|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 5, 2018 10:14:30 GMT -8
Forget about athletics, it would also be a serious blow to the prestige of the university as a whole, not having Stanford, UCLA, Washington and the other elite West Coast research universities as a our peers. We would be considered (and rightly so) the inferior university in the state.
As I said, dumbest thing I've read here all year.
I did not graduate from OSU, but immediately became a die-hard Beaver fan after moving to the area more than three decades ago. I am continually amazed at the consistent negativity many OSU grads - who should be the biggest advocates of their alma mater - have toward their own school, even when our football program was rolling in the early 2000s.
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Feb 5, 2018 14:16:17 GMT -8
A lot of people my age (class of '85) remember their alma mater as a second rate school that happened to have a few pockets of excellence. Forestry, agriculture, basketball - those were first class. But football was a disaster, baseball hardly better than a club sport, and the school as a whole was mired in mediocrity and self-pity. A walk around campus took you past multiple buildings that were fully or partially condemned - the rhodies were beautiful but the bricks and mortar was run-down. Nothing positive ever seemed to happen. There was serious talk about moving the entire engineering department to Portland State! Robert MacVicar had no ambitions for our school and blamed everything on the lack of legislative support.
Then came Paul Risser, and everything changed. He actually expected excellence, well, everywhere, and he didn't care for the old excuses. And Ed Ray followed, and kept it going. The campus today is nothing like it was, the programs are far more competitive, and the closer you look, the more the differences are apparent.
But here's the thing. We all left our alma mater and most of us don't come back much. Even if we catch a game at Gill or Reser now and then, most of us haven't really absorbed what's happened since we left. Most of us still act as though MacVicar is the Pres and the legendary AD Dutch Baughman still runs the sports. A lot of my old classmates talk down OSU. Just this weekend, I had a dorm-mate ask where his kid should go for Computer Science . . . OSU isn't even on his radar! Another dorm-mate got his MS in CS back then - he didn't even attempt to plug OSU to our mutual friend.
I'd love to see a survey of attitudes broken down by age. My bet is that there is a powerful generational thing at work here. And my generation is living in the past - a very sad past.
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on Feb 5, 2018 19:22:22 GMT -8
A lot of people my age (class of '85) remember their alma mater as a second rate school that happened to have a few pockets of excellence. Forestry, agriculture, basketball - those were first class. But football was a disaster, baseball hardly better than a club sport, and the school as a whole was mired in mediocrity and self-pity. A walk around campus took you past multiple buildings that were fully or partially condemned - the rhodies were beautiful but the bricks and mortar was run-down. Nothing positive ever seemed to happen. There was serious talk about moving the entire engineering department to Portland State! Robert MacVicar had no ambitions for our school and blamed everything on the lack of legislative support. Then came Paul Risser, and everything changed. He actually expected excellence, well, everywhere, and he didn't care for the old excuses. And Ed Ray followed, and kept it going. The campus today is nothing like it was, the programs are far more competitive, and the closer you look, the more the differences are apparent. But here's the thing. We all left our alma mater and most of us don't come back much. Even if we catch a game at Gill or Reser now and then, most of us haven't really absorbed what's happened since we left. Most of us still act as though MacVicar is the Pres and the legendary AD Dutch Baughman still runs the sports. A lot of my old classmates talk down OSU. Just this weekend, I had a dorm-mate ask where his kid should go for Computer Science . . . OSU isn't even on his radar! Another dorm-mate got his MS in CS back then - he didn't even attempt to plug OSU to our mutual friend. I'd love to see a survey of attitudes broken down by age. My bet is that there is a powerful generational thing at work here. And my generation is living in the past - a very sad past. Great, honest, tough-to-hear post! I see that as VERY evident. My dad worked at OSU from '70-'88. He LOVED it, but he "felt" exactly what you just put into words. My eldest son graduated in '03, and my youngest son in '2008. They have a COMPLETELY different take, and it's changing (for the better) every year. I will say; when both my sons attended OSU, football WAS MORE than competitive. Important distinction.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Feb 5, 2018 20:20:26 GMT -8
OSU has got to be one of the worst P5 athletic programs in the country. Times have changed and OSU does not belong in the PAC 12. We belong in the Mountain West or maybe even in the Big Sky. You're retarded. Don't sugarcoat it, give it to him straight.
