Some background, I went to grad school at Tulane after playing baseball in college in the northeast for a lesser D1 school.

I wanted to get some feedback from Rice folks regarding the new landscape in baseball in relation to private schools. Obviously Tulane baseball has fallen on some really hard times:

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...er_default

Of course Rice has not been as dominant but continues to play great ball and be very very relevant (loved the NC State series and was hoping you guys could have advanced). Do you agree that Tulane is more of a victim of the new landscape or is it more about coaching and recruiting problems? Does the Rice community discuss the effects on your program with the new changes? Just looking for any opinions all of you may have.

Thanks.

(06-14-2013 01:36 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Some background, I went to grad school at Tulane after playing baseball in college in the northeast for a lesser D1 school.

I wanted to get some feedback from Rice folks regarding the new landscape in baseball in relation to private schools. Obviously Tulane baseball has fallen on some really hard times:

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...er_default

Of course Rice has not been as dominant but continues to play great ball and be very very relevant (loved the NC State series and was hoping you guys could have advanced). Do you agree that Tulane is more of a victim of the new landscape or is it more about coaching and recruiting problems? Does the Rice community discuss the effects on your program with the new changes? Just looking for any opinions all of you may have.

Thanks.

I think Tulane is a victim of Katrina and the change in transfer rules. Before the rule change they could bring in Owings and Bogusevic and have them play immediately. Now they can't.

Rice and Vandy prove private schools can compete in baseball.

Only a few of us (not me) would be qualified to even venture a guess as to Tulane's issues. I believe that a) we have an exceptional coach who can recruit and develop talent. It seems that we don't lose many recruits to the bigs, and part of that is of course leverage... but another part certainly must be that "signability" goes into the recruiting process 2) although we are a private/expensive school, we have relatively generous financial aid that at least puts us in the ballpark when combined with (a)... and D) (yes that was intentional) we are located in a relative hotbed of baseball talent and the demographics fit us.

The above has allowed us to remain competitive despite the changes... though I have to believe that a) is by far the biggest contributor... and you can't have him (or his wife)

(06-14-2013 01:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Only a few of us (not me) would be qualified to even venture a guess as to Tulane's issues. I believe that a) we have an exceptional coach who can recruit and develop talent. It seems that we don't lose many recruits to the bigs, and part of that is of course leverage... but another part certainly must be that "signability" goes into the recruiting process 2) although we are a private/expensive school, we have relatively generous financial aid that at least puts us in the ballpark when combined with (a)... and D) (yes that was intentional) we are located in a relative hotbed of baseball talent and the demographics fit us.

The above has allowed us to remain competitive despite the changes... though I have to believe that a) is by far the biggest contributor... and you can't have him (or his wife)

I am well aware of the excuses thrown out by Tulane and the entire situaiton. The issue with aid is that the same aid must be given to all students. There were rumors that Rice directed schollies to latin american players but I have my doubts. I do think the rules have effected many privates as we are not seeing the same results at Rice, USC and to a lesser extent Stanford, TCU, Baylor etc. Vandy has really made a commitment and it is paying off, not sure how they are getting it done.
Bogusevic was not a transfer I believe, but TU was certainly effected by the transfer rule but as far as I am concerned a good coach should not have to rely on transfers. The Katrina stuff is a bunch of garbage at this point. The rest of the city is growing quickly and since the storm TU has built a brand new stadium, I get a little tired when the storm is used as an excuse.

I think you will agree that Rice has been very good but has taken a step back since the new rules were set in place, so is it discussed amongst your fans and admin?

(06-14-2013 02:04 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(06-14-2013 01:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Only a few of us (not me) would be qualified to even venture a guess as to Tulane's issues. I believe that a) we have an exceptional coach who can recruit and develop talent. It seems that we don't lose many recruits to the bigs, and part of that is of course leverage... but another part certainly must be that "signability" goes into the recruiting process 2) although we are a private/expensive school, we have relatively generous financial aid that at least puts us in the ballpark when combined with (a)... and D) (yes that was intentional) we are located in a relative hotbed of baseball talent and the demographics fit us.

