Feelin’ good’ll be good enough for me; good enough for me and my Uncle JC.

Posted on January 4, 2012 by Giles

Uncle JC was my childhood hero. He was a “real” cowboy. He was a rancher, he owned umpteen head of cattle, a working ranch in the Nebraska Sand Hills near Scottsbluff, and he rode horses on a regular basis. Grandpa McKnight was also a rancher. He and Grandma lived in an old sod house on their ranch about 5 miles away from Uncle JC’s place. By the time I met them, Grandpa was too old (in my mind) to be a cowboy, he was Grandpa. But Uncle JC was the real deal. Hat always worn at a jaunty tilt, a thin, debonair mustache, piercing blue eyes set in an olive complexion, a ready laugh and a persistent smile, he was always eager for a story or a joke – telling or hearing.

Nebraska Sand Hills

I can still hear him laughing as I tried to swallow a raw egg. I must have been 7 or 8, and it was one of those special summers in my life when we went to Nebraska to see our cousins and family on Mom’s side. While I was napping, my two older brothers and my two older cousins had won their bucks from Uncle JC by downing a raw egg, straight from the shell, and I was eager to earn my dollar. Since I was younger, Uncle JC felt some sympathy, so he cracked my egg into a jelly jar for me, and cautioned me not to break the yolk. By my count, I swallowed that egg at least five times, but the terms of the deal was keeping the egg down – and I couldn’t. It never hit my stomach, about ½ way down the gullet it would reverse direction and the next thing I knew, it was sitting there in the jelly jar as smug as you please. I didn’t get my dollar that afternoon, but Uncle JC gave me fifty cents for the entertainment.

But that’s not what this story is about. This story is about September 15^th of this year – or, more accurately, it is about what I hope will occur on that day.

Uncle Don and Aunt Wanda's house in Scottsbluff

A couple of years ago I decided to take Uncle Don, a die-hard Husker, to a Nebraska game. He loved football and followed the Huskers religiously, but had never been to a Husker game. The husband of Mom’s sister, he and Aunt Wanda lived in Scottsbluff, NE near where my mom grew up. Uncle Don suffered from a lung disease, and didn’t have too many years left. Uncle JC, and his wife, Auntie Marie, accepted my invitation to go along with us. I made the arrangements – the Huskers played at home during an Oregon State bye, found a source for tickets, and made reservations in Linclon using my hotel points. We were all ready to go.

I would fly into Denver, rent a car and drive to Scottsbluff on Thursday night. Friday morning we would all get into Uncle JC’s new Cadillac and drive to Lincoln. My uncles, both WWII era Army vets, were interested in going to the American Legion state headquarters in Lincoln, so we were set for more than a football game, it would be an EVENT! I was eager to finally see a Nebraska football game, but even more I was looking forward to seeing Uncle Don’s face as he walked into the stadium, and when he saw his beloved Huskers run out onto the field. Sadly, a few weeks before the anticipated day, Uncle Don took a turn for the worse, and he was unable to travel. I didn’t want to go to the game without Uncle Don, leaving him home while we did something he had dreamed of for decades – so Uncle JC and I agreed to cancel the trip. Uncle Don never got better, He died later that year.

Last fall the love of Uncle JC’s life, Aunt Marie, passed away. Not wanting any more opportunities to disappear, I asked Uncle JC go to Lincoln with me for the Iowa game on Friday, November 25^th. But once again, life and circumstances interfered, and I was unable to go to that game. I called with my regrets, and promised to set up our date for 2012.

I just checked the Beaver football schedule today, and found that our bye on September 15^th corresponds to a Husker home game with Arkansas State. So it’s time for me to make the arrangements.

I can’t wait to go with Uncle JC to Lincoln, riding in his Cadillac with Auntie Marie’s memory with us, and walking into Memorial Stadium sensing Uncle Don between us and watching his delight in our minds’ eyes as he sees his Huskers run out onto the field amidst a sea of screaming, waving red – Big Red.

That stupid football thing

Posted on December 23, 2011 by Giles

When Oregon State University rebuilt the east (approximately) side of Reser Stadium, they were required, as with many government building projects, to incorporate a sculpture of some sort in the design. When the commissioned piece was initially erected, I liked it. It was a minimalist representation of a giant football, constructed of metal tubing – like the skeleton of a football, if you will.

