|
|
Post by messi on Jan 21, 2018 20:33:37 GMT -8
I thought the streak would have ended last season, with both teams winning at home. So I was only off a year. Going forward, I like our positioning in this rivalry. Friday showed that at our best, a "down" OSU team can beat them, and all their talent. And going forward, OSU has bigger upgrades and recruits coming in, whereas that other team is only going to ride with what they already have for another two years. We're only going to get better, and the other team is going to be the same as we see.
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,729 
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Jan 21, 2018 20:50:45 GMT -8
Well, they only essentially lose Lexi Bando off of this team, and they add Erin Boley plus a 4 star PG and 3 star Forward. And they are projecting as a #1 seed this year in the tourney....
The series will likely be more balanced in future years, but the 14 game streak was a good one, and we can start another (positive) one hopefully soon.
Go Beavers!
|
|
|
|
Post by beavdowg on Jan 21, 2018 21:33:01 GMT -8
I think it's naive to think that Graves won't continue to recruit at the level he has so far. He will likely continue to bring in top talent. I believe we need to continue to recruit like we have, perhaps even step it up a notch so that Rueck's superb coaching is matched by our talent level.
|
|
|
|
Post by 411500 on Jan 22, 2018 7:04:57 GMT -8
beavdowg - - I think your comments on recruiting summarize the situation perfectly......GO BEAVS !!
|
|
|
|
Post by beavadelic on Jan 22, 2018 19:17:08 GMT -8
I think it's naive to think that Graves won't continue to recruit at the level he has so far. He will likely continue to bring in top talent. I believe we need to continue to recruit like we have, perhaps even step it up a notch so that Rueck's superb coaching is matched by our talent level. Right on. The thing that I like is that Rueck is recruiting real well, and if the talent is anything close to equal (and it should be), I like the guy on our bench better. That’s no knock on Graves, it’s more reflective of my confidence in Rueck. |
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Jan 22, 2018 21:34:19 GMT -8
I'll give a knock on Graves. The "tougher" team will win indeed. I don't remember anything about him conceding that OSU is the tougher team.
If you'd told me before I'd heard the results of the game that Sabally was the high scorer for UofO and that McGwire scored twice as many points as Hebard I'd have asked how many points OSU won by. Weird game and I'm sorry to see that Mik is still in her scoring slump. Happy to see the bench came through this time.
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,729
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Jan 22, 2018 22:01:13 GMT -8
Sabally looks like an emerging talent, and with SI, Hebard, McGwire, Boley etc they will be a tough team to contend with....
I was bummed for Taylor Kalmer - she had some clean looks that would have really helped her cement a reputation as a gunner, but it was not to be. It also looked like Washington was playing tentative, passing up some open looks. Taya's range and passing have helped her grab the starting role in the forward spot. Will be interesting to see if Patricia Morris comes in at the forward or center next year, what Grymek's ceiling is, how prepared for Pac-12 AA is, and where Jazz lands in the rotation. I think Destiny will be starting just for ball handling and leadership. Watching and practicing with the team for a year will definitely pay off......We will have lots of additional options at almost every position, and good to see Kat coming into her own. Mik is certainly in a mini-slump - I seem to recall the same happening to her last year at about this point in the season as well, but Syd was able to cover for her.
Go Beavers!
|
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Jan 23, 2018 6:39:04 GMT -8
I attempt to not "get emotionally involved" and just enjoy the games for the entertainment value and to support the Beavs. That being said, I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money.
Coach Rueck is a better coach than Coach Graves and OSU runs a better program. What Oregon has done is "bribe" Coach Campbell with more money and probably spends way more money on recruiting expenses,etc.
So in summation, I am not impressed with the Duck's "success" and find it impossible to be supportive or objective in any way about their program.
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,729
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Jan 23, 2018 8:12:22 GMT -8
skyrider - understand what you are saying. I too am trying to not "get emotionally involved" when rooting for the Beavers. But I am in "worse" shape than you: I simply dislike the 'uck sports programs. I can't root for them in any sport. I don't think I would be able to root for an 'uck victory even if the net result was positive for the Beavers. A good day is one where the Beavers win, a great day is one where the Beavers win and the 'ucks lose. I root for 2 teams from week to week - the Beavers and the 'uck opponent. I don't subscribe to "good for the state of Oregon" or "good for the Pac-12" arguments. Simply put, I am a Beaver, and a second generation one at that :-).
|
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Jan 23, 2018 8:22:32 GMT -8
Amen and "right on" to your sentiments brother!
