As to "one of the oldest rivalries in college football"...the following are the teams Rice has played the most times: Texas (93); SMU (90); Texas A&M (80); Baylor (79); Arkansas (67); LSU (55); UH (40)...hardly one of the oldest rivalries in college football.

(07-07-2013 07:07 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(07-07-2013 06:55 PM)Barrett Wrote:  I swear, I'm really trying hard--I mean, really, really trying hard--not to buy into the "UH students/alums are intellectually inferior losers" stereotype. Please don't make it harder for me, Hippy.

And I'm trying to not buy into the "Rice students/fans/alumns" aren't snooty, stuck-up rich kids with a nauseating sense of entitlement.

Please don't make it harder for me Barrett.



Now let's get back on topic. What can be done to intensify this rivalry?

I know sometimes we make it difficult to not buy into it, but please do try. Most of us aren't that way.

I'm going to answer this from a football perspective only at this point. As was said before, having both teams be good in the same year would help. Rice needs to continue to make the rivalry relatively even in the record department. Obviously, the overall is one-sided, but recent history has it as closer to even.

The big thing is obviously going to be that we continue to play every year. I have to believe the Silver Glove series will continue and we have this year's Bayou Bucket on the schedule, but not sure about scheduling going forward. Will the football series take time off? Will we play in basketball? Good questions going forward.

I think this thread actually demonstrates one reason why UH-Rice doesn't have the same feel as UT-A&M or UT-OU. Just very different schools with different missions. Even as UH continues to change (which I support and think is good for UH, Rice, and the city of Houston) this will continue to be the case. UT and A&M are the state's two top public universities. UT and OU are the public flagships of their respective states. Rice and UH are completely different.

Good Point JAAO.

While certainly many people take courses at both places, it is more likely that you took courses "there" because the other didn't offer them as opposed to there being very many people who chose between Rice and UH, or even that many friends who went separate ways. It certainly happens and there are plenty of people who could have gone to either place... but by and large, it isn't she sort of tough decision to do one or the other for most students that often leads to rivalries based on lots of commonality that made a different choice and the rivalry that results from those decisions.

That comes across as academic "snobbery" to UH because clearly our strength is academics... and many people who choose Rice over UH do so based on academics. The academic differences between most rival schools aren't as pronounced. Student life is different where the Rice experience is much more a 4 consecutive year, mostly on campus experience at Rice while UH is much more often something other than that.

Uh is addressing their "commuter school" reputation AND their academic reputation and that is good... THEN our only differences will be that we are 5,000 students with 40,000 alumni while UH is 40,000 students and 300,000 alumni.

(07-08-2013 08:06 AM)Houston Owl Wrote:  As to "one of the oldest rivalries in college football"...the following are the teams Rice has played the most times: Texas (93); SMU (90); Texas A&M (80); Baylor (79); Arkansas (67); LSU (55); UH (40)...hardly one of the oldest rivalries in college football.

None of those schools consider Rice a rival. The Bayou bucket Classic is one of the longest running active series.

(07-07-2013 01:02 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Both teams to be good at the same time. Since 2008, one team has been mediocre and one downright awful (usually alternating) resulting in something not so interesting.

As a counterpoint: Stanford and Cal have a long-running and very intense rivalry, despite (or perhaps because of) many years in which both were bad.

Stanford and Cal are not as different as UH and Rice, but they are more different than UT and A&M, or many other rivalries. So it is possible to have a strong rivalry between a big state school and a small(er) private one.

(07-08-2013 01:46 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 08:06 AM)Houston Owl Wrote:  As to "one of the oldest rivalries in college football"...the following are the teams Rice has played the most times: Texas (93); SMU (90); Texas A&M (80); Baylor (79); Arkansas (67); LSU (55); UH (40)...hardly one of the oldest rivalries in college football.

None of those schools consider Rice a rival. The Bayou bucket Classic is one of the longest running active series.

Really?