But wait, the fine, esthetically pleasing work wasn’t complete! Oh no! The “artist” had plans for more, to make the piece better! Attached to the framework, ALL over it, were a hodgepodge of curving arrows, Xs and triangles. There were so many things wrong with what was done, that I will have to take them methodically:

1) Xs and triangles? What? Obviously the “artist” had very little knowledge of football, had seen at some time, some where, a play diagram…but he didn’t pay very close attention to it. Xs and Os (that’s what is meant by the phrase, Xs and Os). Play diagrams use Xs and Os – the Xs indicate defensive players, the Os represent…wait for it…offensive players! What a concept! Sometimes coaches will use Vs as kind of a shorthand X. The V has the advantage of being pointed in different directions to indicate the defensive players stance in relation to the rest of the field – if the defensive end takes a position on the edge, pointed toward the quarterback, the point of the V can be aimed at the quarterback O. Still with me here? The V could also be depicted as a triangle, that wouldn’t raise my hackles the tiniest bit – as long as the artist used Os and either Xs or triangles (not both). But using Xs and triangles and no Os – well, that is just ignorant. The triangles should be replaced with Os – and right away. Every day we leave it as is, the Beavers look like they don’t know their Xs from their Os!

2) The arrows seem to all have the same length and curvature – which is NOT how a play diagram looks, at all. Different lengths, different curvature, some straight – that makes more sense.

3) Color – when first “completed” the figures consisted of a metal frame filled by some sort of shiny material of indeterminate color…that sometimes looked green and sometimes looked yellow and sometimes looked like maybe some poor hint of orange. What’s wrong with ORANGE and BLACK? The orangeness and the blackness are much more important than any shinyness. After pressure from Bob DeCarolis, the colors were changed, but not enough. They still tended more toward green than orange. Now the some sort of shiny material has been replaced with colored LED lights behind clear plastic (I assume it’s plastic). BUT now the colors are red and blue and whatnot. The LEDs make it show up at night – but it looks like something that belongs in Reno. C’mon, make them orange and black, put a few LEDs to jazz it up just a little – like a lady you’re taking to a fancy dinner, not like the town strumpet (that is a fine, underused word) – not too much.

4) Speaking of too much! There are so many arrows and Xs and triangles (!!!!!) on the sculpture that they overwhelm the football shape – and that shape is more important in the larger scheme of things than arrows or figures or colors or lights. Take about 2/3 of them down, let the football look like a football with a few Xs and Os (Os NOT triangles, mind you) to give it just a little bit of an “Oh, cool” look.

The “artist” didn’t have the requisite knowledge for the project – he should have studied their subject matter just a TEENY bit more. Read his own description of the work by following the link in the neon football picture above – it confirms my opinion.

The “artist” sacrificed fidelity to the Oregon State color scheme for some undecipherable artistic vision – one that I think is artistically faulty, which is why I use quotes to bracket the word “artist”. Frankly, I think the unadorned framework looks better on Parker Plaza than the traveling carnival ride we have now.

A bead-flinging update

Posted on December 22, 2011 by Giles

In all fairness to Bob DeCarolis, I need to update folks on the bead-flinging incident. Bob has taken a lot of heat from fans this season, so I want to acknowledge something he did well. First, however, I don’t think the reporter from the Gazette Times ever filed a story using my interview, so I still have a 15 minute credit out there somewhere. Mr. DeCarolis made an effort to speak with Hog and me before the Stanford game. He had previously emailed me to tell me that he wanted to meet. He spotted me as I was headed into Reser Stadium, and said he would meet me in the Loge in a few minutes. True to his word, he stopped by our table and spent some time talking about the situation.

He had a very realistic viewpoint about the whole situation. He stated up front that the whole idea is for people to have fun – his words, “have fun”. That got the discussion off to a good start. We put forward the promise to not “try for distance” in the future, but to fling thee beads in a kinder, gentler manner. He assured us that handing beads down to folks was certainly OK, and acknowledged the overzealous foolishness of trying to prevent us from doing so. He briefly mentioned the “eye” factor (ala “A Christmas Story”), but acknowledged, with a wry smile, that the same type of beads are sold in the stadium itself.

What gave me the greatest reassurance was his acknowledgement of what we all had concluded during the time immediately following the prohibition – someone without authority or control of their lives or circumstances seized upon an opportunity to exert some measure of authority and control over someone else. He wasn’t referring to the State Police – he was referring to the person who initiated the complaint.

