|
|
Post by fridaynightlights on Oct 7, 2017 15:27:04 GMT -8
This is not a great SC team. They have not really beaten anybody this year and look disinterested at times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike84 on Oct 7, 2017 16:16:54 GMT -8
I understand that this thread is just dark humor but the Beavers actually did continue to make progress today. My time at OSU exactly lined up with the Avezzano years. The fact that I was still a fan after that indicates that I don't give up on my team. I started donating to the BASF in 1997, before the winning began. I donate (and buy tickets) not based on wins but because I want to do what I can to help the program be as successful as possible. When things are going badly, I don't seek out things to make it seem even worse. I don't latch on to every negative report and rumor. I find ways to look for progress even when it doesn't show up in the win column. It's how I work and how I continue to have OSU sports as one of my main hobbies. We knew going into this season that this 5 game stretch would likely not results in wins. Last week looked especially hopeless with Luton having gone out. On game day, our defense played possibly their best half of the season, which was good, but the second half looked all too familiar. The offense was nearly non-existent. To try to take some emotion out of my reaction, however, I used a scoring system that gave the Beavers weighted points for positive plays (first downs, big plays, forcing punts, getting turnovers, etc). Completely by coincidence, the weighted scoring ended up giving the Beavers 41 points (compared to an unfortunate 42 actual points for UW). So, it was a "close game".  I used the same scoring system today. OSU ended up with 49 "points". That's progress, especially on the road against a ranked team. And independent of pretend points, the Beavers actually did play well in many aspects. It is not a stretch at all to say that the Beavers were within inches of another 14-17 points at least. The offense was varied, within the confines of our limited weapons. The defense continued to improve in many ways. So, no, the Beavers did not win. It's not a "moral victory" even. But looking at various areas did show improvement and the Beavers were so close to putting up 24+ in this game. It's better than regression, at least. Go Beavs! Mike '84 |
|
|
|
WE WIN!
Oct 7, 2017 16:28:25 GMT -8
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 7, 2017 16:28:25 GMT -8
I understand that this thread is just dark humor but the Beavers actually did continue to make progress today.My time at OSU exactly lined up with the Avezzano years. The fact that I was still a fan after that indicates that I don't give up on my team. I started donating to the BASF in 1997, before the winning began. I donate (and buy tickets) not based on wins but because I want to do what I can to help the program be as successful as possible. When things are going badly, I don't seek out things to make it seem even worse. I don't latch on to every negative report and rumor. I find ways to look for progress even when it doesn't show up in the win column. It's how I work and how I continue to have OSU sports as one of my main hobbies. We knew going into this season that this 5 game stretch would likely not results in wins. Last week looked especially hopeless with Luton having gone out. On game day, our defense played possibly their best half of the season, which was good, but the second half looked all too familiar. The offense was nearly non-existent. To try to take some emotion out of my reaction, however, I used a scoring system that gave the Beavers weighted points for positive plays (first downs, big plays, forcing punts, getting turnovers, etc). Completely by coincidence, the weighted scoring ended up giving the Beavers 41 points (compared to an unfortunate 42 actual points for UW). So, it was a "close game". I used the same scoring system today. OSU ended up with 49 "points". That's progress, especially on the road against a top ranked team. And independent of pretend points, the Beavers actually did play well in many aspects. It is not a stretch at all to say that the Beavers were within inches of another 14-17 points at least. The offense was varied, within the confines of our limited weapons. The defense continued to improve in many ways. So, no, the Beavers did not win. It's not a "moral victory" even. But looking at various areas did show improvement and the Beavers were so close to putting up 24+ in this game. It's better than regression, at least. Go Beavs! Mike '84 Wish you had posted earlier... we have some clueless that just don't get "self preservation" humor/negativity. |
|
|
|
Post by abureid on Oct 7, 2017 18:53:50 GMT -8
Wise words from a man who has suffered. The early 80's were tough on us fans.
The biggest difference between the 80's and now, is my weekend doesn't consist of getting drunk at a crappy football game and chasing coeds. I am no longer fast enough to chase coeds.
It will get better, our schedule gets softer, we are improving.
|
|
|
|
WE WIN!
Oct 7, 2017 18:56:09 GMT -8
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 7, 2017 18:56:09 GMT -8
Wise words from a man who has suffered. The early 80's were tough on us fans. The biggest difference between the 80's and now, is my weekend doesn't consist of getting drunk at a crappy football game and chasing coeds. I am no longer fast enough to chase coeds. It will get better, our schedule gets softer, we are improving. You just need to get them more drunk than you!! Chase is easier... but, then again for those who have no sense of humor/too PC I'm going to get scolded  |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Oct 7, 2017 19:33:09 GMT -8
What did Jim McMahon say about the coeds at BYU? You can chase them, you just can't catch them.
|
|
|
|
WE WIN!
Oct 7, 2017 19:35:54 GMT -8
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 7, 2017 19:35:54 GMT -8
What did Jim McMahon say about the coeds at BYU? You can chase them, you just can't catch them. Have you seen some of those BYU coeds?  Not sure Jim tried real hard. JK Ladies... you're gorgeous... |
|
|
|
Post by abureid on Oct 7, 2017 20:17:18 GMT -8
What did Jim McMahon say about the coeds at BYU? You can chase them, you just can't catch them. Have you seen some of those BYU coeds? Not sure Jim tried real hard. JK Ladies... you're gorgeous... I think at BYU you are allowed to keep up to 3 coeds, after that it is catch and release only |
|
|
|
WE WIN!
Oct 7, 2017 21:00:16 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 7, 2017 21:00:16 GMT -8
Have you seen some of those BYU coeds? Not sure Jim tried real hard. JK Ladies... you're gorgeous... I think at BYU you are allowed to keep up to 3 coeds, after that it is catch and release only Ya... that makes sense... practice! |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Oct 7, 2017 21:58:27 GMT -8
December 2009 - I park in that shtty parking lot of the shtty Sam Boyd Stadium. We are playing BYU in the bowl. There is an extended van a couple of spots from me. It has those stick figure human stickers in the back window. I kid you not - man, woman, 15 small people. Two guys were also looking at the van. One says, I'm looking for a bigger vehicle with (stickers) man, woman, woman, woman, woman, and 20 or so small people. It was the highlight of my night out there.
|
|
Not sure Jim tried real hard.