The above has allowed us to remain competitive despite the changes... though I have to believe that a) is by far the biggest contributor... and you can't have him (or his wife)

I am well aware of the excuses thrown out by Tulane and the entire situaiton. The issue with aid is that the same aid must be given to all students. There were rumors that Rice directed schollies to latin american players but I have my doubts. I do think the rules have effected many privates as we are not seeing the same results at Rice, USC and to a lesser extent Stanford, TCU, Baylor etc. Vandy has really made a commitment and it is paying off, not sure how they are getting it done.
Bogusevic was not a transfer I believe, but TU was certainly effected by the transfer rule but as far as I am concerned a good coach should not have to rely on transfers. The Katrina stuff is a bunch of garbage at this point. The rest of the city is growing quickly and since the storm TU has built a brand new stadium, I get a little tired when the storm is used as an excuse.

I think you will agree that Rice has been very good but has taken a step back since the new rules were set in place, so is it discussed amongst your fans and admin?

Our rules on aid are the same as yours... that whatever criteria for aid is used by the administration must apply to all. A family of 4 making 100k qualifies for 50% aid or whatever.... I just think that perhaps we give 50% where some of our peers give 35%. There was a discussion on here that implied that unlike some of our peers, athletic aid counted as part of that 50%... meaning if you got a half scholarship, you got no additional aid. I can't verify this, but it would certainly be a problem. Rules on transfers could be potentially worked around in that a kid not able to play could take a 50% aid scholarship one year and then a 50% baseball scholarship the next. Purely a guess, but it makes sense in my head. Our opinions on our effectiveness on the field seem to have centered more on parity and the equipment. I could be wrong, but I've never considered Wayne to be a "small ball" coach... and the new bats encourage small ball. Further, pitching seems to be much more balanced... perhaps based somewhat on the fact that "mistakes" don't hurt as much because of the bats? There really hasn't been (that I've seen) a lot of discussion about much else. I'd call Wayne a pitching and defense coach with "big inning" potential hitting. The equipment changes keep the big innings down and balance out the pitching highs and lows... but the defense and pitching still keep us "in it". That's my 2 cents.

As to Latin Americans, well, we ARE in Houston which is home to many Latin Americans and our school has a solid reputation for diversity. I'm not aware that we get a lot of Latin American recruits that are much different from any other of our recruits. I'm not even sure how to respond to that. It seems a little like saying that Tulane and LSU seem to get an awful lot of Cajun recruits and players named Boudreaux and LaFleur. Well, yeah... because those are fairly common traits of people in Louisiana.

(06-14-2013 01:43 PM)Old Sammy Wrote:  

(06-14-2013 01:36 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Some background, I went to grad school at Tulane after playing baseball in college in the northeast for a lesser D1 school.

I wanted to get some feedback from Rice folks regarding the new landscape in baseball in relation to private schools. Obviously Tulane baseball has fallen on some really hard times:

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...er_default

Of course Rice has not been as dominant but continues to play great ball and be very very relevant (loved the NC State series and was hoping you guys could have advanced). Do you agree that Tulane is more of a victim of the new landscape or is it more about coaching and recruiting problems? Does the Rice community discuss the effects on your program with the new changes? Just looking for any opinions all of you may have.

Thanks.

I think Tulane is a victim of Katrina and the change in transfer rules. Before the rule change they could bring in Owings and Bogusevic and have them play immediately. Now they can't.

Rice and Vandy prove private schools can compete in baseball.

+1. Katrina certainly did not help, but during Tulanes's glory years of the late '90s through 2005, Coach Jones lived off the old transfer rule; oftentimes bringing in 4 - 5 all-american caliber junior transfers. IMO, that rule change hurt Tulane far more than Katrina did. IMO, Coach Jones is not a particularly good teacher and player developer; rather, in the past, he relied on already developed talent.