|
|
|
|
Post by ricke71 on Jan 23, 2018 9:45:42 GMT -8
skyrider - understand what you are saying. I too am trying to not "get emotionally involved" when rooting for the Beavers. But I am in "worse" shape than you: I simply dislike the 'uck sports programs. I can't root for them in any sport. I don't think I would be able to root for an 'uck victory even if the net result was positive for the Beavers. A good day is one where the Beavers win, a great day is one where the Beavers win and the 'ucks lose. I root for 2 teams from week to week - the Beavers and the 'uck opponent. I don't subscribe to "good for the state of Oregon" or "good for the Pac-12" arguments. Simply put, I am a Beaver, and a second generation one at that :-). 4th generation here......I NEVER root for a 'uck individual ot team (well...not since Pre anyhow). re-Mik offensive slump. Hopefully it'll turn around, she's only at 31% FG% since PAC 12 season started. Ugh. Seems like she had a bit more success last season...and earlier this season (against weaker opponents however) with her muscular drives to the hoop, than has been the case lately. Some good moves, but without successful finish. I think her lower shooting percentage is a direct result of all of the shot-clock-winding-down forced outside shots or doomed drive attempts against good inside defense. Lack of true/experienced point guard is causing the offense to throw up far too many prayers. |
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Jan 23, 2018 11:04:47 GMT -8
I attempt to not "get emotionally involved" and just enjoy the games for the entertainment value and to support the Beavs. That being said, I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money. Coach Rueck is a better coach than Coach Graves and OSU runs a better program. What Oregon has done is "bribe" Coach Campbell with more money and probably spends way more money on recruiting expenses,etc. So in summation, I am not impressed with the Duck's "success" and find it impossible to be supportive or objective in any way about their program. "I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money." I'd like to know exactly what you mean by this, especially as it relates to women's sports. My experience with women's college sports says the college education and opportunity to play are the most important criteria for women receiving a scholarship offer. Like any athletic scholarship there are typically multiple factors that drive the final choice of which school to attend. For women, the "fit" with their teammates - people they will spend thousands of hours with over the course of 4 years is very important. Add the relationship with the coaching staff as a similar factor. From your post a person might conclude that those things do not matter to the women athletes at Oregon - that their decision to accept a scholarship from Oregon is more connected to the facilities and other tangible products of the athletic experience at Oregon. Is it possible for a female student-athlete to choose Oregon for the same reasons they choose a school like Washington State or Arizona State or Arizona. Certainly Oregon's women's basketball team does not have the recent cache' born from success that the OSU program has. And it is easy for any observer to see that OSU's recent success has helped feed their recruiting success. So why wouldn't an elite 8 run by Oregon be reason for a recruit to seriously consider that Oregon is at the beginning of a rise that OSU has already made? From published reports and talking heads, Kelly Graves does have a good reputation as a coach - and what has been built in the last 3 years is evidence that he can teach and coach and build a team that can win. I guess I don't understand why you can't appreciate the talent of the Oregon players and the coaching staff - respect their work. You can still "hate to lose to the Ducks", but that feeling does not require trying to demean the individuals by suggesting they are "bought and paid for" rather than hard-working people that are part of a team. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jan 23, 2018 11:09:44 GMT -8
I attempt to not "get emotionally involved" and just enjoy the games for the entertainment value and to support the Beavs. That being said, I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money. Coach Rueck is a better coach than Coach Graves and OSU runs a better program. What Oregon has done is "bribe" Coach Campbell with more money and probably spends way more money on recruiting expenses,etc. So in summation, I am not impressed with the Duck's "success" and find it impossible to be supportive or objective in any way about their program. "I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money." I'd like to know exactly what you mean by this, especially as it relates to women's sports. My experience with women's college sports says the college education and opportunity to play are the most important criteria for women receiving a scholarship offer. Like any athletic scholarship there are typically multiple factors that drive the final choice of which school to attend. For women, the "fit" with their teammates - people they will spend thousands of hours with over the course of 4 years is very important. Add the relationship with the coaching staff as a similar factor. From your post a person might conclude that those things do not matter to the women athletes at Oregon - that their decision to accept a scholarship from Oregon is more connected to the facilities and other tangible products of the athletic experience at Oregon. Is it possible for a female student-athlete to choose Oregon for the same reasons they choose a school like Washington State or Arizona State or Arizona. Certainly Oregon's women's basketball team does not have the recent cache' born from success that the OSU program has. And it is easy for any observer to see that OSU's recent success has helped feed their recruiting success. So why wouldn't an elite 8 run by Oregon be reason for a recruit to seriously consider that Oregon is at the beginning of a rise that OSU has already made? From published reports and talking heads, Kelly Graves does have a good reputation as a coach - and what has been built in the last 3 years is evidence that he can teach and coach and build a team that can win. I guess I don't understand why you can't appreciate the talent of the Oregon players and the coaching staff - respect their work. You can still "hate to lose to the Ducks", but that feeling does not require trying to demean the individuals by suggesting they are "bought and paid for" rather than hard-working people that are part of a team. And you never will. FTd! Forever. |
