|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Apr 3, 2024 12:51:01 GMT -8
Depends on how much cash is in the sack. Saw some guy on Eggers' twitter say TVO is a "$750,000 player." In what universe? Not this one. Pesos? I was thinking piasters, but yeah. Certainly not euros. Confederate money?
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Apr 3, 2024 12:57:35 GMT -8
Canzano reporting that he has been told that another 3 to 6 OSU wbb players are weighing their options How much do their options weigh? According to some here it is at least $50k. Wrong "options"?
|
|
|
Post by rmancarl on Apr 3, 2024 12:58:45 GMT -8
I like Canzano's reporting, and he has really done OSU fair, most of the time, in my mind, but didn't all of us think numerous players on this team would "weigh their options"? I know if he had ask me, I would have told him that. In fact, tell me how many schools do not have at a number of their players weighing their options. Look at the portal. There's already over 900 in the WBB portal. It's a tough WBB world right now. Oregon comes in last in the Pac-12 and then loses it's two best players in the portal. We can't sit back anymore and say "hey, this team is going to be really good over the next couple years as the team matures" because teams just don't stick together anymore. I'm guilty of saying that this year. I was really looking forward to the next two years. Maybe the rest of the team will stick together, but I wouldn't bet my money on it, and it's probably wrong to talk about next season until the portal closes, because the player(s) you are talking about very well may not be around next season. Yeah, downer post on my part. Sorry, just venting, but venting reality unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Apr 3, 2024 13:00:27 GMT -8
How much do their options weigh? Depends on how much cash is in the sack. Saw some guy on Eggers' twitter say TVO is a "$750,000 player." In what universe? Not this one. Weird Paige Brueckers "valuation" is only $640k... of course as the young woman explained almost all her deals, besides Nike, involve donations to charity or in one case building a store in her old middle school to fight food shortages in families. Maybe Jerry paid her not to use "America's Team"??
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Apr 3, 2024 13:08:52 GMT -8
Rumors are the Timea has filed her transfer portal paperwork.
|
|
|
Post by markarmour04 on Apr 3, 2024 13:15:15 GMT -8
The lesson for all of us — not lecturing, I’m talking to myself too — these are free and independent women with their own lives and families and futures, and they should live and do as they please.
We all know this, but yet we allow ourselves to say “we are family!” We are not— I have a family, they have a family, and they are not the same. I like watching them play basketball, but other than that we likely have nothing in common. They don’t consider my feelings when making life decisions, and they shouldn’t. That would be stupid.
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Apr 3, 2024 13:22:57 GMT -8
Rumors are the Timea has filed her transfer portal paperwork. Hopefully no social media exit post.....but I'm sure it's coming.
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Apr 3, 2024 14:10:01 GMT -8
Depends on how much cash is in the sack. Saw some guy on Eggers' twitter say TVO is a "$750,000 player." In what universe? Not this one. Weird Paige Brueckers "valuation" is only $640k... of course as the young woman explained almost all her deals, besides Nike, involve donations to charity or in one case building a store in her old middle school to fight food shortages in families. Maybe Jerry paid her not to use "America's Team"?? ag'87 says that rgeorge's value as a poster is about $800k to $850k. We disagree on how much NIL money is available but these valuation numbers make about as much sense as a stock value of billions when gross income is 500k.
|
|
93beav
Sophomore
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_black.png)
Posts: 2,178
Member is Online
|
Post by 93beav on Apr 3, 2024 14:15:36 GMT -8
I look at it slightly differently...Take family out of the equation, which by itself is a little weird because that's what WBB has been selling itself as for a long time and the players seemed to buy into that, but maybe not.
Imagine you're doing a job you love and every year, forevermore, there are jobs available for what you do and you always qualify. And some years there are jobs that pay more, and sometimes the jobs let you work with friends or let you work with really brilliant people (let's just use engineering as an example).
