|
|
Post by skyrider on Mar 5, 2018 10:21:52 GMT -8
I am watching as the inevitable seems to be happening-that is the Ucks overwhelming $$$ resource advantage seems to be leaving our fine Beaver women's basketball program somewhere in the rear view mirror.
It is fascinating that my (and I believe most other fans) devotion and connection with their favorite teams seems to "blind them" to the reality that the #$# wins in an overwhelming majority of instances.
In the NFL, NBA, and Major league baseball significant procedures, policies, etc. are in place to at least attempt to somewhat level the playing field so that a better chance exists for various teams to win.
Yet, the NCAA does no such thing, because fans continue to behave like lemmings going over the edge of a cliff-that is continuing to support a system that in most cases gives the vast majority of teams zero chance of winning.
It is obvious that the "haves" teams need to have a significantly higher number of "have not" teams to play against, so why are the "have not teams" unable or unwilling to use their collective greater numbers to achieve a much more level playing field than now exists.
Within the PAC 12 for instance, you have OSU/WSU/UTAH/COLORADO/CALIFORNIA that in general have a significantly less chance of winning titles-yet their presidents and athletic directors seem to blindly go on with the "herd" meekly accepting the meager handouts they are given.
Clearly the NCAA is an enabler of the system of the "rich get richer". The NCAA has all the $$$ resources in the world to enforce the weak rules that it does have for attempting to balance competition. Yet, it allows major violation after major violation
where the "big boys" of college sports use their overwhelming financial advantage to cheat even more (recent College basketball scandal is a clear case in point).
Would be interested in hearing from the many astute Beaver fans on this website about their thoughts on my post.
Thank you!
P.S. If there is anyone who believes that the UCKs women's basketball team
did not achieve this rapid rise due to Sugar Daddy Phil's $$$$, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn for you!
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Mar 5, 2018 10:28:52 GMT -8
We have a far superior recruiting class to uo. Destiny Slocum is every bit as good a player as Ionescue. For all their "greatness," they won the title by one game.
We were in the final 2 for Hebbard and Sabrina, but they chose uo. So be it.
The WBB title is the first of the year in the Pac-12 for uo, in any sport. They certainly are not dominating.
Quit obsessing.
|
|
|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Mar 5, 2018 10:53:17 GMT -8
We have a far superior recruiting class to uo. Destiny Slocum is every bit as good a player as Ionescue. For all their "greatness," they won the title by one game. We were in the final 2 for Hebbard and Sabrina, but they chose uo. So be it. The WBB title is the first of the year in the Pac-12 for uo, in any sport. They certainly are not dominating. Quit obsessing. Credible sources have reported that OSU was in the final two for Satou Sabally, but I don't believe that was the case for Sabrina. OSU had been dropped by Sabrina when she narrowed it down to Oregon and Washington from her final four that also included Cal and OSU according to most written sources. If OSU had landed Sabally, that likely would have been enough for OSU to win the PAC-12 title this season. Sabally will only get better as she continues to learn how to exploit her length at this level. As for Hebard's #2 college choice being OSU, I was not aware of that either. I know that the Beavs were in the recruiting mix for her along with a number of other elite basketball schools as noted in the ESPNW link below. www.espn.com/high-school/girls-basketball/recruiting/player/_/id/189303www.dailyemerald.com/2016/05/04/sabrina-ionescu-narrows-decision-to-oregon-or-washington-as-2016-signing-deadline-looms/ |
|
|
|
Post by blueheron on Mar 5, 2018 10:54:34 GMT -8
We have a far superior recruiting class to uo. Destiny Slocum is every bit as good a player as Ionescue. For all their "greatness," they won the title by one game. We were in the final 2 for Hebbard and Sabrina, but they chose uo. So be it. The WBB title is the first of the year in the Pac-12 for uo, in any sport. They certainly are not dominating. Quit obsessing. One cannot overstate the recruiting miss on Ionescue. If she were a Beav we'd be back on top of the conference. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Mar 5, 2018 10:55:17 GMT -8
I am watching as the inevitable seems to be happening-that is the Ucks overwhelming $$$ resource advantage seems to be leaving our fine Beaver women's basketball program somewhere in the rear view mirror. It is fascinating that my (and I believe most other fans) devotion and connection with their favorite teams seems to "blind them" to the reality that the #$# wins in an overwhelming majority of instances. In the NFL, NBA, and Major league baseball significant procedures, policies, etc. are in place to at least attempt to somewhat level the playing field so that a better chance exists for various teams to win. Yet, the NCAA does no such thing, because fans continue to behave like lemmings going over the edge of a cliff-that is continuing to support a system that in most cases gives the vast majority of teams zero chance of winning. It is obvious that the "haves" teams need to have a significantly higher number of "have not" teams to play against, so why are the "have not teams" unable or unwilling to use their collective greater numbers to achieve a much more level playing field than now exists. Within the PAC 12 for instance, you have OSU/WSU/UTAH/COLORADO/CALIFORNIA that in general have a significantly less chance of winning titles-yet their presidents and athletic directors seem to blindly go on with the "herd" meekly accepting the meager handouts they are given. Clearly the NCAA is an enabler of the system of the "rich get richer". The NCAA has all the $$$ resources in the world to enforce the weak rules that it does have for attempting to balance competition. Yet, it allows major violation after major violation where the "big boys" of college sports use their overwhelming financial advantage to cheat even more (recent College basketball scandal is a clear case in point). Would be interested in hearing from the many astute Beaver fans on this website about their thoughts on my post. Thank you! P.S. If there is anyone who believes that the UCKs women's basketball team did not achieve this rapid rise due to Sugar Daddy Phil's $$$$, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn for you! "Nothing is written" 2:00 in clip. |
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Mar 5, 2018 11:06:06 GMT -8
Squonk,
You notice that I said "Inevitable seems to be happening"
So I did try to "hedge my bet"
Hope you have a great day!