|
|
|
Post by messi on Jan 23, 2018 11:58:24 GMT -8
I attempt to not "get emotionally involved" and just enjoy the games for the entertainment value and to support the Beavs. That being said, I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money. Coach Rueck is a better coach than Coach Graves and OSU runs a better program. What Oregon has done is "bribe" Coach Campbell with more money and probably spends way more money on recruiting expenses,etc. So in summation, I am not impressed with the Duck's "success" and find it impossible to be supportive or objective in any way about their program. "I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money." I'd like to know exactly what you mean by this, especially as it relates to women's sports. My experience with women's college sports says the college education and opportunity to play are the most important criteria for women receiving a scholarship offer. Like any athletic scholarship there are typically multiple factors that drive the final choice of which school to attend. For women, the "fit" with their teammates - people they will spend thousands of hours with over the course of 4 years is very important. Add the relationship with the coaching staff as a similar factor. From your post a person might conclude that those things do not matter to the women athletes at Oregon - that their decision to accept a scholarship from Oregon is more connected to the facilities and other tangible products of the athletic experience at Oregon. Is it possible for a female student-athlete to choose Oregon for the same reasons they choose a school like Washington State or Arizona State or Arizona. Certainly Oregon's women's basketball team does not have the recent cache' born from success that the OSU program has. And it is easy for any observer to see that OSU's recent success has helped feed their recruiting success. So why wouldn't an elite 8 run by Oregon be reason for a recruit to seriously consider that Oregon is at the beginning of a rise that OSU has already made? From published reports and talking heads, Kelly Graves does have a good reputation as a coach - and what has been built in the last 3 years is evidence that he can teach and coach and build a team that can win. I guess I don't understand why you can't appreciate the talent of the Oregon players and the coaching staff - respect their work. You can still "hate to lose to the Ducks", but that feeling does not require trying to demean the individuals by suggesting they are "bought and paid for" rather than hard-working people that are part of a team. Ewww, a duck fan. |
|
|
|
Post by gnawitall on Jan 23, 2018 12:00:31 GMT -8
I attempt to not "get emotionally involved" and just enjoy the games for the entertainment value and to support the Beavs. That being said, I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money. Coach Rueck is a better coach than Coach Graves and OSU runs a better program. What Oregon has done is "bribe" Coach Campbell with more money and probably spends way more money on recruiting expenses,etc. So in summation, I am not impressed with the Duck's "success" and find it impossible to be supportive or objective in any way about their program. "I do have an intense dislike for the Duck's teams simply because they are in most cases "buying their success" with Phil Knight money." I'd like to know exactly what you mean by this, especially as it relates to women's sports. My experience with women's college sports says the college education and opportunity to play are the most important criteria for women receiving a scholarship offer. Like any athletic scholarship there are typically multiple factors that drive the final choice of which school to attend. For women, the "fit" with their teammates - people they will spend thousands of hours with over the course of 4 years is very important. Add the relationship with the coaching staff as a similar factor. From your post a person might conclude that those things do not matter to the women athletes at Oregon - that their decision to accept a scholarship from Oregon is more connected to the facilities and other tangible products of the athletic experience at Oregon. Is it possible for a female student-athlete to choose Oregon for the same reasons they choose a school like Washington State or Arizona State or Arizona. Certainly Oregon's women's basketball team does not have the recent cache' born from success that the OSU program has. And it is easy for any observer to see that OSU's recent success has helped feed their recruiting success. So why wouldn't an elite 8 run by Oregon be reason for a recruit to seriously consider that Oregon is at the beginning of a rise that OSU has already made? From published reports and talking heads, Kelly Graves does have a good reputation as a coach - and what has been built in the last 3 years is evidence that he can teach and coach and build a team that can win. I guess I don't understand why you can't appreciate the talent of the Oregon players and the coaching staff - respect their work. You can still "hate to lose to the Ducks", but that feeling does not require trying to demean the individuals by suggesting they are "bought and paid for" rather than hard-working people that are part of a team. You make the comment 'especially as it pertains to women's sports'. It's naïve to think that Nike money hasn't catapulted Oregon women's sports into top ten rankings in Volleyball, Basketball and Softball directly or indirectly. That's no fault of any Oregon fan. It's an advantage you have. I can't speak for all OSU fans but I'm sure there are some, including me, that have been shamed my whole life by friends for being a beaver fan and it stings when our baseball team wins two national titles after working for years of hard work under both Jack Riley and Pat Casey and Nike money directly influences not only the restart of a baseball program at UO but they are within the top ten in what? two or three years and our women's basketball team wins three pac 12 titles after Scott Rueck resurrects the program from utter chaos and then boom, Oregon's women's team in the blink of an eye has top recruiting classes and ranked in the top ten. For sure there is some bitterness there for some of us. I have the most respect for Rich Brooks and Mike White. They were very influential in the rise of their respective programs to a competitive level. After that, Nike money, gets the most credit IMHO. But again, it's not duck fan's fault, it is your advantage and no reason not to embrace it. There is plenty reason though to just admit. |
|