Now you don't have to care about the customers, because that's essentially what we are. And you can switch jobs every year and maybe your current employer would understand. But if you kept doing this, the other employers would eventually be like "Why do you keep hopping every year to a new job? I don't want to hire you and invest in training you, getting you up to speed, making you better, paying you a generous wage and then you leave." And the customers would stop buying the product because each year there would be a brand new UI and different features and rarely is anything ever the same. Eventually, in the real world, the problem usually but not always takes care of itself. The problem is that in college sports right now you have 4-5 years. You're switching a limited number of times. The other employers don't care because they are burned by the same thing, someone is in and out of the whole system across schools in 4-5, and they're trying to maintain face with the customers. And you have no recourse to the investment you've put in and lost.
So yes, you're right, the engineer doesn't have to care about the customers or anyone else. They could always just go on thinking about themselves. After all "it's just business", right? (I am so tired of hearing that). Except that it's not really business, it's like pure capitalism without any government intervention to prevent domination. It's also about a school and a community you become part of...I honestly think that's the psychological mistake we've made all along is associating a sport with a community with a non-profit like a university. The athletes don't owe anything to any of us. But I sincerely wish then, that they'd just shut up when they're playing for us and not make any comments about how great it is to play here and I sincerely wish that when someone on the board disparages a player and someone comes to their rescue they wouldn't. Because if it's just a business, and they're just employees (and we know they are) and they don't give a **** about the free education, the free nutrition coach, the free physical therapist, the free meals and everything else provided then they need to be treated like they are just random, nondescript employees. Brutal, but I think it's coming to that.
What really stinks about all of this is that I'm positive there are some women (and men for other sports, etc.) that DO care. That DO want to be associated with OSU. That DO care about giving their best. That absolutely DO get excited about being a part of a community. But they're also all sucked up into this game that we, as customers, put them into. TVO put in her years, I don't begrudge her. But the system is, as we know, broken.
|
|
|
Post by ricke71 on Apr 3, 2024 14:18:38 GMT -8
The lesson for all of us — not lecturing, I’m talking to myself too — these are free and independent women with their own lives and families and futures, and they should live and do as they please. We all know this, but yet we allow ourselves to say “we are family!” We are not— I have a family, they have a family, and they are not the same. I like watching them play basketball, but other than that we likely have nothing in common. They don’t consider my feelings when making life decisions, and they shouldn’t. That would be stupid. It's impossible to put myself in their place - I'm a 75 year old man, an OSU graduate, I grew up in Oregon, and I have (or had) nothing more than neighborhood level skills at any sport. But, it's easy to see why a young woman, who: a.) has 2 or more years of eligibility left b.) has special skills or great all-around skill c.) hails from a State that has 1 or more universities that will play in a P-5 conference (i.e. Utah, Colorado, Texas or Wisconsin) in the 2024-25 season d.) has dreams of a professional career in basketball ....would take a good hard look at moving on, ESPECIALLY when her current team is destined for a huge downgrade (in terms of conference affiliation) for the next season.
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Apr 3, 2024 14:30:19 GMT -8
Well, we don't really know who will actually leave aside from TVO. I have no doubt that a couple of the players who are "weighing options" are doing so due to lack of playing time or whatever. I don't want anyone else to leave but there are specific players (Beers, Gardiner, Hunter for sure. Maybe Dom as well) that the future of the team really rests on. Beers is no doubt the one you've got to keep if you want any chance of a quick rebuild.
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Apr 3, 2024 14:39:28 GMT -8
The lesson for all of us — not lecturing, I’m talking to myself too — these are free and independent women with their own lives and families and futures, and they should live and do as they please. We all know this, but yet we allow ourselves to say “we are family!” We are not— I have a family, they have a family, and they are not the same. I like watching them play basketball, but other than that we likely have nothing in common. They don’t consider my feelings when making life decisions, and they shouldn’t. That would be stupid. It's impossible to put myself in their place - I'm a 75 year old man, an OSU graduate, I grew up in Oregon, and I have (or had) nothing more than neighborhood level skills at any sport. But, it's easy to see why a young woman, who: a.) has 2 or more years of eligibility left b.) has special skills or great all-around skill c.) hails from a State that has 1 or more universities that will play in a P-5 conference (i.e. Utah, Colorado, Texas or Wisconsin) in the 2024-25 season d.) has dreams of a professional career in basketball ....would take a good hard look at moving on, ESPECIALLY when her current team is destined for a huge downgrade (in terms of conference affiliation) for the next season. I agree that playing in the WCC isn't equal to the Pac-12 as far as the competitive level but none of these points really stand up to scrutiny. OSU just made the Elite Eight. If everyone had returned (or everyone does without TVO) the national perception of the team is not going to drop. It's already been set. Did Utah make the Elite Eight? Wisconsin? was Wisconsin even in the tournament? Colorado did well but lost three games to OSU. Texas is good but AJ would not get any PT there. And all of the OSU players already chose to not stay home. Maybe they go back. Maybe. Playing for any other team isn't going to make much of a difference as far as getting a shot as a professional. Announcers were already talking about Beers as if she was pretty much a given for the WNBA. So unless there's a hefty deal in the works to leave a two-season future as a dominant team in the WCC or there's something going haywire behind the scenes, it doesn't make much sense.