|
|
|
|
Post by blueheron on Mar 5, 2018 12:05:06 GMT -8
One cannot overstate the recruiting miss on Ionescue. If she were a Beav we'd be back on top of the conference. It wasn't a "miss." She wanted to be the center of attention, with some pieces around her for success. That's why the $uck$ and uw were her final 2 and it wasn't uw at the end. If it wasn't a miss, she'd be in Orange and Black. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Mar 5, 2018 12:11:28 GMT -8
We didn't "miss" her. We knew all about her and recruited her. She visited her a number of times. She didn't want to come here. So be it. We'll be fine with Destiny.
The only reason she was considering UW was because they were interviewing her club coach to be an assistant. Once he was out of the mix she dropped them.
|
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Mar 5, 2018 12:15:40 GMT -8
We have a far superior recruiting class to uo. Destiny Slocum is every bit as good a player as Ionescue. For all their "greatness," they won the title by one game. We were in the final 2 for Hebbard and Sabrina, but they chose uo. So be it. The WBB title is the first of the year in the Pac-12 for uo, in any sport. They certainly are not dominating. Quit obsessing. One cannot overstate the recruiting miss on Ionescue. If she were a Beav we'd be back on top of the conference. (Wow, a lot added above before I hit "post". I'll leave the following thought.) I'm glad we are at the point where we can decide to not offer really good/great players. We don't NEED to take them because they are really good/great. We take them because they are really good/great AND are a good fit. (Plus, we didn't need to make a walk-on offer to her brother) |
|
|
|
Post by texasbeaver on Mar 5, 2018 12:18:55 GMT -8
I read on a board that we backed off recruiting Sabrina sometime around March of 2016. Scott is very character driven and if he does not think they are a good fit he will walk away.
|
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 5, 2018 12:24:33 GMT -8
I am watching as the inevitable seems to be happening-that is the Ucks overwhelming $$$ resource advantage seems to be leaving our fine Beaver women's basketball program somewhere in the rear view mirror. It is fascinating that my (and I believe most other fans) devotion and connection with their favorite teams seems to "blind them" to the reality that the #$# wins in an overwhelming majority of instances. In the NFL, NBA, and Major league baseball significant procedures, policies, etc. are in place to at least attempt to somewhat level the playing field so that a better chance exists for various teams to win. Yet, the NCAA does no such thing, because fans continue to behave like lemmings going over the edge of a cliff-that is continuing to support a system that in most cases gives the vast majority of teams zero chance of winning. It is obvious that the "haves" teams need to have a significantly higher number of "have not" teams to play against, so why are the "have not teams" unable or unwilling to use their collective greater numbers to achieve a much more level playing field than now exists. Within the PAC 12 for instance, you have OSU/WSU/UTAH/COLORADO/CALIFORNIA that in general have a significantly less chance of winning titles-yet their presidents and athletic directors seem to blindly go on with the "herd" meekly accepting the meager handouts they are given. Clearly the NCAA is an enabler of the system of the "rich get richer". The NCAA has all the $$$ resources in the world to enforce the weak rules that it does have for attempting to balance competition. Yet, it allows major violation after major violation where the "big boys" of college sports use their overwhelming financial advantage to cheat even more (recent College basketball scandal is a clear case in point). Would be interested in hearing from the many astute Beaver fans on this website about their thoughts on my post. Thank you! P.S. If there is anyone who believes that the UCKs women's basketball team did not achieve this rapid rise due to Sugar Daddy Phil's $$$$, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn for you! Construction on Matthew Knight Arena was completed in January 2011. Much of the home Pac10 season was played in Matt Knight. Coach for the Duck women for 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 was Paul Westhead. Losing record in Pac-10/12 play for all 3 seasons. Kelly Graves first year in Eugene, 2014-15 was a losing record. Season 2 was .500 in Pac12 play, Season 3 [2016-2017] was 8-10 in conference ... with Sabrina as a freshman. Fact is Coach Graves and his staff worked hard to recruit better players to build the program. I suppose that paying Graves a slightly higher salary and hiring Campbell away could be "spending money to win" ... but your post implies that it is Phil Knights investment (Phil earmarks his investment in Oregon athletics for facilities) that has made the difference. From the most recent data I found, Scott Rueck makes $536K per year plus bonuses. He earned 100K in bonuses in 2016-2017. Kelly Graves received a re-negotiated contract after the Elite 8 appearance in April 2017. His new contract is for 684K plus incentives. I am guessing $150K additional compensation to Rueck won't change recruiting much - especially given how successful Rueck has been in the past and the great class he has coming in for next season. So, that brings me back to the question ... if Matt Knight isn't the big draw for recruits, then what exactly did Oregon spend money on to "buy" their success? Is there any chance you could acknowledge the hard work of the coaches and players at Oregon as the reason for their success? |
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Mar 5, 2018 12:41:03 GMT -8
The answer to your question is a resounding no.