|
|
dK
Freshman
Posts: 393
|
Post by dK on Feb 5, 2018 22:28:25 GMT -8
A lot of people my age (class of '85) remember their alma mater as a second rate school that happened to have a few pockets of excellence. Forestry, agriculture, basketball - those were first class. But football was a disaster, baseball hardly better than a club sport, and the school as a whole was mired in mediocrity and self-pity. A walk around campus took you past multiple buildings that were fully or partially condemned - the rhodies were beautiful but the bricks and mortar was run-down. Nothing positive ever seemed to happen. There was serious talk about moving the entire engineering department to Portland State! Robert MacVicar had no ambitions for our school and blamed everything on the lack of legislative support. Then came Paul Risser, and everything changed. He actually expected excellence, well, everywhere, and he didn't care for the old excuses. And Ed Ray followed, and kept it going. The campus today is nothing like it was, the programs are far more competitive, and the closer you look, the more the differences are apparent. But here's the thing. We all left our alma mater and most of us don't come back much. Even if we catch a game at Gill or Reser now and then, most of us haven't really absorbed what's happened since we left. Most of us still act as though MacVicar is the Pres and the legendary AD Dutch Baughman still runs the sports. A lot of my old classmates talk down OSU. Just this weekend, I had a dorm-mate ask where his kid should go for Computer Science . . . OSU isn't even on his radar! Another dorm-mate got his MS in CS back then - he didn't even attempt to plug OSU to our mutual friend. I'd love to see a survey of attitudes broken down by age. My bet is that there is a powerful generational thing at work here. And my generation is living in the past - a very sad past. Great, honest, tough-to-hear post! I see that as VERY evident. My dad worked at OSU from '70-'88. He LOVED it, but he "felt" exactly what you just put into words. My eldest son graduated in '03, and my youngest son in '2008. They have a COMPLETELY different take, and it's changing (for the better) every year. I will say; when both my sons attended OSU, football WAS MORE than competitive. Important distinction. To bennyskid, I would say you didn't get around enough. Baseball was a very competitive sport during the Jack Riley era no thanks to the powers that be. Calling them close to a club sport is a huge insult. Also, wasn't that also the Aki Hill era? Wrestling was still competitive nationally. The university had far more that a few pockets of academic excellence in that era, especially in the hard sciences. Oceanography, microbiology, food sciences are a few I can think of. To Lebaneeyore, I grew up in Corvallis in the 50's and 60's. OSC/OSU was very competitive in almost every sport they participated in. So it is not true that OS can only be competitive in a couple sports. Football - Prothro and Andros in his first few years. Basketball - Slats and Valenti in basketball. Dale Thomas in wrestling. Sam Bell and Berny Wagner - track and field. Coleman, Tanselli, and Riley in baseball. Oregon State has been competitive in many major sports at the same time and can be again. It has to be done the same way it was done before. The right coaches, hard work, low ego and high output. Remember Lebaneeyore, hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies.
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on Feb 5, 2018 22:39:50 GMT -8
Hope is a great thing. But hope without action, honesty and introspection just makes one feel good. Hoping something gets better has NEVER done a damn thing. Signed...eeyore
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Feb 6, 2018 7:05:56 GMT -8
dK: Ask Jack Riley if baseball was really an area where the college invested in success. Jack wasn't just coach, he was trainer, equipment manager and assistant groundskeeper, too. We invested zero dollars into that program, which got to play in the almighty Pac-10 NORTH with PSU and UP. Wrestling was a bright spot, but Aki Hill didn't get anything more to work with than Jack did. OSU put in the absolute minimum required to stay in the Pac.
You can't sugarcoat it: we eliminated TRACK AND FIELD!!! I suppose because javelins were so damn expensive.
And I absolutely stand by the statement that OSU had just a few pockets of excellence - and an overall culture of mediocrity and excuse-making. OSU offered somewhere around 200 degrees, and so far the list of exceptional ones is up to . . . what, a dozen? Meanwhile, the engineering department was housed in a building that didn't have adequate electrical service for modern equipment, the tower at Weatherford - our most photogenic building - was closed down for safety, and CS students were still programming on punch cards because there weren't enough terminals during dead week.
