 2020 pandemic season was the exception). Again, who you are able to hire and then giving them enough support is very important.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2024 17:52:06 GMT -8
I forget if I posted on this board or the first board, but Kansas State has a lot more money for athletics for whatever reason. Also, Kansas State generally has had a much easier path to the Big 12 Championship Game than Oregon State has had to a Pac-12 Championship Game. KSU's 2023-24 budget was $93,251,000. So roughly the same as OSU's. Maybe there's more NIL funds for KSU players, IDK. Agree that they've had an easier path to Big 12 title games. But my overall point is they built a solid football program basically out of the ashes in Manhattan, Kansas. A city that has about the same amount of people as Corvallis (a little less) and is about 120 miles from Kansas City. KSU actually has a much worse football history than Oregon State and was really bad decade after decade until Bill Snyder arrived in the 1990s. Snyder had two stretches as coach, 1989-2005 and then back in 2009-18 after three mediocre seasons under Ron Prince. Now it's Chris Klieman, who has led the Wildcats to four bowls in five seasons (the 2020 pandemic season was the exception). Again, who you are able to hire and then giving them enough support is very important. 2023: Kansas State's revenue: $102.33M Oregon State's revenue: $91.59M
Less Corporate Sponsorship, Advertising, Licensing, Competition Guarantees, Conference/NCAA Distributions, Media Rights, Postseason Football, Institutional/Government Support, & School Support:
Kansas State's revenue: $49.45M Oregon State's revenue: $29.18M
This is something close to total fan support revenue. And Kansas State fans crush Oregon State fans by $20.27M per year. Roughly 69.47%.
If I add conference support, media rights, and post-season football back in:
Kansas State's revenue: $100.42M
Oregon State's revenue: $69.83M
With the Big 12's help, Kansas State is up $30.59M per year. Roughly 43.81%.
How does Oregon State stay competitive?
Corporate Sponsorship, Advertising, and Licensing:
Oregon State's revenue: $10.04M Kansas State's revenue: $1.91M
And Kansas State received no other money from any other source.
Oregon State received $11.21M from Institutional/Government Support. And Oregon State received an additional 0.50M on Competition Guarantees.
If Kansas State tried, they could likely squeeze a couple of tens of million dollars from corporate sponsorship, advertising, and licensing, the state government, and the university. Oregon State has already been tapping those wells.
That is all to say that a lot of what Oregon State has done is smoke and mirrors.
Kansas State fans fully support athletics. Oregon State fans have not. And with conference help, that difference is magnified.
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 23, 2024 18:56:50 GMT -8
KSU's 2023-24 budget was $93,251,000. So roughly the same as OSU's. Maybe there's more NIL funds for KSU players, IDK. Agree that they've had an easier path to Big 12 title games. But my overall point is they built a solid football program basically out of the ashes in Manhattan, Kansas. A city that has about the same amount of people as Corvallis (a little less) and is about 120 miles from Kansas City. KSU actually has a much worse football history than Oregon State and was really bad decade after decade until Bill Snyder arrived in the 1990s. Snyder had two stretches as coach, 1989-2005 and then back in 2009-18 after three mediocre seasons under Ron Prince. Now it's Chris Klieman, who has led the Wildcats to four bowls in five seasons (the 2020 pandemic season was the exception). Again, who you are able to hire and then giving them enough support is very important. 2023: Kansas State's revenue: $102.33M Oregon State's revenue: $91.59M
Less Corporate Sponsorship, Advertising, Licensing, Competition Guarantees, Conference/NCAA Distributions, Media Rights, Postseason Football, Institutional/Government Support, & School Support:
Kansas State's revenue: $49.45M Oregon State's revenue: $29.18M
This is something close to total fan support revenue. And Kansas State fans crush Oregon State fans by $20.27M per year. Roughly 69.47%.
If I add conference support, media rights, and post-season football back in:
Kansas State's revenue: $100.42M
Oregon State's revenue: $69.83M
With the Big 12's help, Kansas State is up $30.59M per year. Roughly 43.81%.
How does Oregon State stay competitive?