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCA...alry_games sorted by date of first game, it's the 14th youngest rivalry... and the vast majority of the 14 that have ended have done so within the past year or so... and ours seems to be following suit.

Not intended to be smack, but let's not be overly nostalgic.

(07-08-2013 03:12 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-07-2013 01:02 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Both teams to be good at the same time. Since 2008, one team has been mediocre and one downright awful (usually alternating) resulting in something not so interesting.

As a counterpoint: Stanford and Cal have a long-running and very intense rivalry, despite (or perhaps because of) many years in which both were bad.

Stanford and Cal are not as different as UH and Rice, but they are more different than UT and A&M, or many other rivalries. So it is possible to have a strong rivalry between a big state school and a small(er) private one.

True, in this case, Cal has about 25,000 undergrads while Stanford has 7,000. Big thing here is that these two started playing in 1892 and have had a game against each other every year since 1946 (which would have been since 1919 except they took a break for WWII from 1943-45).

(07-08-2013 08:06 AM)Houston Owl Wrote:  As to "one of the oldest rivalries in college football"...the following are the teams Rice has played the most times: Texas (93); SMU (90); Texas A&M (80); Baylor (79); Arkansas (67); LSU (55); UH (40)...hardly one of the oldest rivalries in college football.

Since you framed it as a complete list, you probably need to add TCU, and Texas Tech in there, as we've played both of them more than 40 times.

That would bring the list to 9. I would be interested in knowing who the first school would be after Houston. Probably Tulane.

Would UTEP or Tulsa be next?

(07-08-2013 03:12 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  As a counterpoint: Stanford and Cal have a long-running and very intense rivalry, despite (or perhaps because of) many years in which both were bad.

Stanford and Cal are not as different as UH and Rice, but they are more different than UT and A&M, or many other rivalries. So it is possible to have a strong rivalry between a big state school and a small(er) private one.

Sure it is, but much more likely if the schools have more kids who choose one over the other based on something that is inherently personal like the size of the student body or the location (urban/rural)

Rice and UH share a location much more than even SMU and TCU do. UH is larger, but I don't think many people choose between Rice and UH based on that factor.

A big part of a rivalry is a question of values...

UT/A&M or SMU/TCU is a lot about urban/rural. Cal/Stanford is about small vs large and private/public and perhaps a bit like Rice/SMU in terms of Dallas vs Houston. None of these are factually superior choices.

I can't say this without being snotty... sorry... but it's true. Academically, at number 17, Rice is a superior university... and not by a debatable margin. If UH were 50 or even perhaps in the top 100, there would be some debate. Cal is the #21 National University. Stanford 6. SMU is number 58. TCU is 92. UH is #184.

That means that there aren't many people deciding between the two so as to create a rivalry.

(07-08-2013 01:46 PM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 08:06 AM)Houston Owl Wrote:  As to "one of the oldest rivalries in college football"...the following are the teams Rice has played the most times: Texas (93); SMU (90); Texas A&M (80); Baylor (79); Arkansas (67); LSU (55); UH (40)...hardly one of the oldest rivalries in college football.

None of those schools consider Rice a rival. The Bayou bucket Classic is one of the longest running active series.

Sort of like UH and Rice in baseball?

(07-08-2013 04:51 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Sure it is, but much more likely if the schools have more kids who choose one over the other based on something that is inherently personal like the size of the student body or the location (urban/rural)

Rice and UH share a location much more than even SMU and TCU do. UH is larger, but I don't think many people choose between Rice and UH based on that factor.

A big part of a rivalry is a question of values...

UT/A&M or SMU/TCU is a lot about urban/rural. Cal/Stanford is about small vs large and private/public and perhaps a bit like Rice/SMU in terms of Dallas vs Houston. None of these are factually superior choices.

I can't say this without being snotty... sorry... but it's true. Academically, at number 17, Rice is a superior university... and not by a debatable margin. If UH were 50 or even perhaps in the top 100, there would be some debate. Cal is the #21 National University. Stanford 6. SMU is number 58. TCU is 92. UH is #184.