We agreed to sit down and talk about the situation once the football season was over and the holiday hubbub behind us. Several times he stated that he was certain we could arrive at a solution that would make everyone happy.

Throughout the discussion he was amiable, concerned, willing to listen and, most importantly, seemed intent on reaching a conclusion that would enhance the fun of game day at Reser. I am looking forward to sitting with Bob again in the next month or two and putting this whole incident behind us.

OK, so how does it look without the Fly?

Posted on December 10, 2011 by Giles

This is a look at game by game stats for 2011, extracting and comparing the fly sweep plays, much as I did Quizz’s impact in the previous chart. I assumed each rushing attempt recorded by a WR was a fly sweep or similar. This may not be entirely accurate – there might be a couple of backwards passes that would count as a rushing play – but it’s pretty close, and it takes the WR factor out of the equation and looks strictly at the tailback-running-the-ball aspect of the game. One thing this does not factor, and it would be an interesting thing to look at, is the number of draws and delays that we ran, and their result. I hate those plays. I think they yield next to nothing and I wish we would run them FAAAAAAR less often – but that is just an impression, not a studied conclusion.

Here is my revised assessment – I could only find two games that I can claim, with assurance, we should have won with a more predominant rushing attack. Sac State, obviously – the final numbers scream the question, “What were you thinking in the first half?” – and Arizona State.

The Sac State horse has been beaten far beyond death, so I’m going to look more closely at ASU:

11 true rushing attempts, 9 excluding the Fly Sweep.

5.6 YPC and 1 TD….AND WE ONLY RAN 9 TIMES!!!!!

There is no way anyone can begin to claim that the running game was not working! 5.6 YPC is working! The Fly Sweep was working also, but we only ran it twice. That game, with a balanced attack looks like a sure win to me.

So my revised analysis is this – if we ran the ball more, we tally 2 more wins this season and we end with a 5-7 record, which isn’t great, but it is a far cry better than 3-9.

Two other games I want to point out – Utah, with only 15 carries by the tailback. The YPC are slightly under 3, but I argue that 15 times for 20% of the plays is not a running game, and not a real test. I think it barely possible that we pull that one out by being a bit more run persistent. The other game, surprisingly enough is the Toilet Seats – we had 3.5 YPC, but only tried it 11 times, not counting the Fly. Again, I think the run merited a bit more usage in that game; almost certainly not enough to pull out the win, but I think we would have done much better if we had run more..

I thought the Fly question posed in response to my last look at the stats merited a closer look. Having looked, I’m not so sure about 3 more wins, but I still think running more definitely garners 2 more wins, and probably 1 more, just by virtue of the “the more you do it the better you get” factor.

Sac State	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	43	266				38	79
Sacks	2	8
Team Net	41	274	6.68	3	13.67			51.90%
Fly	2	3	1.50	0				2.53%
Team – F	39	271	6.95	3	13.00			49.37%
% Fly	5%	1%


Wisc	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	24	23				44	65
Sacks	3	25
Team Net	21	48	2.29	0				32.31%
Fly	2	6	3.00	0				3.08%
Team – F	19	42	2.21	0				29.23%
% Fly	10%	13%


UCLA	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	29	88				40	69
Sacks	0	0
Team Net	29	88	3.03	0				42.03%
Fly	6	33	5.50	0				8.70%
Team – F	23	55	2.39	0				33.33%
% Fly	21%	38%


ASU	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	14	47				69	80
Sacks	3	27
Team Net	11	74	6.73	1	11.00			13.75%
Fly	2	23	11.50	0				2.50%
Team – F	9	51	5.67	1	9.00			11.25%
% Fly	18%	31%


Ariz	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	W
Team Ttl	35	128				43	78
Sacks	0	0
Team Net	35	128	3.66	1	35.00			44.87%
Fly	4	21	5.25	0				5.13%
Team – F	31	107	3.45	1	31.00			39.74%
% Fly	11%	16%


BYU	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	23	59				44	66
Sacks	1	3
Team Net	22	62	2.82	2	11.00			33.33%
Fly	3	13	4.33	0				4.55%
Team – F	19	49	2.58	2	9.50			28.79%
% Fly	14%	21%


WSU	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	W
Team Ttl	34	175				34	68
Sacks	0	0
Team Net	34	175	5.15	1	34.00			50.00%
Fly	3	41	13.67	0				4.41%
Team – F	31	134	4.32	1	31.00			45.59%
% Fly	9%	23%


