+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: Members (/forum-401.html)
+----- Forum: Rice (/forum-444.html)
+----- Thread: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** (/thread-825246.html)
Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - Bailiff_Lingo_Bingo - 08-27-2017 01:11 AM
Let's put some lipstick on this pig?
Glaesmann looked promising, but needs to figure out how to hold the ball securely in his hand
Stewart looked good
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - Tiki Owl - 08-27-2017 01:42 AM
I still prefer Tyner's size at QB but quite frankly both had too many bad moments and it makes it hard to see potential.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - mrbig - 08-27-2017 01:49 AM
I'll keep it positive. No one really expected Rice to win this game. I doubt few of us really expected Rice to put up a fight. Go 11-0 for the rest of the year, or even 10-1, and no one will ultimately care about today's beatdown. So my positive thoughts:
(1) Jack Fox punted very well
(2) I really liked the speed Rice showed at some skill positions (Stewart, Walter, Montgomery, Trammel, Esupka). It didn't make a huge difference against Stanford, but I could see that depth of speed in the backfield and slot being very troublesome for less stout defenses.
(3) I liked the pre-snap motion. I have been hoping for more pre-snap motion for years. As long as they are doing it with some kind of purpose (not just as a gimmick), then I really like it.
(4) Along the same vein, I liked that they were showing different formations, and changing formations after breaking the huddle.
(5) No meerkat! Finally!
(6) No wild owl
(7) I like the move away from the 4-2-5 to the 3-4. Hopefully things look a lot more tidy after some extra time watching video until the next game.
(8) Rice's o-line didn't create a lot of running lanes between the tackles, but I thought they did a decent job protecting the QB and allowing RB's to get outside the tackles.
Hats off to Stanford, they are significantly better than Rice and it showed. I think their #2s would beat Rice's #1s pretty handily. Their o-line looked particularly stout. To be slightly negative, I am worried about the QB situation. I felt like Glaesmann was handled with kids gloves, which can't exactly instill confidence in him, and he seemed like he lost confidence over the course of the game. I hope he bounces back.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - Almadenmike - 08-27-2017 02:58 AM
Next game: After an off-week, we play @UTEP on Sept. 9. UTEP gets no off-week after starting its season @Oklahoma on Sept. 2.
In pre-season rankings, Oklahoma is generally higher than Stanford. It will be interesting to compare their performance in Norman with ours tonight in Sydney ... and how indicative they are of the outcome of our Sept. 9 game.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - NYNightOwl - 08-27-2017 03:11 AM
By the way, I talked to some folks in the athletic dept. and there was a nice revenue positive payout from the game. So at least there's that.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - BufflOwl - 08-27-2017 07:00 AM
(08-27-2017 03:11 AM)NYNightOwl Wrote: By the way, I talked to some folks in the athletic dept. and there was a nice revenue positive payout from the game. So at least there's that.
This administration has flip flopped on the financial ramifications vs creating experiences for this kids a couple too many times for my liking. I've never cared much for these leaders and I've got a ton of flack here for it but I now officially don't trust anything coming out of that group.
I'm glad this game and experience is over. I hope all who went had the time of their lives. I wish the best for everyone in Houston experiencing this flood. I hope the team gets home safe. Fingers crossed in the next week or two we can actually start the season with some form of normalcy. It'll be good for everyone.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - westsidewolf1989 - 08-27-2017 08:59 AM
Team is a complete joke. We'll hear the usual excuses from our moron coach and his band of misfit coaches in the ensuing week(s), as well as the typical puff piece from the athletic department, but when it comes down to it, this team's play is a hilarious and sad representation of our university. Seeing the game in person was enough to show me that neither the players nor the coaches gave two ***** about playing a competitive game today, whatsoever. Hopefully our idiot athletic director and our clown president saw what I saw today - zero pride in representing this university and zero effort.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - westsidewolf1989 - 08-27-2017 09:03 AM
(08-27-2017 07:00 AM)BufflOwl Wrote:(08-27-2017 03:11 AM)NYNightOwl Wrote: By the way, I talked to some folks in the athletic dept. and there was a nice revenue positive payout from the game. So at least there's that.
This administration has flip flopped on the financial ramifications vs creating experiences for this kids a couple too many times for my liking. I've never cared much for these leaders and I've got a ton of flack here for it but I now officially don't trust anything coming out of that group.
I'm glad this game and experience is over. I hope all who went had the time of their lives. I wish the best for everyone in Houston experiencing this flood. I hope the team gets home safe. Fingers crossed in the next week or two we can actually start the season with some form of normalcy. It'll be good for everyone.
