Of all the pieces I’ve written, none have sparked as much outrage as the one I made over the weekend suggesting that Oregon State missed an opportunity by taking such a casual approach to its spring football showcase.
It mobilized Beavers fans and caused heartburn at the top of the wounded university’s power structure.
I was accused of “writing a hit piece” and a “hackneyed hit job” that was “in poor taste” and “kicking OSU while they’re already hurting.” I was called “sanctimonious, self-entitled” and “anti-Beaver, pro-Phil Knight.” One reader lamented the “mediocre and often substandard ‘reporting’ of the Beaver teams” by myself “and the other gumshoes for the Oregon Pravda.”
Admittedly, as a begrudging millennial, I had to look that one up.
Most Beavers fans, between curse words, simply called me the very worst thing they could think of: a Duck.
Buried within the avalanche of anger, however, was a note that struck a decidedly different tone.
“Probably not supposed to say this,” it said, “but great column.”
It came from a university source. Someone who knows how the athletic department operates.
This person understood that I was talking about much more than a spring football game. The column was about how Oregon State chooses to move after losing the Pac-12, its top athletes, its highest-paid coach and a clear future.
The fact that this single voice was such an outlier among those coming from Corvallis, that the source knew a vote of support was akin to treason, tells me that OSU still doesn’t get it. So let me put it even more plainly.
Leave a Reply