|
Post by rollotomasi on Feb 27, 2018 11:35:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Feb 27, 2018 12:40:22 GMT -8
What's wrong with this sentence?
"The Beavers are coming off a 1-11 season in which Gary Andersen, whom Barnes first hired at Utah State in 2009,"
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Feb 27, 2018 12:47:11 GMT -8
And: "Barnes fielded a complaint from an attendee about the uneven concreate at the front entrance of Gill Coliseum,"
Does Moron even read what he's writing?
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Feb 27, 2018 12:49:56 GMT -8
And: "Barnes fielded a complaint from an attendee about the uneven concreate at the front entrance of Gill Coliseum," Does Moron even read what he's writing? The Oregonian had to cut Spellcheck due to budget constraints. This was after they cut Talentcheck.
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Feb 27, 2018 14:01:14 GMT -8
Interest rates are probably going to at least double between now and any point future for the west side construction, I think his fundraising target is low.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 27, 2018 14:23:11 GMT -8
God damnit guys. I came here looking for response on the information contained in the article, of which there is a ton. Instead you guys are getting all sweaty over a couple typos, as if your favorite sportswriter never has any, or you haven't screwed up a word on this board ever. Credit should go to Moran for attending this event (to my knowledge, Eggers didn't post anything about the town hall, nor did the Gazette Times. Now, if we could actually go over the content: - I love that we're treating that extra money going to the previous coaching staff as an ongoing expense, rather than a one time thing coming off the books. Nice to see that will be re-invested in current coaches.
- Season tickets fell off 15% during the GA tenure. 15%!!!
- Barnes suggests we classify money spent on football different from other schools. Why? Do we know for a fact that other schools do in fact factor in debt service, game ops, etc. in their calculations? This sounds like convenient accounting to me.
- I've long said that I disagree with non conference football scheduling for wins. We should schedule games people are going to attend or that are going to make us money. If someone knows what a home game vs. Portland State Labor Day Weekend makes us vs. a roady at the Horseshoe, I'd love to see it. If our goal is to make our football team better AND increase revenues, playing good teams on the road for a pay day seems a great way to do it. Plus, you play games that people want to travel to, that's a built in way to spend a weekend with your biggest donors. I know that Our Beaver Nation invites top donors to travel with them for one road game a year, typically a big non-conference game if available. It makes sense to me that having this big marquee games would be a great way to get people to increase their donations to a level that gets them an invite, as opposed to getting invited to travel to Stanford again. Only once in the last twenty years (2010) did we lose a one-off game that prevented us from making a bowl game, and that was vs. a freaking Mountain West team, so I don't buy this "losing those games is bad for our culture." We had a dip in 2011 thanks to roster turnover (we started an insane amount of freshman in 2011), but 2012 was our best season since the Fiesta Bowl. Didn't seem like it really hurt us to play those games. People worried about our national reputation should realize that we've never had one. We had one shot to raise our profile after the 2000 season, and we sucked.
- Doesn't sound like he's too keen on the idea of revamping the West Side right now, unless we do something goofy like turn it into a partial stadium/strip mall. Nothing says big-time college athletics like having an H&R Block behind section 15. Of course it's not his fault that we don't have the money to just finish the thing the right way.
- Bringing back men's track? Doesn't that mean adding another women's sport? Why no mention of that?
- I love that Barnes/Ray are critical of other ADs and presidents for bashing the conference tv deal, then proceed to bash those ADs and Presidents for "getting out over their skis." Seemed like a good opportunity to just be the bigger school and move on.
- The dropping Nike thing makes sense only if we are getting a significantly better deal from someone else. We're the closest major conference school to Nike, and I know that we test quite a lot of their new performance gear for them. That seems like a great marketing tool - come here and get to wear the latest Nike high performance gear before anyone else and provide them feedback to improve it.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Feb 27, 2018 14:45:34 GMT -8
I'm glad that other money's going to be put to good use. I'd put a chunk of it towards recruiting as well as the coaching salaries.
I don't mind the one and dones with big programs, but I think the reality is the "paycheck" talk is overplayed to justify the trip. Ohio State is paying us 1.7 mil, wow, but if we could get 40K Beaver fans to show up to a game at Reser at roughly 50 bucks a pop (and that's probably on the low side) that's 2 million + coming in without having to pay for travel expenditures...makes paying 400-500K to some lower team to visit quite doable (if we can find a worthwhile opponent that would play for that - lots of bigger teams offer much more). I'd bet "paycheck" games are more of a wash financially than the administration leads some to belive. That said, I really prefer the neutral field possibility that Barnes floated.