Karlgaard should be usurped by others in the athletic department. It's painfully clear he isn't qualified to do anything other than podcasts and selling us a bill of goods.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - texowl2 - 08-27-2017 09:24 AM
First three minutes of the game tells it all. Stanford ripped through us on defense in 3 plays, looking an NFL team playing a jr high. Kick return two yards deep in the endzone returned to the 12 or so. Three penalties and a run for loss on first 4 plays. During Goldsmith and Hatfield, though occasionally some brutal games, you always felt that we would stay competitive. I went to the OU game at Norman the year they won the national championship (2000) and into the third quarter (maybe it was deep in the second), there was some really nervous fans. Does anyone have confidence that we don't get blown out by all of the major conferences and the vast majority of G5 teams?
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - sts60 - 08-27-2017 09:25 AM
Houston sports headline trifecta:
"Texans held scoreless in preseason loss to Saints
Stanford routs Rice 62-7 in game in Sydney
Astros blow 5-run lead in loss to Angels"
And that's today's good news.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - owl40 - 08-27-2017 09:42 AM
Agree with all the positives (Stewart, Fox, speed, made a couple $, etc.). Would add to the list the up-tempo/change of pace on O, Womac, played ok D on 1st and 2nd down, and Special Teams coverage, but we also want to look at the negatives to see if they improve against UTEP and season progresses.
- Talent disparity is getting worse, not better. Recruiting services appear to not be wrong like many us thought. It was evident.
- I could be wrong but I put over/under on Stanford wins at 9. I think we were worse than they were better. They are a solid top-20 team, but not a top-5 or even top-10 team. Don’t see them running the table against Wash, USC, etc.
- Execution was horrible. Despite talent gap, holding on to the ball, getting plays called, busted coverages, etc. you can’t have so many execution errors in a game like this. That has nothing to do with talent. We had countless 1:1 plays and seemed to lose every one of them.
- Did not look prepared and ready to play. I actually thought we would come out w/ the new schemes and confuse Stanford and be competitive for a quarter or two before getting blown-out. We looked like we had been on vacation all week (oops..we were).
- Glaesman did a couple nice things, made some nice throws, etc. but when DB said, ‘nobody had separated themselves’, I thought he was posturing but he was not. He is definitely a freshman. Was expecting a few frosh errors but thought would have had some more playmaking to offset those frosh errors.
- I’m assuming Lynch’s gameplan was that we could not beat them up-front or with vertical passing (their secondary is very stout) so we went with horizontal stretch and misdirection plays. Liked the idea but thought too many of them.
- Shovel pass. I know they are trying to get D to slow down their speed option pursuit but tried it too many times.
- Tackling. Can change schemes all you want but we had guys in position to make plays. They did not make plays.
- 3rd Down. They were great. We were terrible.
- Would have liked to see Cephus and Granson get some more touches. They are playmakers.
- Not sure why you run so many plays into the boundary (esp speed option) with a team that has so much speed/talent. You are making it easier with less field to cover.
- A bit tongue-in-cheek but would have been better to keep game in Houston and have it been rescheduled for November and be off-the-grid.
Overall, biggest negative is that Rice Football brand took a big hit. We had an opportunity to have the national stage to ourselves and not only squandered the opportunity for a positive, made the ‘Rice stinks’ as the takeaway. Does not matter what happens rest of year..to the casual fan that ‘Rice stinks’ is the takeaway. Not angry today....more embarrassed.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - Bailiff_Lingo_Bingo - 08-27-2017 10:40 AM
(08-27-2017 09:42 AM)owl40 Wrote: Not angry today....more embarrassed.
to be fair owl40, you and the rest of us have been saying this line verbatim for years
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - Tiki Owl - 08-27-2017 10:59 AM
(08-27-2017 10:40 AM)Bailiff_Lingo_Bingo Wrote:(08-27-2017 09:42 AM)owl40 Wrote: Not angry today....more embarrassed.
to be fair owl40, you and the rest of us have been saying this line verbatim for years
Agree completely. I would add that the effort/execution was so bad that if we give that same performance I don't see a win on the entire schedule.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - allerretour - 08-27-2017 11:11 AM
Even if Stanford is clearly the more talented team (which they are), that was not acceptable. How many 50+ point losses do you see throughout the whole CFB season, regardless of who is playing who? Unless they make a miracle turnaround, Baliff absolutely has to be gone at the end of the season (and I like the guy). I don't know enough about the assistants, but if one of them is at all ready to set in, I'd say Bailiff should be playing for the right to finish out the season over the next 2 or 3 games. I thought Glaesmann looks like he has potential, but the defense looked hopeless.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - OldOwl - 08-27-2017 11:24 AM
If we had a President and AD that cared about Rice sports, they would fire Bailiff when he gets back to Houston but they rather give the President a huge salary who has not accomplished nothing at the university since he got here. Bailiff should have been fired last year but Rice is so worried about expenses that is rather run the whole football program into the ground for $200 or $300K. What a bunch of idiots. Don't they realize how long it will take to build the program up again and how much revenue they will be loosing in the meantime of increasing attendance and TV interest. They should have not sold any season tickets to send a message but people keep buying them like cattle going to a water trough.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - Barney - 08-27-2017 12:48 PM
I'm not as upset as some of you. Maybe I would be if I'd traveled all the way to Australia to see that....