I know a number of Rice supporters on this board disagree with me, but I really don't think Rice baseball has fallen back much if any over the past several years. Sure, we haven't been to Omaha since 2008, and this was our first year back in the Super-regionals since 2009, but let's face reality-- we continue to be a fixture within the Top 25...we have hosted a regional 7 of the past 10 years...and earned a national seed just two years ago....and I fully expect us to be consensus preseason Top 10 enter next season.

Rice sits in a hotbed for High school baseball players--Houston is very big on its High school baseball--some schools, like Bellaire would just as soon win baseball as football. I have been disappointed like lots here the last few years but I now think, we have not fallen off, but lots of schools have caught up to us. Just like the SWC dominated football with the feeder programs of Texas High School football- now the copycatting of what got kids to Rice, UT, etc 10-12 years ago is being duplicated with baseball programs almost nationwide--there are more good kids to go around.

I'm not a baseball guy, but my Baylor friends are always telling me that Rice has a huge advantage in that (due to the huge endowment) they are able to give need based scholarships. Baylor mostly only has merit based scholarship money. The need based money helps to even the playing field with the state schools. I don't know how that affects Tulane. I am sure that Vandy, Stanford, ND, USC have few problems in these areas.

My first thought is to agree with Walt. Nobody, and I mean nobody, brought in D-I transfers like Rick Jones. The 2005 team had three really good ones in Micah Owings from GT and Greg Dini and Matt Barket from Miami. The Owings transfer alone probably took the Wave from a really good Top-10 team to a national championship contender overnight.

Another thing that I have noticed over the last several years is that the Wave don't really recruit Houston as successfully as they have in the past.

The 2005 team had five players from the Houston area (Stephen Porlier, Billy Mohl, Sean Morgan, Mark Hamilton and Cat Everett) that were impact players. Only one player from Houston on that roster, Will Rice, failed to be at least a solid contributor at some point.

Since then, as far as Houston recruits go, they've had one star in Jeremy Schaeffer, a couple of nice contributors like Drew Zizinia and Nick Pepitone and they have a budding star in current closer Ian Gibaut, but that's about it. And it's not just that they aren't recruiting Houston as much anymore. In each season since that great 2005 campaign, they've had at least a handful of players from Houston on the roster, but very few of them have turned into much of anything.

That alone is not the reason for the program's struggles, but I can't imagine that it has helped.

(06-16-2013 05:15 PM)jdh008 Wrote:  My first thought is to agree with Walt. Nobody, and I mean nobody, brought in D-I transfers like Rick Jones. The 2005 team had three really good ones in Micah Owings from GT and Greg Dini and Matt Barket from Miami. The Owings transfer alone probably took the Wave from a really good Top-10 team to a national championship contender overnight.

Another thing that I have noticed over the last several years is that the Wave don't really recruit Houston as successfully as they have in the past.

The 2005 team had five players from the Houston area (Stephen Porlier, Billy Mohl, Sean Morgan, Mark Hamilton and Cat Everett) that were impact players. Only one player from Houston on that roster, Will Rice, failed to be at least a solid contributor at some point.

Since then, as far as Houston recruits go, they've had one star in Jeremy Schaeffer, a couple of nice contributors like Drew Zizinia and Nick Pepitone and they have a budding star in current closer Ian Gibaut, but that's about it. And it's not just that they aren't recruiting Houston as much anymore. In each season since that great 2005 campaign, they've had at least a handful of players from Houston on the roster, but very few of them have turned into much of anything.

That alone is not the reason for the program's struggles, but I can't imagine that it has helped.

Tulane continues to have more D-1 and JUCO transfers on their roster than almost any other D-1 program. For each of the past two seasons, at least two-thirds of their weekend rotation were transfers (last year all 3 were transfers). Rick Jones is simply sub-par in developing talent and maximizing potential. Conversely, it's one of The OG's greatest strengths....and what (teaching and player develpment) he loves to do (IMO, why he'd never consider the AD job).

(06-14-2013 02:04 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  There were rumors that Rice directed schollies to latin american players but I have my doubts.