In support of that answer I offer the following:
(a) If Phil Knight chooses to put several million dollars in one of your pockets rather than in another pocket (facilities pocket vs some other use pocket), you still have several million dollars more than your competition.
(b) I live in Spokane and watched Kelly Graves coach for years. He was an excellent coach here (every bit as good as he is now) and never won like he is doing at Oregon.
(c) You missed my point entirely regarding the whole structure of big time college athletics-Oregon was a similar bottom feeder as OSU for many many years. What changed Oregon from also-ran to one of the elite handful was the almighty dollar as provided by Phil Knight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Mar 5, 2018 12:43:54 GMT -8
I read on a board that we backed off recruiting Sabrina sometime around March of 2016. Scott is very character driven and if he does not think they are a good fit he will walk away. She was at an OSU game last season, well after March 2016. She didn't want to come here. So be it. We will be fine with Destiny, a player who does want to be here. Oregon has a nice arena, with all the ambiance of a Costco, especially when there are 10k empty seats, which is customary for almost any game not involving OSU. Oregon has a good team. Illegal off-season practices conducted by members of the coaching staff helped considerably. |
|
|
|
Post by texasbeaver on Mar 5, 2018 12:48:52 GMT -8
Last season she played for the Ducks.
|
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Mar 5, 2018 12:52:25 GMT -8
I am watching as the inevitable seems to be happening-that is the Ucks overwhelming $$$ resource advantage seems to be leaving our fine Beaver women's basketball program somewhere in the rear view mirror. It is fascinating that my (and I believe most other fans) devotion and connection with their favorite teams seems to "blind them" to the reality that the #$# wins in an overwhelming majority of instances. In the NFL, NBA, and Major league baseball significant procedures, policies, etc. are in place to at least attempt to somewhat level the playing field so that a better chance exists for various teams to win. Yet, the NCAA does no such thing, because fans continue to behave like lemmings going over the edge of a cliff-that is continuing to support a system that in most cases gives the vast majority of teams zero chance of winning. It is obvious that the "haves" teams need to have a significantly higher number of "have not" teams to play against, so why are the "have not teams" unable or unwilling to use their collective greater numbers to achieve a much more level playing field than now exists. Within the PAC 12 for instance, you have OSU/WSU/UTAH/COLORADO/CALIFORNIA that in general have a significantly less chance of winning titles-yet their presidents and athletic directors seem to blindly go on with the "herd" meekly accepting the meager handouts they are given. Clearly the NCAA is an enabler of the system of the "rich get richer". The NCAA has all the $$$ resources in the world to enforce the weak rules that it does have for attempting to balance competition. Yet, it allows major violation after major violation where the "big boys" of college sports use their overwhelming financial advantage to cheat even more (recent College basketball scandal is a clear case in point). Would be interested in hearing from the many astute Beaver fans on this website about their thoughts on my post. Thank you! P.S. If there is anyone who believes that the UCKs women's basketball team did not achieve this rapid rise due to Sugar Daddy Phil's $$$$, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn for you! I don't care about "fair" when it comes to NCAA sports. It's just like life. I don't care if the rich get richer and which schools have more resources, and I don't care if it takes tons of money (that OSU does not have) to consistently produce a winner. I would love OSU to have uo, UW, USC, UCLA, etc money, but we don't and that's fine.
I just like OSU sports. And I dislike the yucks. But I'm not going to let uo's dollar-based success get me all bent and twisted; the slug-eaters have more than enough shades of green and jealously isn't a shade I want to bring to OSU.
Let's appreciate and enjoy what we've got: --a WBB team that's been in the top ten for a few years before this year and got to the Final Four a couple years ago. --an outstanding baseball team --an outstanding gymnastics team --competitive wrestling --a softball team playing good ball right now that plays in *THE* most difficult conference --a MBB team that is playing decent basketball and showing signs of life --a football team that was given the gift of an escape from a $12+ million football contract and possibly new life --a wrestling program that is by and large competitive
There's a lot of good stuff to like about OSU athletics. No need to let the success of other programs ruin the enjoyment of our own; no need to be jealous of the money that most of the Pac 12 (and other Power 5 conference teams) enjoy. Let's take what we have. And when our football team gets to another big bowl (like it will someday) and our baseball team goes to the CWS and the other teams make their respective NCAA tournaments on the occasions that they do, let's just sit back and enjoy the ride.
|
|