Fortunately, MacVicar is gone. Baughman is gone. The excuse-making is gone. But for some strange reason, the fan despair still lingers.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Feb 6, 2018 8:38:41 GMT -8
A lot of people my age (class of '85) remember their alma mater as a second rate school that happened to have a few pockets of excellence. Forestry, agriculture, basketball - those were first class. But football was a disaster, baseball hardly better than a club sport, and the school as a whole was mired in mediocrity and self-pity. A walk around campus took you past multiple buildings that were fully or partially condemned - the rhodies were beautiful but the bricks and mortar was run-down. Nothing positive ever seemed to happen. There was serious talk about moving the entire engineering department to Portland State! Robert MacVicar had no ambitions for our school and blamed everything on the lack of legislative support. Then came Paul Risser, and everything changed. He actually expected excellence, well, everywhere, and he didn't care for the old excuses. And Ed Ray followed, and kept it going. The campus today is nothing like it was, the programs are far more competitive, and the closer you look, the more the differences are apparent. But here's the thing. We all left our alma mater and most of us don't come back much. Even if we catch a game at Gill or Reser now and then, most of us haven't really absorbed what's happened since we left. Most of us still act as though MacVicar is the Pres and the legendary AD Dutch Baughman still runs the sports. A lot of my old classmates talk down OSU. Just this weekend, I had a dorm-mate ask where his kid should go for Computer Science . . . OSU isn't even on his radar! Another dorm-mate got his MS in CS back then - he didn't even attempt to plug OSU to our mutual friend. I'd love to see a survey of attitudes broken down by age. My bet is that there is a powerful generational thing at work here. And my generation is living in the past - a very sad past. Baseball compared to a club sport??? Not sure what you were doing or paying attention to, but you're about 180 degrees off on that observation. I was also in the class of '85, though I strategically strung it out to 86 without much problem. The engineering school was great. A swing and a miss there. As far as OSU's infrastructure you refer to, it was a huge, impressive complex to this kid from small town Idaho. Guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Feb 6, 2018 9:52:06 GMT -8
A lot of people my age (class of '85) remember their alma mater as a second rate school that happened to have a few pockets of excellence. Forestry, agriculture, basketball - those were first class. But football was a disaster, baseball hardly better than a club sport, and the school as a whole was mired in mediocrity and self-pity. A walk around campus took you past multiple buildings that were fully or partially condemned - the rhodies were beautiful but the bricks and mortar was run-down. Nothing positive ever seemed to happen. There was serious talk about moving the entire engineering department to Portland State! Robert MacVicar had no ambitions for our school and blamed everything on the lack of legislative support. Then came Paul Risser, and everything changed. He actually expected excellence, well, everywhere, and he didn't care for the old excuses. And Ed Ray followed, and kept it going. The campus today is nothing like it was, the programs are far more competitive, and the closer you look, the more the differences are apparent. But here's the thing. We all left our alma mater and most of us don't come back much. Even if we catch a game at Gill or Reser now and then, most of us haven't really absorbed what's happened since we left. Most of us still act as though MacVicar is the Pres and the legendary AD Dutch Baughman still runs the sports. A lot of my old classmates talk down OSU. Just this weekend, I had a dorm-mate ask where his kid should go for Computer Science . . . OSU isn't even on his radar! Another dorm-mate got his MS in CS back then - he didn't even attempt to plug OSU to our mutual friend. I'd love to see a survey of attitudes broken down by age. My bet is that there is a powerful generational thing at work here. And my generation is living in the past - a very sad past. I had a different experience (class of '91). Byrne was out President and the school had excellent agriculture, forestry, and oceanography. Engineering was a pretty good school (in fact, when I first got there, the engineering school bragged that it had the highest passing rate on the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam in the country). If I recall correctly, OSU also had a pretty good home-ec and food manufacturing program, as well. The business school was decent and the Economics department got a PhD program rolling. Liberal Arts wasn't considered a very good school, but even a few of those programs had a decent reputation.
I didn't think the buildings were that bad and most people that I knew liked the classic-college-campus feel of OSU. It's was and remains a beautiful college campus.
Athletics? Football was a joke and plenty of people suggested that we needed to drop down a conference so we could win some games. Basketball was good (but we never go past the first round of the NCAAs), gymnastics was good, wrestling was good, and baseball was a decent program (never made the post-season but often had winning records) in the Pac 10 North, which was dominated by Washington State. I used to enjoy stopping by the stadium on a Spring day to catch a few innings on my way home from classes. The track team folded (1988?) and I don't remember any of the other teams being particularly remarkable. Byrne did not make athletics a priority.