I can't remember the last time we had a player from outside the US. Maybe I don't know the roster as well as I think, but I feel* like we're typically about 70% Houston area, 20% rest-of-Texas, 5% rest-of-US.

We did recruit Dickie Thon, Jr., who was nominally from Puerto Rico, but he signed with MLB out of high school.

*I made these numbers up, purely based on my impression. If anyone has a better sense for it, I'd be interested in hearing it.

Thanks for the replies.

Generally speaking Rice has an endowment advantage but it is not like TU is broke.

There is loads of talent in the greater NOLA area and less competition when compared to Rice, so that is a wash.

Getting outside opinions, I think it is clear that Jones is completely overrated as living off transfers and JUCOs is a gimmick. Once they dried up, it is clear he cannot develop players. Unfortunately our AD is even worse than yours. Remember we pay Jones $550K, the highest in CUSA and much more than what Graham (reportedly) makes. It's really disappointing.

I should have clarified, the rumors from some folks was that Rice was adding a few local players of latin american decent via a targeted scholarship, it seemed like typical TU excuse making in order to rationalize why Rice continues to win and we stink.

I think the NCAA has unfairly punished private schools an either needs to remove the transfer requirements or increase the # of schollies to 15.

One thing that I think some have missed is that beginning a few years ago, schools (mostly large public's) began to recognize that they could pull a profit with baseball and at a minimum score some marketing points and added entertainment for students and fans after FBall and Bball was done. Essentially utilizing baseball just like northern schools utilize hockey. This has increased the competition for top talent and combine that with the scholly/JUCO changes = a tough road for private schools.

Good luck with the new AD search and sorry that you get stuck in the CUSABelt.

Tulane has one major problem. It needs to replace its current athletic director,Rick Dickson, and head baseball coach,Rick Jones, and staff. Rick is one of the highest paid college coaches in the nation at one half million dollars salary per year but he has not taken Tulane to the NCAA tournament in five years. He has become lazy,complacent and cannot recruit blue chip players. All we here from him are excuses. Why can private schools like Rice,Vanderbilt,Miami,Standford,TCU and others get to the NCAA's year in and out?

(06-23-2013 03:44 PM)Savacool Wrote:  Tulane has one major problem. It needs to replace its current athletic director,Rick Dickson, and head baseball coach,Rick Jones, and staff. Rick is one of the highest paid college coaches in the nation at one half million dollars salary per year but he has not taken Tulane to the NCAA tournament in five years. He has become lazy,complacent and cannot recruit blue chip players. All we here from him are excuses. Why can private schools like Rice,Vanderbilt,Miami,Standford,TCU and others get to the NCAA's year in and out?

Rick Greenspan is available and he has a son who is an asst at Indiana But seriously I do agree with you about Rick Jones.

(06-14-2013 06:11 PM)Converted Rice Wrote:  I'm not a baseball guy, but my Baylor friends are always telling me that Rice has a huge advantage in that (due to the huge endowment) they are able to give need based scholarships. Baylor mostly only has merit based scholarship money. The need based money helps to even the playing field with the state schools. I don't know how that affects Tulane. I am sure that Vandy, Stanford, ND, USC have few problems in these areas.

Flip it the other way... Rice loses money on athletics. Baylor benefits from being in a money conference. Money builds single sport and shared facilities, pays coaches... in addition to scholarships. I find any Baylor tears to be relatively crocodile if they're complaining about anything that has to do with athletic $ vis a vis Rice.

I'd agree with some of the other posters that finishing in the top 20 every year, year-in and year-out, is an impressive feat. The fact that we ARE disappointed about not finishing in the top 8 or being the top 1 says more about the consistent quality of our program than anything else. Alternatively, there's UT - big money, big base, not so much with the recent baseball results.

As I understand it, Rice does fund a higher percentage of total university operating costs from the endowment which is concerning of course on a different level - money only comes in to a university from endowment income, grants or tuition. But if we're talking baseball here, can Baylor be really laying the blame for their performance on that?