My principal takeaway from this game was how extreme the separation of P5 from G5 has been allowed to become. "College Football" as a single entity doesn't exist anymore. There's P5 college football and there's the rest of college football.
Besides simply being dominated physically, the other flaws I saw were relatively few and simple: we have very young and inexperienced QB's, and we don't look very well coached/disciplined on offense.
On the other hand, I saw a number of positives, which others have listed. I also saw us pressure the QB better against a huge and experienced OL, and with at least a couple of sacks. I saw minimal separation of Stanford's receivers from our DB's, and almost nothing over the top (miracle!).
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - greyowl72 - 08-27-2017 12:55 PM
Watched the whole game.
Some random observations/ thoughts:
-I think we have a bit more speed this year than last. On both sides of the ball.
-Nice to see a lot of pre-snap motion on offense and we seem (as much as I can tell from last night's non-performance) to have a bit more creative playbook.
-Fox has turned into a good punter. If we are to have any success this year he will probably be a major factor.
-in garbage time, it appeared that our defensive play calling was a lot more aggressive than the past 2 seasons. . A number of stunts I hadn't seen before.
-In the few camera shots of the Rice bench during the game, Bailiff looked miserable. No doubt he was.
-Glaesman has potential. At this point that's about all he has. It was his first college start. On a big stage. He had the jitters. He will get better. We will see how much.
-Top 2 comments from Mrs. Greyowl during the game. "Oh my god." and "Tell me why we are playing Stanford."
The "Rice Stinks" comment may, in my opinion, be the symbolic turning point for the football program. It was said to a national audience. It cannot be ignored. The AD has heard it. The President has heard it. By now the coaches have heard it. The poor players and their families have heard it now. No doubt a number of the BOT heard it in real time. For a university that strives to be respected and viewed by its peers as a top 10 or 20 school in this nation, the comment "Rice stinks" cannot be ignored. It cheapens Rice. Not only as a team, but it paints us as an institution that is truly not capable of being upper echelon university at every level. Either because we are unwilling to to use our considerable resources to not stink, or we are clueless as to how to not stink. The "Rice Stinks" comment sickens me. For god's sake, somebody wake up and do something.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - ranfin - 08-27-2017 01:08 PM
The people responsible for keeping Bailiff should be ashamed of themselves and should voluntarily minimize their role in our search for a new coach.
RE: Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - OldOwl - 08-27-2017 01:11 PM
Great comments and I totally agree. This year is essentially wasted again. Do not tell me we cannot be competitive against the P5 schools. Of course we can but not against top 25 teams at this time but we should be in the future with the right coaching staff and commitment from the University. Why in the hell were we touring Sydney on a boat before the biggest game this year. I am sure most of the players love Bailiff for it accept those trying to go to the NFL.
(08-27-2017 12:55 PM)greyowl72 Wrote: Watched the whole game.
Some random observations/ thoughts:
-I think we have a bit more speed this year than last. On both sides of the ball.
-Nice to see a lot of pre-snap motion on offense and we seem (as much as I can tell from last night's non-performance) to have a bit more creative playbook.
-Fox has turned into a good punter. If we are to have any success this year he will probably be a major factor.
-in garbage time, it appeared that our defensive play calling was a lot more aggressive than the past 2 seasons. . A number of stunts I hadn't seen before.
-In the few camera shots of the Rice bench during the game, Bailiff looked miserable. No doubt he was.
-Glaesman has potential. At this point that's about all he has. It was his first college start. On a big stage. He had the jitters. He will get better. We will see how much.
-Top 2 comments from Mrs. Greyowl during the game. "Oh my god." and "Tell me why we are playing Stanford."
The "Rice Stinks" comment may, in my opinion, be the symbolic turning point for the football program. It was said to a national audience. It cannot be ignored. The AD has heard it. The President has heard it. By now the coaches have heard it. The poor players and their families have heard it now. No doubt a number of the BOT heard it in real time. For a university that strives to be respected and viewed by its peers as a top 10 or 20 school in this nation, the comment "Rice stinks" cannot be ignored. It cheapens Rice. Not only as a team, but it paints us as an institution that is truly not capable of being upper echelon university at every level. Either because we are unwilling to to use our considerable resources to not stink, or we are clueless as to how to not stink. The "Rice Stinks" comment sickens me. For god's sake, somebody wake up and do something.
Rice v Stanford ***Postgame Thread*** - owl at the moon - 08-27-2017 01:17 PM
Well we do have two weeks to fix er up. But in the meantime...
To the tune of the J Geils Band classic...
We're champs on the diamond
And not too bad on the links
We're champs on the courts
(But on the gridiron, Rice ...)