|
|
|
Post by obf on Feb 27, 2018 14:49:10 GMT -8
I thought it was great that Barnes directly addressed the Football budget shortfall as compared to other Pac-12 schools that a lot of folks here have been clamouring about. The response was tepid, but at least it got actual air time: The good: Barnes and OSU definitely want to increase the football budget! The bad: Big time hedge against that with the "we don't count X, Y, and Z; but the others do..." Overall I love that the focus is football, football, and football. As with the uber athletic department master plan, the ideas and thoughts look good and solid, now we just need to see actual execution
|
|
|
Post by obf on Feb 27, 2018 15:03:28 GMT -8
I'm glad that other money's going to be put to good use. I'd put a chunk of it towards recruiting as well as the coaching salaries. I don't mind the one and dones with big programs, but I think the reality is the "paycheck" talk is overplayed to justify the trip. Ohio State is paying us 1.7 mil, wow, but if we could get 40K Beaver fans to show up to a game at Reser at roughly 50 bucks a pop (and that's probably on the low side) that's 2 million + coming in without having to pay for travel expenditures...makes paying 400-500K to some lower team to visit quite doable (if we can find a worthwhile opponent that would play for that - lots of bigger teams offer much more). I'd bet "paycheck" games are more of a wash financially than the administration leads some to believe. That said, I really prefer the neutral field possibility that Barnes floated. Agreed, 1.7 million looks like a lot, but compared to even a lightly attended home game (34k against PSU last year, Stanford was actually the least attended at 30k), I would take the home game. Also not factored in is the money spent in Corvallis in general. I was chatting with my Uber driver a few nights ago and in the 6ish months that he has driven in Corvallis, other than halloweekend, the football game weekend are by far and away the best nights he has had. I know this trend follows with the hotels and restaurants in town as well. It's not necessarily scheduling for wins, but maximizing home games and limiting blood bath games, yeah we have "no reputation", which IS a reputation... Others have suggested it, but IMHO the OOC schedule should be 2 home games 1 away, and all of them should be "winnable", I would look for home and home with anyone, but refuse any one off away games. I would even be ok with the blood bath games if there was a return date planned as well... Like Barnes said, solving football solves A LOT of issues, and WINS solve football... so if that means we play PSU a few more times and tOSU, Michigan and Penn State less, I am more than OK with that...
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on Feb 27, 2018 15:03:47 GMT -8
Tough balancing act. Football is king, but no way in hell should we neglect what Casey, Rueck and the other successful,” but non-revenue producing sports have built.
|
|
|
Post by obf on Feb 27, 2018 15:22:31 GMT -8
God damnit guys. I came here looking for response on the information contained in the article, of which there is a ton. Instead you guys are getting all sweaty over a couple typos, as if your favorite sportswriter never has any, or you haven't screwed up a word on this board ever. Credit should go to Moran for attending this event (to my knowledge, Eggers didn't post anything about the town hall, nor did the Gazette Times. Couldn't agree more. This is probably the biggest news story in weeks, and will be for weeks and we can't get past a spelling error, smh... Maybe I have been a corporate honk for too long, but this and the strategic plan are WAY bigger deals in my view than this board gives them credit... I know I am in the minority, but as someone who has season tickets on the west side... I AGREE with Barnes sentiment that finishing the west side is not a huge priority. I take it you don't like the idea of the new west side being multi purpose??? Personally I love it. First reality is that we AREN'T a "big-time college athletics" factory, and even if we were I would like to think that the smart, efficient, and practical alumni of the the smart, efficient and practical university in the state would embrace and support a building that was smart, efficient and practical It may be sacreligious to say, but I find the opulence and waste of an edifice created only to serve a purpose 6 times a year and for a small fraction of the population that carries the financial burden to be at best silly and at worst offensive. This is highlighted, as it always is, by this being an Olympic year, and the defunct and decrepit money pits that follow... I would be all for bringing back men's track and as has been discussed in other threads I am not convinced it would even take adding a women's sport... Hey, I hate the *ucks as much as anyone, and sure that means I guess I hate *hil *night too... But it's only those filled with blind hatred that can't see that we benefit greatly from Nike being in state and have a nicer than we should expect deal with them. Of course I kind of liked the bra uniforms.... Now, if Under Armour or Adidas wanted to give us a super sweetheart deal to lure us away from Nike and give philly boy a big middle finger by taking the closest college physically from him.... I would be ok with that
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 27, 2018 15:30:36 GMT -8
if we could get 40K Beaver fans to show up to a game at Reser at roughly 50 bucks a pop (and that's probably on the low side) There is no way 40,000 fans at Reser pay an average of $50 or more for a ticket. Subtract 7-8k students, who don't pay up front. Subtract 17K season-ticket holders, who don't pay $50 a ticket. Subtract at least 1,000 comps (players, coaches, etc. from both teams, recruits, OSAA coaches, etc.). Subtract who knows how many tickets used for gifts in kind to boosters. Very few fans pay face value for a football ticket. I'd rather have a home game too, but $1.7 million is a nice chunk of change, a nice trip for the players and boosters, and exposure, even in defeat, we would n't get by playing Utah State or Idaho State.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 27, 2018 15:32:25 GMT -8
God damnit guys. I came here looking for response on the information contained in the article, of which there is a ton. Instead you guys are getting all sweaty over a couple typos, as if your favorite sportswriter never has any, or you haven't screwed up a word on this board ever. Credit should go to Moran for attending this event (to my knowledge, Eggers didn't post anything about the town hall, nor did the Gazette Times. Now, if we could actually go over the content: - I love that we're treating that extra money going to the previous coaching staff as an ongoing expense, rather than a one time thing coming off the books. Nice to see that will be re-invested in current coaches.