Utah	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	26	32				55	75
Sacks	6	56
Team Net	20	88	4.40	0				26.67%
Fly	5	45	9.00	0				6.67%
Team – F	15	43	2.87	0				20.00%
% Fly	25%	51%


Stan	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	17	33				33	47
Sacks	3	27
Team Net	14	60	4.29	1	14.00			29.79%
Fly	5	42	8.40	0				10.64%
Team – F	9	18	2.00	1	9.00			19.15%
% Fly	36%	70%


Cal	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	21	27				42	61
Sacks	2	19
Team Net	19	46	2.42	0				31.15%
Fly	4	28	7.00	0				6.56%
Team – F	15	18	1.20	0				24.59%
% Fly	21%	61%


UW	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	W
Team Ttl	31	145				38	68
Sacks	1	7
Team Net	30	152	5.07	3	10.00			44.12%
Fly	6	74	12.33	0				8.82%
Team – F	24	78	3.25	3				35.29%
% Fly	20%	49%


TS	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	21	16				50	65
Sacks	6	41
Team Net	15	57	3.80	0				23.08%
Fly	4	18	4.50	0				6.15%
Team – F	11	39	3.55	0				16.92%
% Fly	27%	32%


Total	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	L
Team Ttl	318	1039				530	821
Sacks	27	213
Team Net	291	1252	4.30	12	24.25			35.44%
Fly	46	347	7.54	0				5.60%
Team – F	245	905	3.69	12				29.84%
% Fly	16%	28%

Do these numbers mean anything?

Posted on December 9, 2011 by Giles

Beaver rushing production during the Quizz era and post Quizz – a look at the numbers

I am a believer in the rushing game. I believe that the Oregon State Beavers have chosen to decrease their rushing game in favor of the passing game. I believe that this shift has been unwarranted and has been detrimental to the Beavers’ offensive production and to their winning percentage. Much has been made of the efficacy of the offensive line and its relationship to the running game and, in consequence, to our Win/Loss record. I believe that the downturn in winning percentage is due more to play calling (run vs. pass) than it is to offensive line play. In order to verify or contradict my belief, I decided to take a look at the numbers.

Methodology:

I wanted to see the effect that Jaquizz Rodgers had on the team totals and averages, so I pulled his numbers to compare, and used his numbers to see how the team did rushing when he wasn’t carrying the ball. This method does not take into account his effect on the overall outcome of a play when he is not carrying the ball (i.e. blocking or decoy), but it still gives us a clearer look at his effect on the stat line.

Team Net is team total rushes minus sacks and team total rushing yards plus sack yards.

CPG = Carries per Game

CPT = Carries per Touchdown

Rush % = Number of net rushing plays (total – sacks) divided by the total number of plays (rushing plays including sacks + official passing attempts)

2008	Games	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPG	CPT	Pass Att	Ttl Plays	Rush %	Win %
Team Ttl		487	2055					448	935		69%
Sacks		21	163
Team Net	13	466	2218	4.76	21	35.85	22.19			49.84%
Quizz	11	259	1253	4.84	11	23.55	23.55
Team – Q		207	965	4.66	10	15.92	20.70
% Quizz		56%	56%		52%	66%


2009	Games	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPG	CPT		Ttl Plays	Rush %	Win %
Team Ttl		440	1818					478	918		62%
Sacks		29	229
Team Net	13	411	2047	4.98	26	31.62	15.81			44.77%
Quizz	13	273	1440	5.27	21	21.00	13.00
Team – Q		138	607	4.40	5	10.62	27.60
% Quizz		66%	70%		81%


2010	Games	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPG	CPT		Ttl Plays	Rush %	Win %
Team Ttl		384	1435					375	759		42%
Sacks		35	232
Team Net	12	349	1667	4.78	18	29.08	19.39			45.98%
Quizz	12	256	1184	4.63	14	21.33	18.29
Team – Q		93	483	5.19	4	7.75	23.25
% Quizz		73%	71%		78%


2011	Games	Rushes	Yards	YPC	TDs	CPG	CPT		Ttl Plays	Rush %	Win %
Team Ttl		318	1039					503	821		25%
Sacks		27	213
Team Net	12	291	1252	4.30	14	24.25	20.79			35.44%

I concede that this is a small sample set, but since it somewhat supports my opinion I like it. Exactly what do these numbers tell us? Probably not a lot – but as a former devoted reader of Bill James’ annual “Baseball Abstract” I like looking at the numbers in different ways.

