IntenseDebate - kersting13

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: More on wrestling · 1 reply · +1 points

Did people really complain about "dude's touching dudes?" That's pretty weak.

I have never been a big wrestling fan, but I have seen a couple of wrestling meets in my time and it's actually pretty enjoyable and interesting IMO.

Heck, I'm not a big basketball fan, either, but I will watch OSU when they're on TV, same as I'd watch OSU wrestling if it were on.

I bet a lot of self-described sports fans have just never watched a wrestling match before.

I honestly don't believe it has to go all MMA to find an audience. There's a structure to the fight, and rules within it just like there is in MMA. The rules are pretty simple and it shouldn't take anyone of reasonable intelligence long to figure it out, even if they've never seen the sport before.

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: A football play... · 0 replies · +1 points

You're kidding, right?

The Bowls don't have any "real" power in this. If the NCAA wanted to, they could dump the bowls in a second.

There is SO much more money in a playoff than in the Bowls.

The only reason they continue with the Bowls is that the Big Money goes to the Big Conferences who get into the Big Games.

If they went to a playoff, the distribution would be more equitable. But, even with more equitable distribution, the Big Conferences might still get more because a playoff would generate more overall $$$ if the NCAA controlled it rather than the Bowls.

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: A football play... · 0 replies · +1 points

When they went to the permanent 12-game schedule, I pretty much figured that would be the end of the possibility for a real playoff.

There really isn't a reason to pit #1 vs #2. We all know the rankings are fallable. These are exhibition games. Why not just allow all the traditional match-ups happen as they used to and forget about attempting to crown an *undisupted* national champion?

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: A football play... · 2 replies · +1 points

I agree with COBever.

If we have a playoff, it needs to be a GOOD system.

The #1 vs #2 system is NOT good. Cliff, your idea isn’t really any different from what we have now.

I’d rather see us go back to the Old School system than have a BAD playoff system like we have now.

Including Bowls in the playoff system is a BAD idea. That is what is making it so tough for people to get a good system. Trying to incorporate the Bowls in the playoffs screws the whole thing up.

They do the tournament thing just fine at the other 3 levels of NCAA football. I have no idea why people try to make it so difficult. It’s easy: 16 teams seeded play for 3 weeks at the higher seeds house and then play the “little Super Bowl” at a neutral site.

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: Merry Christmas · 0 replies · +1 points

That's stretching it pretty far in a lot of ways if you ask me.

If you're going to try and sneak Hardin in there as the starter just because he started 3 games, you're going to have to modify a LOT of the other Pac-10 teams lists, too.

I think John Boyett started more games for the *ucks than Ward did.

Heck, if you're going to sling Pankey in there as a starter, you should be counting Catchings as well. He started most of the year in 2007 and I think might have more career starts than Pankey. He certainly has more than twice as many career starts as Hardin.

Beavers lost 5 players who were the primary starters of the starting 22. Adeniji was the starting Split End only because of Catchings injuries, so I'd give you 18.

Double counting co-starters like Pankey/Roberson and Halahuni/Camp is plain misleading.

I agree with not counting Terry, since he lost his job due to performance, not injury, but Hardin only got 3 starts because of Clark's injury. That one is the cheapest of all IMO.

Anyone from the outside is going to say the Beavers are returning 17 starters.

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: Merry Christmas · 0 replies · +1 points

Cliff, where do you get 20 returning starters for the Beavs??

We lost 5 Senior starters from the 22, so, to me that = 17. I will give you Catchings to make 18, but who are the mystery 2 extra starters??

You can't be including Roberson/Pankey or even Halahuni + Camp can you?

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: Pac-10 woes · 0 replies · +1 points

The Pac 10 will have an extremely hard time getting a 2nd BCS team until they decide to drop the 9th conference game.

Having the 9th game to complete the round-robin was the "right" thing to do, but I've always been so shocked that the powers-that-be couldn't recognize how badly it would damage the Conference's reputation by adding those extra guaranteed losses.

This is one of those situations where doing the "right" thing doesn't pay.

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: Football notes,... · 0 replies · +1 points

It was obvious to me when we first went to round-robin - and I've said it from the start - it's the "right" way to do it, but it hurts the league WAY too much on the national level.

Mike Riley has it exactly right.

Sooner or later, we'll drop the round robin because it's bad for the conference's standing compared to others.

With all the talk about strength of schedule, no one really looks past the W-L record.

I still can't believe that they went to it in the first place, and I can't beleive that it's still a debate about whether we should continue.

16 years ago @ Cliff Kirkpatrick - Cliff: Another footbal... · 0 replies · +1 points

In the “current” landscape of recruiting, it seems EVERY BCS team over-recruits.

The game changes constantly. Just two or three years ago, teams didn’t see all of the early commits that we see now.

I can’t imagine any BCS caliber team shooting for a target of less than 90 players. Attrition of 5 players from the commit list and the holdovers each season would be a decent year for most teams. You MIGHT have to grayshirt one or two guys if you have an excellent year with fewer than average departures.

Most of the time OSU has been in that 1 or 2 grayshirt league. Only the 2007 and 2009 classes had significant grayshirt lists, and you have to assume that was done purposefully by the coaching staff.

Cliff, who are the “several” walk-ons who deserve a scholarship??

Grant Johnson would be the obvious guy, since he’s actually starting. Aaron Nichols?? Taylor Kavanaugh had a pretty significant role on this team for most of his career, but it took until his senior season before he got his.

16 years ago @ KVAL - Eugene, OR - The Pick: 15 years lat... · 0 replies · +1 points

Pretty silly to say the Huskies haven't been able to keep up since.

From 95-2003 the two teams were 4-4 vs. each other. From 95-2000, Huskies had 48 wins to the ducks 49.

Wasn't until toward the end of the Neuheisel era that the ducks really passed UW.

Who HASN'T passed the Huskies during the Gilbertson/Willingham era??

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with kersting13

People I'm following

kersting13