Plenty of people from my time at OSU still go back and enjoy seeing games there. People have a realistic attitude about the school...it's not Ivy League, but will serve you well if you decide to go there and apply yourself. Seriously, the only reason I would not recommend my daughter to go to OSU is 1) we live in CA and out-of-state tuition is ridiculous and 2) if she gets into a UC school, no matter which campus, she will have opportunity to go to one of the greatest public schools in the world at in-state tuition rates. But if I lived in Oregon...I would have no problem with her going to OSU.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Feb 6, 2018 10:03:04 GMT -8
dK: Ask Jack Riley if baseball was really an area where the college invested in success. Jack wasn't just coach, he was trainer, equipment manager and assistant groundskeeper, too. We invested zero dollars into that program, which got to play in the almighty Pac-10 NORTH with PSU and UP. dK already noted that baseball had some success despite the fact that the school didn't invest in it.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 6, 2018 10:05:29 GMT -8
You guys should all read, "A School for the People," the recently-published history of OSU. Lots of background, etc., on the MacVicar/Byrne eras, in particular. They had their drawbacks and different management styles but the refusal of the state legislature to properly fund higher education and Measure 5 really put them behind the 8-ball. Lots of material on Risser/Ray as well. It also does not paint a very nice picture of tsdtw, in regards to working together with OSU as a peer university. osupress.oregonstate.edu/book/school-for-people
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Feb 6, 2018 10:12:36 GMT -8
A lot of my old classmates talk down OSU. Just this weekend, I had a dorm-mate ask where his kid should go for Computer Science . . . OSU isn't even on his radar! Another dorm-mate got his MS in CS back then - he didn't even attempt to plug OSU to our mutual friend.I'd love to see a survey of attitudes broken down by age. My bet is that there is a powerful generational thing at work here. And my generation is living in the past - a very sad past. OSU's 2017 overall fall enrollment was 31,904 (up 1.9% from 2016) and is by far the largest university in the state. So it appears that OSU must be on someone's radar, just not your dorm-mates.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Feb 6, 2018 10:16:17 GMT -8
You guys should all read, "A School for the People," the recently-published history of OSU. Lots of background, etc., on the MacVicar/Byrne eras, in particular. They had their drawbacks and different management styles but the refusal of the state legislature to properly fund higher education and Measure 5 really put them behind the 8-ball. Lots of material on Risser/Ray as well. It also does not paint a very nice picture of tsdtw, in regards to working together with OSU as a peer university. osupress.oregonstate.edu/book/school-for-peopleI wonder how that compares to "The People's School: A History of Oregon State University," which was published the same year.
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Feb 6, 2018 10:43:37 GMT -8
dK already noted that baseball had some success despite the fact that the school didn't invest in it. "some success" - meaning occasionally winning a 6-team conference which included PSU and UP. That's just the definition of "success" that MacVicar made his career on. Blaming it on Measure 5 and legislative indifference is disingenuous. The legislature didn't suddenly change their attitude when Risser was appointed, and Measure 5 was never repealed. What changed is that Risser ended the excuses, made excellence an expectation, and took concrete actions to attain it. He pressed the flesh with potential donors in a way that MacVicar never did. He struck gold with Riley and Erickson - but the roots of our success were planted by Pettibone, who was a fantastic fundraiser who helped us make a huge leap in facilities. And Ed Ray has kept those expectations high. Today we have a billion-dollar endowment, hundred of millions in revenues annually from research grants, and millions more from royalties. And we don't measure success by beating PSU. There is not one single excuse made for the '70s and '80s that you couldn't make today. But today's OSU doesn't have to make excuses for anything.
|
|
dK
Freshman
Posts: 393
|
Post by dK on Feb 6, 2018 10:55:38 GMT -8
You guys should all read, "A School for the People," the recently-published history of OSU. Lots of background, etc., on the MacVicar/Byrne eras, in particular. They had their drawbacks and different management styles but the refusal of the state legislature to properly fund higher education and Measure 5 really put them behind the 8-ball. Lots of material on Risser/Ray as well. It also does not paint a very nice picture of tsdtw, in regards to working together with OSU as a peer university. osupress.oregonstate.edu/book/school-for-peopleBesides a stingy legislature and Measure 5, there is another elephant in the room. Athletic departments across the country had to eliminate hundreds of men's sports programs in the 80's due to the implementation of Title IX. Wrestling took the biggest hit nationally, but more than a couple dozen track and field programs were eliminated. Many state run schools like OS simply didn't have the means to fund all of the sports they had.
|
|