Review these numbers at your leisure, I’m not exactly sure what to make of them except the confirmation of what we already know – Quizz was special. But I enjoy looking at some of these numbers. I’m not going to draw any large conclusions from them, but I’m going to discuss a couple of them in this post..

First, I want to point out that 2009 was a monster year for Quizz in terms of YPC (5.27) but also CPT (13). I think there are two things that account for this:

1) Maturity and experience – it was his second year as feature back.

2) Offensive line – the line performed better than it did in 2010.

When we look at the larger picture we see that Carries per Game dropped dramatically over these four years, from almost 36 to barely over 24. Another important number to note is the percentage of rushing plays to total plays, the Beavers went from a high of nearly 50% in 2008 to a low of 35.4% in 2011. Two reasons given for the low percentage in ’11 are – no breakout running back and poor run blocking by the offensive line.

I refute both of these arguments as valid reasons for only running the ball one third of the time. Yards per carry were 4.3 in 2011 – not earth shattering, but still within range of the three previous years. 4.3 is respectable, and that number tells me that we should have been running more. Running with a 4.3 average controls the game more, gives your defense more rest and, I argue, wins more games.

4.3 says the running game in 2011, while not quite to the level of previous years, was not totally inept. The difference between 4.3 YPC and 5 YPC over a game (assuming 30 carries per game) is 21 yards. In the larger scheme of things, those 21 yards do not lose games, per se. The timing of those yards is the difference maker – but I believe there is a bigger difference maker: Almost always passing on first down seems to yield a long string of 3rd and longs. If the running game can put you at 2nd and 5 or 2nd and 6, you have a decent chance of making your mark. Running 50% to 60% of the time on first down increases the effectiveness of your first down passing. Running more sustains more drives, keeps the opponents defense on the field longer and your own off the field longer. Defense being where fatigue most often becomes a factor, this is a BIG deal as the game wears on.

I think our reluctance to run came from two sources: 1) Our young running backs fumbled the ball at inopportune times, and discouraged the coaches from relying on them. But QBs, especially young QBs, throw interceptions at inopportune times, and are rarely benched when it occurs. 2) A former QB as offensive coordinator will have a bias toward the pass – all QBs do, it’s their thing.

Finally, I want to say this: Had we shown more confidence in our running game, and ran the ball 50% of the time (at the RIGHT time) the beneficial results would have shown in the late 3rd and the 4th quarters. More running would have yielded better YPC numbers, because the early work would pay off as the defensive lines grew weary later in the game. I think our disuse (and misuse – but that’s another rant) of the running game cost us a least 3 games – without question the Sac State game was lost due to a refusal to run the ball in the first half. Would 3 more wins in 2011 meant anything to Beaver fans?

Fred Thompson RIP

Posted on December 8, 2011 by Giles

I read last night about the untimely death of Fred Thompson.. A quick aside – we use the term “untimely” because we are caught by surprise, and we think it was “before his time” because we imagined (as he and his family did, no doubt) a bright but now unrealized future for him. But isn’t our hope, really, that Fred was in God’s hands and in His plan, and he died according to the munificent design of a gracious, benevolent God?

I briefly met the young man a few weeks ago, after the UW game. My lasting impression was of an exhuberant young man, enjoying his time at Oregon State, excited about his future as a starting defensive tackle for the Beavers. My heart warmed as I watched him, then briefly conversed about him with two good friends of mine, Howard Croom and Rodney Williams. They both knew him, and both had positive comments about the young man, both as a person and as a future contributer to OSU football.

My first thought upon reading the sad news was for Fred’s family. I then sent a text to Howard and Rod, both of whom had heard about the tragedy from their own family members close to the team and to Fred. Rodney reminded me that, in addition to his family which I had remembered, Fred’s friends and his teammates were in need of our prayers. Thanks for that reminder Rod.

In one of those tap-on-the-shoulder twists of fate, when I received the news I was in the final editing of my previous post – a brief examination of death and eternity.

I will not spend any of this post commenting on Mr. Thompson’s qualities as a football player and his anticipated contributions to Beaver football. His value far exceeded his athletic abilities, and the loss felt by his family and his friends is far beyond any loss a fan, such as myself, can begin to feel. Had I not recently met this young man, had I not been so favorably impressed by his youthful exhuberant, yet properly respectful demeanor, I would not have been moved to make this post. I met him, I was impressed by him, I looked forward to watching him grow and mature in character and capabilites, and I looked forward to becoming acquainted, in some small measure, with this young man. That won’t happen. God has different plans.