Corporate Sponsorship, Advertising, and Licensing:
Oregon State's revenue: $10.04M Kansas State's revenue: $1.91M
And Kansas State received no other money from any other source.
Oregon State received $11.21M from Institutional/Government Support. And Oregon State received an additional 0.50M on Competition Guarantees.
If Kansas State tried, they could likely squeeze a couple of tens of million dollars from corporate sponsorship, advertising, and licensing, the state government, and the university. Oregon State has already been tapping those wells.
That is all to say that a lot of what Oregon State has done is smoke and mirrors.
Kansas State fans fully support athletics. Oregon State fans have not. And with conference help, that difference is magnified.
I got my number directly off the Kansas State site. Again, the KSU budget for 23-24 is listed as $93,231,000.
|
|
|
Post by richard44 on Aug 23, 2024 19:51:24 GMT -8
About 2/3 of the voters think 2 losses or less for the season. I’m a Beaver through and through, but that’s incredibly optimistic thinking. We will have almost an entirely new team that needs to build in-game chemistry, we have limited qb play, and have suffered three long term injuries to our D Line (Hinkle, Norris, and Howard).
Yes, our schedule is considered weak by many in the national media. But if people think we are going to roll teams like San Diego State, Air Force, UNLV, Purdue, Colorado State, Boise State, and WSU, I think they will be in for a rude awake awakening.
I do have a ton of faith in this coaching staff, but there is a ceiling with the talent level on this squad. I would be stunned if this team finished with 2 or less losses. Hopefully I’m wrong.
With all that said, our goal is to stay relevant on the national stage. I believe if we hit 7 or more wins, we do that. I think 7 wins is certainly attainable for this squad.
9+ wins is unlikely, less than 6 wins is unlikely. If we fall at 7/8 wins, I consider this season a huge success considering the horrible hand we were dealt when smith left and the exodus occurred. If we hit 7+ wins, give a ton of credit to Bray for saving our program.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2024 21:35:52 GMT -8
2023: Kansas State's revenue: $102.33M Oregon State's revenue: $91.59M
Less Corporate Sponsorship, Advertising, Licensing, Competition Guarantees, Conference/NCAA Distributions, Media Rights, Postseason Football, Institutional/Government Support, & School Support:
Kansas State's revenue: $49.45M Oregon State's revenue: $29.18M
This is something close to total fan support revenue. And Kansas State fans crush Oregon State fans by $20.27M per year. Roughly 69.47%.
If I add conference support, media rights, and post-season football back in:
Kansas State's revenue: $100.42M
Oregon State's revenue: $69.83M
With the Big 12's help, Kansas State is up $30.59M per year. Roughly 43.81%.
How does Oregon State stay competitive?
Corporate Sponsorship, Advertising, and Licensing:
Oregon State's revenue: $10.04M Kansas State's revenue: $1.91M
And Kansas State received no other money from any other source.
Oregon State received $11.21M from Institutional/Government Support. And Oregon State received an additional 0.50M on Competition Guarantees.
If Kansas State tried, they could likely squeeze a couple of tens of million dollars from corporate sponsorship, advertising, and licensing, the state government, and the university. Oregon State has already been tapping those wells.
That is all to say that a lot of what Oregon State has done is smoke and mirrors.
Kansas State fans fully support athletics. Oregon State fans have not. And with conference help, that difference is magnified.
I got my number directly off the Kansas State site. Again, the KSU budget for 23-24 is listed as $93,231,000. That is a budget for last year. The real numbers expenses and revenues from that budget will not be released until early next year. The 2022-23 budget was $83,642,000. Actual revenue was $102,332,761, which was also off the Kansas State site. Ticket sales exceeded the projected revenues. Contributions exceeded the projected revenues. Big 12/NCAA exceeded the projected revenues. Concessions/ Merchandise exceeded the projected revenues. Licensing exceeded the projected revenues. And that worked out well for them, because Kansas State's expenses exceeded the budget by several million dollars.
