(10-12-2013 09:58 PM)owl40 Wrote:  For Rice, it feels like a very un-satisfying 4-2 so far. Team seems to be underachieving but nevertheless it is on-track to achieve team goals. Nobody is going to argue team is overrated since it has not performed to expectations all season except for 1H against A&M.

Sub in VT for A&M and I think you just described Marshall fan's feeling about our season so far. Kind of eerie, actually how similar we are in the two divisions.

(10-13-2013 08:07 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Volkmar...not disrespecting UTSA in anyway. Again, am a Roadrunner fan and amazed at the progress the program has made in short-time. If anything, most Owl fans are jealous as Bailiff is just getting things together in year 7...

We have watched Rice for all of Bailiff's 7 years and what we saw yesterday was consistent w/ the entire body of work. In games where we get a lead, we become overly conservative. We threw the ball almost 20 times in first 40 minutes and 3 times in last 20 minutes. Our running game was predictable. That is playcalling on Rice...nothing to do w/ UTSA. We made a decision to get away from what was working in 1H because we wanted to milk clock and not make mistakes. The result of that coaching decision was to allow UTSA back in game and put up stats.

On D, we went into the bend/don't break D and stopped blitzing, stopped pressing, and the one play we finally did in third quarter, our Safety (Porras) was burned by Soza to Bias for 40 yard play as we got caught in man coverage...which put us deeper in the bend/break bunker w/ coaches putting guys in position to play soft and tentative. We lost our edge. The only time we got it back was on goalline stand late that caused you to burn clock/timeouts as we could not play soft on the 1-yd line. That attitude/approach is on Rice, not on UTSA.

On UTSA, I think Soza looked much better than last year.. Nice job progressing reads, looking off defenders, made a couple big time throws, etc. He played a nice game but when we stopped attacking and we started just allowing 5-15 yard plays as long as they were not big ones over someones head...we have seen that movie many times before. Good luck to you guys the rest of way out. Selfishly, we would love to see you take down both Tulane and NT.

This'll be my last response because I try not to be one to keep beating a dead horse, or however that expression goes, but I have to say this...

Let's assume everything you're saying about your coach's closing strategy is spot-on and that he stopped attacking and played a prevent-defense, it stands to reason he likely did the same in our meeting last year as well, correct?

So even if what you're saying is true, it still doesn't change the fact that when you guys did the same last year, you ended up a +14 in first downs vs. a -9 this year. It also doesn't change the fact you were a +244 in yards in closing out your game last year vs. a -94 this year. Unless you're saying you closed out the game differently against us last year (I was at both games and didn't see there to be any difference), your point is moot and the statistical comparison still bears mentioning and is completely relevant, as well as the -20 on the scoreboard last year vs. the -6 this year. Besides, we were also basically even in yardage and first downs coming into the 4th quarter, even despite the score at that point.

Not discrediting your team at all (and that goes for the Houston fan who commented also). I'm just trying to draw positives from a loss by pointing out areas where we're making notable improvements. The L's will turn to W's in time, but until then, there's definitely growth going on with our program, and these other stats show that. Thanks again for your words of encouragement btw in your analysis, and again, good luck to you guys for the rest of the season. There's just as much revealed by how one wins as there is by how one loses, and you guys are a classy bunch.

(10-13-2013 08:07 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Selfishly, we would love to see you take down both Tulane and NT.

I think the home/away factor could be huge there. Good news for UNT, bad news for Tulane.

I have to agree with Volkmar here. Rice's D is better than last years. Rice's O is better or worse, depending on which one shows up each week. UNT's D and O are better than last year's versions, with the O being substantially better. The critical question for both teams is do they continue to improve from week to week and from this season to next. UNT is a lot younger, so they have a better potential to do that. Rice I think is a bit deeper, so any drop off may be less and may not happen at all. Overall, I think both teams should be happy with their improvement over last year, although Rice's O is not living up to expectations thus far. And I think both teams are looking up in terms of the next several seasons. JMHO.