Isaiah 55:9 – “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

May God’s everlasting peace comfort the family, the friends, and the teammates of Fred Thompson in this time of immense loss and sorrow.

Interviewed by Gazette Times

Posted on October 14, 2011 by Giles

I was interviewed earlier today by Emily Gillespie from the Gazette Times. She is writing a story about the fan dissatisfaction with the game day experience at Reser Stadium. She had heard about our bead-flinging-fiasco and wanted to hear my story, so I told it.

She has invited fan comment, and ask me to post her email address: emily dot gillespie at gtconnect dot com

She was cordial, and seemed interested – we’ll see how the story turns out.

Reading her profile (linked to her portrait) I see she is a graduate of duckland university! This causes me some bit of angst. I will give her the benefit of the doubt, even though she is a duck, and wait to see the article she produces.

I wanted to make sure that she understood that it isn’t all the Oregon State Police, but that there are other areas of dissatisfaction also; that OSP contributes to the damper, but they aren’t the whole Maryanne. I mentioned the duck noisemakers, that are against the rules – we’ll see if THAT makes it into the story. I encouraged her to visit Pure Orange to get a feel for the fan opinion. I also asked her not to make the beads the focus of the story, but instead to view the overall picture, and include ideas from the supporters and fans for enhancing their experience.

Of games and scores and beads and such.

Posted on October 13, 2011 by Giles

Update: This is an a more thorough description of events that were described in less detail on the Oregon State Sports forum, PureOrange at this link.

My buddy, Hog, and I have shared a loge in Reser Stadium for the last 7 years. For the last 7 years we have been throwing mardi gras beads out to the fans below us after a score. It has been a big hit. Folks in the section below us will turn around when the Beavers score and wave and jump for beads (No, they don’t do that – it is Corvallis, not New Orleans!). Kids love them, ladies scream for them, and the guys will make an extra effort to catch them.

Several years ago, he and I donated our loge seats to the family of a young man fighting cancer. He had come to our attention after he sent letters of encouragement to the OSU kicker after he had missed 3 extra points against LSU, during a game in Baton Rouge that the Beavers lost by 1 point! They are Washington State fans, so when they came to Corvallis for a WSU game, we offered our seats. We instructed the family and the young man that one of the requirements of sitting in the Loge was to toss beads after every Beaver score. They complied with style and enjoyment. They enjoyed playing the part and were worthy representatives of our tradition.

Alas, as I posted here, last Saturday a uniformed patrolman marched up the stairs near our seats and informed us that such antics would no longer be tolerated. We grudgingly agreed to cease, and I must confess to a less than Christian attitude about the whole thing.

We handed beads down to folks below us after the next score, but there isn’t any exuberance expressed in handing beads to someone, like there is in flinging the beads out. We then went to the front of the section and handed them out there. While doing this, folks would ask us what happened, and as I explained, I pointed to the female security person who initiated the action. She said she felt threatened by our actions – Hog and another friend went and talked to her, and she said she felt threatened by that as well. I can understand, to some degree, her feeling. But we did nothing to intimidate her. We mugged and pointed and talked to her. In retrospect, I should not have acknowledged her in any way, and I wish now that I hadn’t.

While we were passing out beads, OSU scored again. I was in front of the section, and Hog was just below me on the walkway, so I gently tossed him the beads in my hand in celebration – about a 2 ½ foot toss – and was promptly told if I did it again I would be removed from the stadium!

I spoke to athletic department representatives about the matter, and she expressed agreement with my position, but she, of course, is bound by the rules. She assured me that this would be discussed in Monday’s meeting (last Monday) and she would get back to me. She did – and this was the ruling: No more bead tossing. They did say they would allow us to hand the beads to folks…I am open to suggestions for exuberant, celebratory bead handing; I just don’t know how to do it. But more than that, how presumptuous of them to “allow” something they do not have the authority to prohibit in the first place!

So, I am contemplating making a sign that says something like this:

“We are no longer allowed to toss beads. Please express yourself to bob.decarolis@oregonstate.edu”

I’m not sure if that would be the right thing to do – but I do want to have some explanation for the folks who have come to expect beads.

Truth Has a Chance

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. –Winston Churchill

Tag Archives: Oregon State Beavers