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 23, 2024 22:17:29 GMT -8
I got my number directly off the Kansas State site. Again, the KSU budget for 23-24 is listed as $93,231,000. That is a budget for last year. The real numbers expenses and revenues from that budget will not be released until early next year. The 2022-23 budget was $83,642,000. Actual revenue was $102,332,761, which was also off the Kansas State site. Ticket sales exceeded the projected revenues. Contributions exceeded the projected revenues. Big 12/NCAA exceeded the projected revenues. Concessions/ Merchandise exceeded the projected revenues. Licensing exceeded the projected revenues. And that worked out well for them, because Kansas State's expenses exceeded the budget by several million dollars. I just went through all 30-plus pages of the KSU financial statement and did not find the $102,332,761 revenue for 2022-23. I did see the $83,642,000 budget number of course. Whatever, it's not a real big deal. Kansas State does get way more money through the Big-12/NCAA than OSU does through Pac-12/NCAA so the Beavers are not going to match that.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2024 22:35:39 GMT -8
That is a budget for last year. The real numbers expenses and revenues from that budget will not be released until early next year. The 2022-23 budget was $83,642,000. Actual revenue was $102,332,761, which was also off the Kansas State site. Ticket sales exceeded the projected revenues. Contributions exceeded the projected revenues. Big 12/NCAA exceeded the projected revenues. Concessions/ Merchandise exceeded the projected revenues. Licensing exceeded the projected revenues. And that worked out well for them, because Kansas State's expenses exceeded the budget by several million dollars. I just went through all 30-plus pages of the KSU financial statement and did not find the $102,332,761 revenue for 2022-23. I did see the $83,642,000 budget number of course. Whatever, it's not a real big deal. Kansas State does get way more money through the Big-12/NCAA than OSU does through Pac-12/NCAA so the Beavers are not going to match that. Here is the final FY2023 (2022-2023) numbers.I do not know what you are looking at, so I cannot comment. Yes, but my point is that financial support from fans is so much higher at Kansas State. It is a bigger delta than the Big-12/NCAA number. Granted, that is likely to change moving forward. Still, financial support from fans can cure a lot of other ills, and Oregon State just does not have that. And that is why I think that any comparison between Kansas State's and Oregon State's situations is not apt. The fans care more in Manhattan and show it financially. Oregon State does not have that level of fan support. If the fans support Oregon State, great things can happen. Oregon State could become the next Kansas State. The money was not there a decade ago. It still is not here today. Part of it was the Great Recession. Part of it was how BDC treated the football team. Part of it was GAG. But add it all up, and you get the present situation. I have been saying for at least a decade at this point, though. Unless the money situation is fixed, you cannot expect Kansas State-level results in Corvallis. Kansas State in Corvallis has been and is pie in the sky.
|
|
|
Post by ee1990 on Aug 24, 2024 2:25:51 GMT -8
Can we go back to talking about the Steelers?
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Aug 24, 2024 5:19:30 GMT -8
Massive roster turnover, new HC, and new OC when the new HC is a defensive specialist. It's tough to believe that this will be a 10-2 or 11-1 team.
Too many X factors, especially with the roster turnover. MWC was weaker than the Pac last year, of that there can no doubt. But there have been a lot of years when the MWC matched up very well with the Pac. Who knows what this year will bring.
But we play a lot of cupcakes this year. 8-4/9-3 is very realistic.
|
|
|
Post by NativeBeav on Aug 24, 2024 8:30:38 GMT -8
Massive roster turnover, new HC, and new OC when the new HC is a defensive specialist. It's tough to believe that this will be a 10-2 or 11-1 team. Too many X factors, especially with the roster turnover. MWC was weaker than the Pac last year, of that there can no doubt. But there have been a lot of years when the MWC matched up very well with the Pac. Who knows what this year will bring. But we play a lot of cupcakes this year. 8-4/9-3 is very realistic. All one has to do is remember the EWU and Sac State debacles at Reser to temper expectations. I agree with many who have already said it - doesn't matter how good or bad our opponents end up being, until we play at least three games, we will not know what we really have this year.
Would love 9, 10 or 11 wins this year. Realistically? What you just said. Given the massive changes, even with an easier-on-paper schedule, 7-5 would not be a shocker.
|
|