(12-17-2016 10:57 PM)BufflOwl Wrote:  Got it. How about a comprehensive campaign similar to the several year several hundred million dollar push Duke or a dozen other schools have done? Include some facility upgrades, some scholarship endowment and some annual fund goals. Include all sports and many different options to support for multiple years. Seeing a vision to support would be a nice change of pace.

Excellent idea. As I understand it, current university policy would prevent it. Changing that policy would be an excellent step forward. I have mentioned it several times in prior posts. I hope JK is working on it. But he can't change it, that's one gotcha that "they" still hold.

Quote:If that's too much how about we start by clarifying the Owl Club vs the other clubs. Insiders seem over this and think I'm an idiot but I still generally don't get what the difference is and if it's all "basically the same" why is there a difference...and why is that not explained on the website?

Another good idea. Under CDC, we had a system where all sports giving was consolidated, and benefits levels were determined by total giving to all sports. The total limits were higher, and IIRC at least half of the total giving had to go to Owl Club (basically, unrestricted, used at AD's discretion, mostly for scholarships). I thought that was a great approach, but there were about as many complaints on here about that as there have been about the trip to Sydney. Then Ranger Rick got rid of that, and again there were another round of complaints. We seem to have supporters who want to retain the status quo, even when the status quo is a downward spiral.

Quote:We can also give some "benefits" to people not in Houston. Look at all the cool perks people get when you have season tickets and can go to every game. For me? My name in an annual report and thank you later without an actual signature on it seems empty. Even I am just a percentage statistic.

Another good idea. I'm not sure what can be done, but this seems like a good idea. What do you have in mind?

Quote:On that note, how about clean up the messaging. Support the Owl Club because percentages matter makes me feel like crap. Any other philanthropy talks about the impact I'm making with my gift. Pennies a day saves a puppy on tv but here I feel like I'm one of the 30% of alums that do vs one of the 70% that don't. Or whatever the stats are. Talk impact. Talk why we love Rice...not do it or you suck...which is how I feel and we're constantly bombarded with.

I actually think they do a pretty good job in this area. I certainly get plenty of information, most of it quite well done, I might add, regarding impact. I'd be interested in comments of others, since you seem to disagree.

Quote:With that, maybe we'll get more from non-alums. I know we can all think of a dozen people who aren't alums that support Rice Alumni. I bet we all think of the same dozen though. Now try the same thought exercise with a big state school. There's a reason to support those other than "you're supposed to" or "yay now were in a 4 way tie for 14 rather than being number 18" which by the way doesnt help the athletics program much if it all. We don't give people not affiliated that same reason because we're too busy beating ourselves up.

Not exactly sure what you mean here, but if you mean what I think you mean, again university policy would probably prohibit it.

Quote:Maybe all of this could connect if we played teams at home that had teams 15 years ago. No not a new conference though that'd make it easier. But annually bringing teams of all sports to our buildings that bring some brand recognition will add up over the next 40 years even if it doesn't off set a $1M this year.

That's not JK's choice or even Rice's choice. We don't schedule Texas or LSU or even Texas Tech or TCU to come to Rice unless THEY want to. For the most part, they don't. As long as they're P5 and we're G5, they won't. The only way to turn this around is to improve our program. The way to do that is improved resources. That requires money. Where do you propose to get it?

Quote:As for the one big Boone Pickens type, that is a matter of a leader being able to sell a vision to someone with the capacity to make the gift. Don't tell me Rice doesn't have anyone with the capacity and never has. What we've never had is the leader that could sell the vision to them. If we can't figure the above things, this last one shouldn't be a surprise though.

Current university policy, as I understand it, pretty much prohibits having that conversation. I agree that needs to change. But that's not JK's call. I also agree that we've long needed a leader who could build and sell a vision. I think JK is well above what we have had in the past in that regard, but this kind of stuff takes time.

Quote:Again, I'm sure the people who do this every day are very nice people. I'm sure the coaches we fire every year are good people. And just like recruiting and play calling isn't your job...this isn't mine. Just because people think they know how to do it or are all together good people doesn't mean they can. My point is only if we demand results from coaches (which I think we should) then we should demand results from administrators. (Which we never have)

I don't support these people because they are good people. I support them because they actually doing, to the extent university policy allows it, a far better job of all the things you complain of than did virtually any of their predecessors.

Quote:And one more thought...reading your inside info about how effed our programs are don't help either. Why would anyone want to give there hard earned money to a place on the verge of collapse? No thanks, I'll kick it to the United Way if my gift doesn't matter as much as a body bag game. Even if those are slap you in the face facts.

The reason I write about how effed up our program has been is to provide some explanation for why things are the way they are now. The people we have in place now are moving about as fast as humanly possible to make the kinds of changes you seem to want.

We don't want to give away a home game to go to Sydney because that's change and we've never done things that way before. Doing things the way we've always done them is how we have ended up as the dregs of a dreg conference. JK and his people are trying to drive change in an environment that has resisted change absolutely for 50 years. That's not going to happen overnight, but it is happening. Give it time, they deserve it.

As this thread has progressed, I've decided that there is a third leg to "the Rice way." In addition to, "losing is okay if you have a good enough excuse," and, "if you don't know where you're going, the path of least resistance will get you there," I should add, "we've always done it that way." All three need to go.