|
|
Post by grackle on Oct 5, 2017 7:24:55 GMT -8
I've read several articles recently dealing with CGA's failed program and expounding on just how difficult, if not impossible, it will always be for OSU football to ever compete on the field or in recruiting with the likes of Stan, UCLA, ASU, UO, etc., etc. After all, they say, any more OSU just doesn't have the facilities, Corvallis is just too miserable a little town to attract prime recruits, the alumni just don't really care about football, we don't have a big donor like Nike, etc. ad nauseum.
Well, personally, (like many of you) I'm sick and tired of that same crap being recycled as an excuse for CGA's program and its all-out free fall toward the bottom of Div 1 football. And you need look no further than what's happened with the football program both this year and during a number of the Mike Price years, at Washington State...Rose Bowls, national rankings, (currently) undefeated teams. Not every year of course, but enough that by comparison, especially our current program is a rank and embarrassing failure.
But how can this be? If anything, compared to OSU, WSU has demonstrably worse facilities, planet Mars is more isolated than Pullman, and their alumni aren't any wealthier than ours. Yet in spite of these drawbacks, they are currently prospering. Coach Leach and his staff are more than holding their own, not only in wins, but in creativity and recruiting. They also seem to be superb in-game coaches.
The loud and clear lesson here, of course, is that there is no reason that OSU must chronically settle for poor to mediocre on the football field. If Barnes can find the right head man, we should be able to fare as well, or better, than WSU. Of course CGA needs to go first and that might not happen soon enough to save us from many more seasons as an NCAA bottom feeder.
|
|
|
|
Post by bennyorange on Oct 5, 2017 7:51:32 GMT -8
I've read several articles recently dealing with CGA's failed program and expounding on just how difficult, if not impossible, it will always be for OSU football to ever compete on the field or in recruiting with the likes of Stan, UCLA, ASU, UO, etc., etc. After all, they say, any more OSU just doesn't have the facilities, Corvallis is just too miserable a little town to attract prime recruits, the alumni just don't really care about football, we don't have a big donor like Nike, etc. ad nauseum. Well, personally, (like many of you) I'm sick and tired of that same crap being recycled as an excuse for CGA's program and its all-out free fall toward the bottom of Div 1 football. And you need look no further than what's happened with the football program both this year and during a number of the Mike Price years, at Washington State...Rose Bowls, national rankings, (currently) undefeated teams. Not every year of course, but enough that by comparison, especially our current program is a rank and embarrassing failure. But how can this be? If anything, compared to OSU, WSU has demonstrably worse facilities, planet Mars is more isolated than Pullman, and their alumni aren't any wealthier than ours. Yet in spite of these drawbacks, they are currently prospering. Coach Leach and his staff are more than holding their own, not only in wins, but in creativity and recruiting. They also seem to be superb in-game coaches. The loud and clear lesson here, of course, is that there is no reason that OSU must chronically settle for poor to mediocre on the football field. If Barnes can find the right head man, we should be able to fare as well, or better, than WSU. Of course CGA needs to go first and that might not happen soon enough to save us from many more seasons as an NCAA bottom feeder. This concept used to drive me nuts - particularly during the losing streak when the Cougs, who on paper seldom seemed that much better than us, would absolutely kill us. When Price was there and Avezanno, Kragthorpe, Pettibone were HC we way too often were on the wrong end of a 63-10 score. Back then we had crappy facilities but WSU's were crappier. Now we have what I would call decent facilities while there's are still pretty low bar.
And Pullman, in spite of the fact its beautiful, has NO redeeming qualities that would attract an inner city athlete. If you think Corvallis is lilly white I've got to think that Pullman is opaque. Is it just that they got lucky in their HC choices or  I'm guessing their alumni base is smaller than ours and I would like to think our scholastic offerings are broader and better than WSU. Corvallis may be a Podunk little town but it's at least within shouting distance of entertaining activities (coast, mountains, Portland). Pullman is close to Moscow, ID - end of story.
I've seen discussions about how WSU has bet the farm and leverage themselves to the hilt to afford Leach and company. Maybe that will come back to haunt them in some form. I hate to think that throwing money at the problem is always the solution but maybe it is. If so I don't see this fan base stepping up to the plate, particularly when the mood is that we've made a terrible mistake with this hire.
|
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Oct 5, 2017 7:51:39 GMT -8
Erm, why do we have to look to WSU for that to be evident.