That means that there aren't many people deciding between the two so as to create a rivalry.

Yes, but UH-Rice is a cultural thing and a upper/upper middle class (as much as a number of you deny it, it's true) vs working class thing as well

(07-09-2013 07:48 AM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 04:51 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Sure it is, but much more likely if the schools have more kids who choose one over the other based on something that is inherently personal like the size of the student body or the location (urban/rural)

Rice and UH share a location much more than even SMU and TCU do. UH is larger, but I don't think many people choose between Rice and UH based on that factor.

A big part of a rivalry is a question of values...

UT/A&M or SMU/TCU is a lot about urban/rural. Cal/Stanford is about small vs large and private/public and perhaps a bit like Rice/SMU in terms of Dallas vs Houston. None of these are factually superior choices.

I can't say this without being snotty... sorry... but it's true. Academically, at number 17, Rice is a superior university... and not by a debatable margin. If UH were 50 or even perhaps in the top 100, there would be some debate. Cal is the #21 National University. Stanford 6. SMU is number 58. TCU is 92. UH is #184.

That means that there aren't many people deciding between the two so as to create a rivalry.

Yes, but UH-Rice is a cultural thing and a upper/upper middle class (as much as a number of you deny it, it's true) vs working class thing as well

No it isn't. UH has a more local crowd, but Rice isn't filled with rich kids.

This is an interesting thread. As a grad of both schools (BA Rice, JD UofH), my experience was that both schools had challenges getting people in the stands whoever the game was against. Rice's academically elite student body was often apathetic about athletics. Athletic events are just not the central focus of social activity as they are at large state schools. The alums reflect this apathy although after several years away many come back to root. Coupled with our small size, this makes for empty seats.

UofH, on the other hand, suffers from the same problems that many city based commuter schools have. Many students live at home and/or work at full or part time jobs. The University is not the center of their social life either.

What's the answer? Both school's teams need to be good and the events enjoyable to watch. Usually, at least in football, Rice has been down and UofH inconsistent. But when both teams are good, such as in our Texas Bowl year when we both were playing for title chances, interest was high.

(07-09-2013 09:02 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 07:48 AM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  Yes, but UH-Rice is a cultural thing and a upper/upper middle class (as much as a number of you deny it, it's true) vs working class thing as well

No it isn't. UH has a more local crowd, but Rice isn't filled with rich kids.

There is truth in both statements. Rice is not "filled" with "rich kids" but there is no doubt that (1) the average family income of Rice students is measurably higher than that of UH students, and (2) UH has a much higher proportion of students who are working full-time or near full-time while going to school than Rice does.

And to expand on (1): Rice certainly has a much higher percentage of students whose parents have college degrees. That is not perfectly indicative of parents' income, but it is arguably indicative of "upper middle class", whatever that means.

To be clear: Rice should not be embarrassed that most of its students are not working full-time or near full-time; or that so many of its students come from highly educated families; or that even a fair proportion come from quite wealthy families. Admission to Rice is very selective, and that sort of student body profile is an inherent results of that kind of selectivity. It is true for Rice, for Stanford, for any highly selective university you can name -- even ones that charge no tuition at all.

My father (BA Arkansas, MBA UT) wanted us to be able to concentrate on our studies. Aside from a couple of National Merit Scholarships, he put three of us through Rice out of pocket. But I didn't have my own car until my junior year, and it was my father's 9 year old Bel-Aire.

My older brother married a UH graduate he met at work. When they met, she was coming off a divorce and had been on food stamps at one point. She was taking accounting classes at UH at night. She got her BA, passed the CPA exam and is now a division head with a major oil company. She makes more than my brothers and me put together.

(07-09-2013 09:10 AM)NolaOwl Wrote:  This is an interesting thread. As a grad of both schools (BA Rice, JD UofH), my experience was that both schools had challenges getting people in the stands whoever the game was against. Rice's academically elite student body was often apathetic about athletics. Athletic events are just not the central focus of social activity as they are at large state schools. The alums reflect this apathy although after several years away many come back to root. Coupled with our small size, this makes for empty seats.

