(06-09-2013 03:33 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Losing to both Kansas and UH would be very disappointing, as would only winning 7 games.

OMO, losing to either would be disappointing.

(06-09-2013 12:21 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(06-09-2013 11:01 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  On your second and third points, I believe that you have mistated the positions of those two people and IAC, these were unwarranted, gratuitous personal attacks that add nothing to the discussion.

Not intended as such. I was aiming for caricature but clearly missed

I think we all have our rubber duckies--mine are Utah State/Chuckie Keeton, Sagarin ratings, and pouring cold water on Walt Greenberg's expectations for back-of-the-bullpen arms. I'm sure those and lots of other things grate on folks, but IMHO all within the bounds of good behavior here.

What about chuckie?


I think he has you ranked too low. I see a lot of easy wins and a few toss ups too. Maybe it is the SOS. After all, you could win 6 games and still be the 7th worst team, right? But I don't know. An amazing amount of returning starters, an easy easy easy schedule for the most part, I honestly won't be surprised to see rice in the votes received section of the polls come October or November. Anything under 7 wins would shock me.

Simple context:
1. Rice coaches reportedly put a higher priority on Driphus Jackson than Chuckie Keeton
2. I have been following Chuckie since 3rd grade, when he played select baseball with my neighbor.
3. Chuckie has been instrumental to USU ascent over two seasons, whereas Driphus made zero impact on Rice until the 2nd half of the last game of his redshirt frosh year.
4. I have use Chuckie gratuitously as a counter to assertions by posters on this board of the recruiting and player development effectiveness of Rice coaches.

A single event is not evidence of a trend...

(06-10-2013 07:07 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  A single event is not evidence of a trend...

Obviously. but QB is a key position and Keeton is clearly better than McHargue. The AFB gave some real hope that DJ could eventually be on par with what Keeton was a true sophomore.

Preview of Rice is up. Prediction is a 5 and 7 season. Sorry this is not going to happen. We are better than this!!

(06-10-2013 11:47 AM)OwlMom15 Wrote:  Preview of Rice is up. Prediction is a 5 and 7 season. Sorry this is not going to happen. We are better than this!!

I understand why we are ranked at 94 (we played a weak schedule last year, lost to memphis and haven't performed well between 2009 and 2011), however I expect Rice to do significantly better than that.

I cannot see any way we would win 5 and fully expect 9-10 wins this year.

(06-10-2013 08:00 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 07:07 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  A single event is not evidence of a trend...

Obviously. but QB is a key position and Keeton is clearly better than McHargue. The AFB gave some real hope that DJ could eventually be on par with what Keeton was a true sophomore.

I think you are putting way too much stock in one player. For reasons discussed many times before, I don't think we have done a good job so far in developing Driphus. Same for a number of other younger players. I've seen nothing to indicate that with proper development DJ would not be at least as goos as Chuckie. I think the problem is a more generic one.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca...w/2407811/

Not a lot of analysis going into his 5-7 prediction, just sort of a gut feel and reference of the poor recent historical road record. He's also counting UofH as a flat out road game. And his returning starter count is 2 short.

That just seems like a lazy preview. I don't see how you can say the UH game is a road game - it's neutral at worst. I think he downplays some really good Rice players (such as Jordan Taylor's breakthrough game in the bowl), and some other key players he almost insinuates are hurt and can't play this year (Bauer and Gaines for example).

It would be one thing if we're playing a killer schedule but we're not. I just don't see how you can completely disregard the bowl performance vs. Air Force as an afterthought. We gave up far and away the fewest yards Air Force gained all season against a schedule that was much tougher than ours. And we completely dominated them with a back-up QB. It just doesn't make sense to not put us higher than them at the very least. And furthermore, I think nine of the teams on our 2013 schedule are rated below Rice - if that's the case, how you can predict us at 5-7 and the other teams below us? The math doesn't work unless you're just being lazy with your numbers.

(06-10-2013 12:12 PM)talon owl Wrote:  Not a lot of analysis going into his 5-7 prediction, just sort of a gut feel and reference of the poor recent historical road record. He's also counting UofH as a flat out road game. And his returning starter count is 2 short.

Agree. He also called out the poor August and September record.

I think that 5-7 prediction is too low, but the writer did say the challenge is to move forward off the late season defensive surge and leverage the ability of the 2012 team to win against bad opponents and win on the road.

(06-10-2013 08:00 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 07:07 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  A single event is not evidence of a trend...

Obviously. but QB is a key position and Keeton is clearly better than McHargue. The AFB gave some real hope that DJ could eventually be on par with what Keeton was a true sophomore.

Yes, but we weren't comparing Keeton to McHargue, we were comparing Keeton to Jackson.

Just because McHargue started over Jackson, I wouldn't say that he is the better QB. We know this staff gives credence to seniority, and that is something we can gripe about, not them choosing Driphus over Keeton.

I don't care one bit if whoever predicts 5-7 for us this year. In fact, I hope they all do.
Just sets us up to surprise a lot of people.
And I'm confident we will.

(06-10-2013 12:59 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  I don't care one bit if whoever predicts 5-7 for us this year. In fact, I hope they all do.
Just sets us up to beat a lot of people.
And I'm confident we will.

Fixed it for you...

(06-10-2013 02:10 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  

(06-10-2013 12:59 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  I don't care one bit if whoever predicts 5-7 for us this year. In fact, I hope they all do.
Just sets us up to beat a lot of people.
And I'm confident we will.

Fixed it for you...

Thank you very much

(06-09-2013 12:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think #94 is about right for a preseason forecast based on all available data. I would like us to do better, I expect us to do better, and I will frankly be disappointed if we do not do substantially better. But there's nothing in the past to support a higher expectation going in. We've got a pretty good chance to start 1-4 if we're not ready, and there's history suggesting the we probably won't be ready.

Exactly. Given the past and the state of the program, there's no reason to be mad at any college football writer for predicting us to be at about that level in 2013.

(06-09-2013 10:20 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  So, if Rice were to finish the regular season at 7-5 (a second straight winning season), would that be great, satisfactory, or disappointing? I think it would be somewhere between great and satisfactory.

Slightly disappointing for me, but at the same time given the nakedly unprepared nature of the team early in seasons lately, and that in my opinion Bailiff hasn't yet shown that he deserves any D1 job, it's about what I expect. I would be quite pleased with 9-3.

(06-09-2013 01:00 AM)Wiessman Wrote:  ... However, I can't ignore the fact that we thoroughly dominated two fairly decent teams in SMU and Air Force....

I'm nitpicking here, but I wouldn't call either of those "thorough dominations." Clear wins, especially in virtue of good second-half efforts.