OSU football was plenty competitive with the "big boys" in the conference for a solid 15 years. No need to look any further than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Oct 5, 2017 8:03:03 GMT -8
Preaching to the choir man. It CAN happen here, but it takes a little bit of luck. What happens to WSU when Leach retires/goes to another program? History suggests they'll take a tumble and fall hard. WSU didn't go to a bowl game from 1931-1981. They seemed to be on to something with Dennis Erickson, but he left after a 9-3 season, and for all the "Mike Price was a genius" talk, he had more losing seasons (8) than winning ones (6) as coach of the Cougs. His record in 14 years: 83-78, 3-2 bowl record. Higher highs and lower lows. Two Rose Bowls, but also four seasons of three wins or less. Mike Riley by comparison had only two season of 3 wins or less, and more winning seasons (8) than losing ones (6). 93-80, no Rose Bowls, but a 6-2 bowl record.
So I think what you're suggesting Oregon State can be, it was, and will be again, given the right coach and a little bit of luck. WSU is riding a hot streak right now, but if and when Leach moves on, I'd expect them to settle right back down to the lower tier of the conference for a while, until another unique coach comes along and they catch a little bit of luck, like say a former walk on quarterback turning out to be a fringe Heisman Trophy candidate.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaverbeliever on Oct 5, 2017 8:48:06 GMT -8
And Pullman, in spite of the fact its beautiful, has NO redeeming qualities that would attract an inner city athlete. If you think Corvallis is lilly white I've got to think that Pullman is opaque. Is it just that they got lucky in their HC choices or I'm guessing their alumni base is smaller than ours and I would like to think our scholastic offerings are broader and better than WSU. Corvallis may be a Podunk little town but it's at least within shouting distance of entertaining activities (coast, mountains, Portland). Pullman is close to Moscow, ID - end of story. It does seem bigger, but OSU is only now matching/surpassing WSU in enrollment. WSU has 214,361 living alumni per their alumni association site. Per wikipedia, OSU has had 230,000 total graduates. |
|
|
|
Post by zebraworks on Oct 5, 2017 8:57:58 GMT -8
WSU is just smarter than OSU. it is obvious.
|
|
|
|
Post by joeavocado on Oct 5, 2017 9:24:03 GMT -8
I think the difference is the Cougs are willing to take more risk, thus more reward. OSU didn't want to roll the dice on Erickson, Wazzu had no problem with him and was rewarded. The George Raveling hire for bball was not what you would think would be an obvious match for them, or Pullman, but it was a great hire. When they go conservative (Doba, Wulf, a few recent bball coach hires) they miss. Ernie Kent doesn't really seem to be working out too well, but it was an interesting hire, one the Beavers would not make. I liked they tried something new when the football team was struggling by playing games in Seattle at the Seahawks stadium. They now have an AD that came from uckville and is aggressive with an attitude that you have to spend money on football to make money. Their new stadium club level and press box look awesome, they hired a big name coach, and built a new football operations building. Their investment in football facilities and a better coach are now paying off. It could come back to bite them as they have taken on a lot of debt.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Oct 5, 2017 11:24:15 GMT -8
A few things... WSU's facilities aren't all that bad. They just completed a 60 some odd million upgrade to a 75k sqft facility back in '14. We're just finishing up a 42 million buck renovation to build a smaller facility. They have had two to three years to feed off that momentum, we haven't yet. Their stadium looks completed. Their coach arguably has had a higher profile and long term record of success than our coach. They have deficit spent, on football, for a number of years, while we use football $ to fund other sports to a greater level than they do (at least on a percentage of budget basis assuming the numbers mentioned earlier are correct). AND... they've on been to a bowl two consecutive years - let's see how long that keeps up before proclaiming them as a great example of how a small school can perform at a high level long term.
|
|
I'm guessing their alumni base is smaller than ours and I would like to think our scholastic offerings are broader and better than WSU. Corvallis may be a Podunk little town but it's at least within shouting distance of entertaining activities (coast, mountains, Portland). Pullman is close to Moscow, ID - end of story.