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Apr 3, 2024 14:43:45 GMT -8
The lesson for all of us — not lecturing, I’m talking to myself too — these are free and independent women with their own lives and families and futures, and they should live and do as they please. We all know this, but yet we allow ourselves to say “we are family!” We are not— I have a family, they have a family, and they are not the same. I like watching them play basketball, but other than that we likely have nothing in common. They don’t consider my feelings when making life decisions, and they shouldn’t. That would be stupid. You are right, they are not actually our family. But the money that they can make is based off of fan interest, and if players start to bounce to whatever college has the moola then fan interest will die and the college game with it. So this might be good for players now, but not so great for the long term.
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Apr 3, 2024 14:45:49 GMT -8
I do find the sports tribalism quite odd. I had all kinds of crazy ideas at 18 on which school to go to, and the ones that won out were not very pragmatic ones.
If I'm even objective about it, the reasons to stay at a school for these girls are:
a) I like who I play with b) I like my coach c) The school has my major of interest d) My school is well respected in my major e) I'm very loyal to X school
Item a) changes at the end of every season. Item b) has the potential to change every offseason. Item c and d don't change, so they better weigh in heavily or they don't hold much water. Item e) is purely an emotional thing. When we advise people to not be loyal to their employer to their own personal detriment, why would we have a different standard for student athletes?
The whole NCAA minimal-transfer history was artificial and terrible for student athletes - if I change my interest and my current school has no academic program, tough luck? Or my family/loved one moves - too bad? That's basically how it was before. Unless colleges actually have kids sign financial contracts and make it officially the pro sport that it is, this transfer era represents a much fairer situation for athletes.
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Apr 3, 2024 15:17:29 GMT -8
I do find the sports tribalism quite odd. I had all kinds of crazy ideas at 18 on which school to go to, and the ones that won out were not very pragmatic ones. If I'm even objective about it, the reasons to stay at a school for these girls are: a) I like who I play with b) I like my coach c) The school has my major of interest d) My school is well respected in my major e) I'm very loyal to X school Item a) changes at the end of every season. Item b) has the potential to change every offseason. Item c and d don't change, so they better weigh in heavily or they don't hold much water. Item e) is purely an emotional thing. When we advise people to not be loyal to their employer to their own personal detriment, why would we have a different standard for student athletes? The whole NCAA minimal-transfer history was artificial and terrible for student athletes - if I change my interest and my current school has no academic program, tough luck? Or my family/loved one moves - too bad? That's basically how it was before. Unless colleges actually have kids sign financial contracts and make it officially the pro sport that it is, this transfer era represents a much fairer situation for athletes. "The whole NCAA minimal-transfer history was artificial and terrible for student athletes". Artificial sure. Terrible? I've known a couple of dozen former college athletes, and from the way they talk about it I think they saw it as the highlight of their lives. And on comparing academics to basketball. Yeah, kinda different. I and all of my siblings went to a cheap university to figure out what we wanted to major in and then found the best place for the major we decided on and transferred there. Basketball players, their major IS basketball. And you make it seem as if they could never transfer before. Transfers were not that uncommon. And again on things being fairer now. How full do you think Gill will be when fans figure out that the Beav's are just a farm team for LSU etc? I think you will find that the fans will wholeheartedly disagree with you on how fair things are now.
|
|