UofH, on the other hand, suffers from the same problems that many city based commuter schools have. Many students live at home and/or work at full or part time jobs. The University is not the center of their social life either.

What's the answer? Both school's teams need to be good and the events enjoyable to watch. Usually, at least in football, Rice has been down and UofH inconsistent. But when both teams are good, such as in our Texas Bowl year when we both were playing for title chances, interest was high.

Good post

(07-09-2013 09:44 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 09:02 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(07-09-2013 07:48 AM)Cougar Hippy Wrote:  Yes, but UH-Rice is a cultural thing and a upper/upper middle class (as much as a number of you deny it, it's true) vs working class thing as well

No it isn't. UH has a more local crowd, but Rice isn't filled with rich kids.

There is truth in both statements. Rice is not "filled" with "rich kids" but there is no doubt that (1) the average family income of Rice students is measurably higher than that of UH students, and (2) UH has a much higher proportion of students who are working full-time or near full-time while going to school than Rice does.

And to expand on (1): Rice certainly has a much higher percentage of students whose parents have college degrees. That is not perfectly indicative of parents' income, but it is arguably indicative of "upper middle class", whatever that means.

To be clear: Rice should not be embarrassed that most of its students are not working full-time or near full-time; or that so many of its students come from highly educated families; or that even a fair proportion come from quite wealthy families. Admission to Rice is very selective, and that sort of student body profile is an inherent results of that kind of selectivity. It is true for Rice, for Stanford, for any highly selective university you can name -- even ones that charge no tuition at all.

True George. Highly qualified academic children more often come from highly educated parents... and highly educated parents have a propensity to higher incomes.

That said, Rice students on average (there are exceptions to every rule) do not come from the same financial background as those who attend most of the Ivies whom are our academic peers, or even perhaps SMU. Rice gives a VERY high amount of NEED based aid as evidence of this.

Compared to UH, we are perhaps "rich". We probably aren't that far from UT. Compared to Yale, we are paupers.

I'm with Cougar Hippy. What can we do to make this a more popular rivalry? It really doesn't matter who has the most students/alumni/fan base, the question is how do we stir up interest in the city of Houston to make this thing work??

Obviously, winning records and decent to good teams will do a lot for the rivalry. If both teams can go in 2-0 (miracles do happen), this could be a very big event. Reasonable ticket prices and or DEALS will help immensely.

I love the idea of this becoming a fantastic rivalry for years to come, because we NEED that! I don't care if its Cougar High or whoever, we need to start rallying this city around Rice Athletics...the only way we start increasing numbers is to get non Rice folks interested in our product.

I wish my alma mater had a fierce inner-city rivalry.

I really don't think the Rice-UH fixture will take off again UNLESS you can draw national TV interest by playing the match on a Friday night when there are little to no other options available. I think that an inner-city battle on Friday night could sell very well provided that both teams enter with a winning record.

The problem: Rice would need to join the AAC for that to happen - but I do think that there's a decent chance of it happening in the next five years. The AAC will be given a LOT of primetime Thurs./Fri. slots over the next five years - and this rivalry could occupy a Friday night slot and do quite well.

Obviously picking up small southern private schools isn't a problem for the AAC. The AAC already has three of them on the books (Tulsa, Tulane, and SMU).

I just hope that if the Bucket game is kept it at each respective schools location, no more Reliant stuff. I do think that in order for both schools to capture the Houston market, the facilities must be world class in this market, the fans demand it, and they want an experience, not just a game. I think that UH had in my mind the best game day experience in football in this town, and yes that even means going up against Texans, location of stadium from parking lot, tailgate times UH allowed 48hr set up and party, pricing, ease of getting out of parking lot. UH was just hands down a better place to experience football than the texans, and i have been to many Texans games.