Jump to content

Talk:Oregon State Beavers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New logo! "OS"

[edit]

The logo affects all athletic logos but the Beaver logo, which is still the primary logo ("OS" is secondary). Still, here is some info from the official FAQ:

  • Q: What will happen to the Beaver head logo?
  • A: The Beaver head logo remains the primary Athletics logo. The logotypes will be used as companion wordmarks to the Beaver.
  • Q: Why “OS?”
  • A: Originally, OSU developed a series of block “Os” that followed in the Athletics tradition and then took these designs out for comment and discussion. After many focus groups, conversations and surveys with alumni, friends, faculty, staff and students (including OSU student athletes and coaches), it was clear that the block “O” was very distinctive to Ohio State; in Oregon, the “O” has been branded well by the University of Oregon; and “OSU” in black and orange has been recognized with Oklahoma State. The change to the “OS” came from conversations with these key stakeholders about creating a unique look — a look that could not be confused with any other university in the nation.

Here's the official source. --Bobak 18:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Block O" is not "original." An inter-locking OAC debuted in the 1890s, followed by an updated version in the late 1890s. The original can be found in 1896 Barometer issues, as well as the 1894 Hayseed (first yearbook). The "Block O" is still pretty early, but it is not the first logo for the school.Ibleedorange14 (talk) 05:07, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Giant Killers

[edit]

If the victory over #3 USC is going to make it on this page. The victories over #1 USC & #2 Purdue & the tie against #2 UCLA in the 1967 Giant Killer campaign should be added. It is the first, last, & only time that a team has defeated a #1 & #2 ranked team & tied a #2 ranked team in the same season. In addition, the 0-0 tie against USC in the 20s should be added as well. It is the only time that a team playing with only 11 men--i.e., used no substitutions--tied or defeated the #1 team in the country. The 11 "Ironmen" or "Men of Iron" are immortalized in Oregon State's fight song, "...Men of Iron go tearing down the field..." & all are enshrined in the Oregon State Hall of Fame. --wilkyisdashiznit 13:20, 30 April 2007 (MST)

I agree 100%. Feel free to add it. VegaDark 23:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was 1933, not 1920s. Most-epic game in program history... ended USC's 25-game win-streak with only 11 men.Ibleedorange14 (talk) 05:01, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Behave...

[edit]

Today we seem to have had a rather lengthy anti-Beaver rant, which was reverted by someone else who put a "we're better than the Ducks"--ish boast instead. That too, has now been reverted.

The article is not improved by engaging in Ducks/Beavers pissing contests.

Please, take it outside...

--EngineerScotty 23:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Winless record

[edit]

Is it notable that the OSU beavers basketball are the first pac-10 team to lose all their conference games?--167.135.31.19 (talk) 20:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Limit size of sections on sports with separate articles

[edit]

It's a maintenance problem to maintain two separate detailed summaries. 72.244.201.239 (talk) 06:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Beaver Racing

[edit]

Would anyone be opposed to adding a section on Beaver Racing Formula and Baja SAE results here, or should I make a new page? Both teams have been fairly successful over the past few years, Baja especially having placed 1st or 2nd in I think every competition they've entered in the past 5 years. Very prestigious results in the engineering and motorsports circles. Probably would need a new section for motorsports since it's not gender-sorted. Please discuss. Bdc101 (talk) 22:19, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you or someone has not already created a page for them I would say do it. I don't think it belongs under sports though.--ben_b (talk) 02:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is at least worth a brief mention if it does not have its own page. Auto Racing is recognized as a sport, even if college teams approach it from a different perspective than the "pros." The national championships make it worth the mention.128.193.162.56 (talk) 03:46, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

School Colors

[edit]

Black is not an official color. I tried to remove it but it appears the template used for college sports only have room for two colors. So if anyone can modify that or whatever, it should be reflected that there is only one official school color... orange.

Actually, I believe that white is the official accent color.

There is not, and never has been an official accent color. Black, White, and Green, however have all been used extensively during various periods.128.193.162.56 (talk) 03:44, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure removing the color is the right choice but rather possible {{citation needed}}.--ben_b (talk) 02:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Even though black has never been official, it was voted on by the students in the 1890s to be the backdrop... it caused some uproar since Albany College adopted the same colors a couple years earlier. Despite being unofficial, it deserves to stay by virtue of such a long existence, though an asterisk should be included.Ibleedorange14 (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the colors back to Orange and Black from Black and Orange. The colors are ORANGE (and black)... black should not be listed first as a) it is not actually a school color and b) its unofficial role is that of a backdrop only. Its use in uniform color schemes is inconsequential in this manner as such schemes are merely a result of modern fashion trends (if these trends determined school colors, in 1942, this page would have told us the colors were Orange and Tan).Ibleedorange14 (talk) 03:30, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the colors in the templates and added them back to the page. Much more useful for us to keep all the colors in one place. For those that care see http://oregonstate.edu/ua/brand/color-palette and http://oregonstate.edu/ua/brand/colors for more color details. --ben_b (talk) 09:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dated and Too Much Info

[edit]

I think the soccer and gymnastics sections are both too dated and filled with too-specific information. Both teams have their own pages, so some of the information is redundant at best. For soccer, why should a 2009 roster be on this page? Even a 2012 roster belongs on the soccer page, not the overall athletics page. It is both dated and inappropriate content. For gymnastics, why does the ranking from 6 years ago warrant use? They have been ranked higher since then (and are currently). They have their own page; leave the rankings there, and on this page just mention that they have a consistent history of high rankings.

I'd change it now... but I thought better to comment here first instead of going on a deleting rampage.Ibleedorange14 (talk) 05:11, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would just make go ahead and make the changes. --ben_b (talk) 04:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and deleted the 2009 roster and updated the first paragraph to be current and relevant, and not sound like a middle school paper. I didn't delete the rest of the unnecessary information though because then there would being left...128.193.162.56 (talk) 03:50, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Track and Field changes

[edit]

I made some changes, some of which partially reverted to an older version, and I wanted to put some justification here to make sure it isn't changed back out of ignorance or opinion.
1. Someone changed it back to say that the "Track and Field and Cross Country Program was..." The were two separate programs; please kindly keep them separate, leaving "programs" plural, and using "were" instead of "was."
2. Someone added mention of the Pac-10 back to the article. Pac-12 is sufficient-- they are the same conference, under different names. The Pac-12 claims all of the history and lineage of the Pac-10 and Pac-8 (and some debate that it also holds the lineage of the PCC as well, but that is a debate for another topic!). Besides, the relevant content refers to the Pac-8 anyways, so adding the Pac-10 was doubly inaccurate It is also not only unnecessary to include both titles, but it is also misleading as it gives the impression that they are two difference conferences. For improved quality, I also unabbreviated the conference name and added a link.ibleedorange14 (talk) 08:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please include details of #1 in the article itself. Also you mention the new complex... please introduce the complex and explain more. --ben_b (talk) 08:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Oregon State Beavers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:29, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Oregon State Beavers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Oregon_State_Beavers&oldid=1211181511"