- Season tickets fell off 15% during the GA tenure. 15%!!!
- Barnes suggests we classify money spent on football different from other schools. Why? Do we know for a fact that other schools do in fact factor in debt service, game ops, etc. in their calculations? This sounds like convenient accounting to me.
- I've long said that I disagree with non conference football scheduling for wins. We should schedule games people are going to attend or that are going to make us money. If someone knows what a home game vs. Portland State Labor Day Weekend makes us vs. a roady at the Horseshoe, I'd love to see it. If our goal is to make our football team better AND increase revenues, playing good teams on the road for a pay day seems a great way to do it. Plus, you play games that people want to travel to, that's a built in way to spend a weekend with your biggest donors. I know that Our Beaver Nation invites top donors to travel with them for one road game a year, typically a big non-conference game if available. It makes sense to me that having this big marquee games would be a great way to get people to increase their donations to a level that gets them an invite, as opposed to getting invited to travel to Stanford again. Only once in the last twenty years (2010) did we lose a one-off game that prevented us from making a bowl game, and that was vs. a freaking Mountain West team, so I don't buy this "losing those games is bad for our culture." We had a dip in 2011 thanks to roster turnover (we started an insane amount of freshman in 2011), but 2012 was our best season since the Fiesta Bowl. Didn't seem like it really hurt us to play those games. People worried about our national reputation should realize that we've never had one. We had one shot to raise our profile after the 2000 season, and we sucked.
- Doesn't sound like he's too keen on the idea of revamping the West Side right now, unless we do something goofy like turn it into a partial stadium/strip mall. Nothing says big-time college athletics like having an H&R Block behind section 15. Of course it's not his fault that we don't have the money to just finish the thing the right way.
- Bringing back men's track? Doesn't that mean adding another women's sport? Why no mention of that?
- I love that Barnes/Ray are critical of other ADs and presidents for bashing the conference tv deal, then proceed to bash those ADs and Presidents for "getting out over their skis." Seemed like a good opportunity to just be the bigger school and move on.
- The dropping Nike thing makes sense only if we are getting a significantly better deal from someone else. We're the closest major conference school to Nike, and I know that we test quite a lot of their new performance gear for them. That seems like a great marketing tool - come here and get to wear the latest Nike high performance gear before anyone else and provide them feedback to improve it.
Home attendance by season per game (% of capacity): 1995 27,270 (77%) 1996 25,196 (71%) 1997 24,902 (70%) 1998 28,548 (81%) 1999 32,517 (92%) 2000 33,649 (95%) 2001 37,012 (105%) 2002 36,436 (103%) 2003 36,143 (102%) 2004 36,334 (103%) 2005 42,190 (97%) 2006 40,830 (94%) 2007 41,374 (91%) 2008 44,930 (98%) 2009 42,328 (93%) 2010 45,509 (100%) 2011 42,420 (93%)2012 43,424 (95%) 2013 42,964 (94%) 2014 42,176 (92%) 2015 36,079 (79%) 2016 37,622 (87%) 2017 34,754 (80%) Attendance last year was down over 20% from attendance in 2014. If season ticket sails were only down 15%, that is showing that the big Beaver fans have not given up on the program, which is a good thing. I crunched the numbers with some other posters on this board, and it appeared that Oregon State could add cross country and men's track and field and still be in compliance with Title IX. Maybe Barnes just realized this? BDC was terrible, and Stansbury was worse. It would not surprise me, if Barnes is the first AD to actually crunch the numbers, since bringing back a true men's track and field team became a reality in 2013. I am a big fan of Oregon State bringing back track and field. I believe that it will really help all facets of men's athletics, including the football team.
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Feb 27, 2018 15:43:11 GMT -8
What's wrong with this sentence? "The Beavers are coming off a 1-11 season in which Gary Andersen, whom Barnes first hired at Utah State in 2009," Since none of you could figure it out and were only focused on my spelling error post. This sentence makes it sound like Moron think Barnes hired Andersen twice. First at USU and then again at OSU. Kind of a large factual error if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 27, 2018 15:44:26 GMT -8
The parking garage is a multi-use facility, and I think it's one of the best uses of a building on campus.
There will be no club section on the west side. That frees up a large area for year-round commercial use, that would also help pay for the construction; or for use as athletic department/sport offices, which would open possible commercial space in Gill Coliseum, or for a smaller academic unit of the university.
That said, a new west side would have very little impact on our competitiveness, since it does not help player development and has not been shown to me that it negatively impacts recruiting. I'd rather see money spent on coaching salaries, recruiting budgets, or on weight room/training table improvements and other things that impact the players every day.
And I much rather spend what limited resources we have on improving the current sports instead of adding a money pit like men's track, a sport which has virtually no appeal to almost anyone outside of Eugene. If MT&F boosters can raise the money to fully endow it, fine. Otherwise, we're fine without it.
|
|