(10-27-2013 12:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 12:08 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 08:14 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  

I hope he gets that photo and remembers the carry for a very long time

He also got a decent segment on Sportscenter.

Presently one of top stories in web version of USATODAY sports section

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/10/4-foot-9...eer-carry/

Isn't it amazing how much complaining we are doing about a 6-2 Rice team. We've scored 40+ points the last 2 weeks and have a great chance to win the West Division. When was the last time we could say this? Frankly, I'm going to enjoy this season. We could win 10 games.

Not much complaining today, but also not much posting. Maybe we fans need to learn how to handle winning.

I will throw in one smallcomplaint. Why not give Eddington some touches?

Rice took care of business again. They beat a team soundly that they should beat soundly. Time to get ready for N. Texas.

(10-27-2013 07:37 AM)Viejobuho Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 12:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 12:08 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 08:14 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  

I hope he gets that photo and remembers the carry for a very long time

He also got a decent segment on Sportscenter.

Presently one of top stories in web version of USATODAY sports section

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/10/4-foot-9...eer-carry/

Also currently on the espn.com homepage (in right sidebar of top articles).

ESPN talking head makes a demeaning and regrettable comment, but it is ESPN...

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-rice-owls

(10-27-2013 06:48 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 11:30 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 05:53 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  FIRST BACK-TO-BACK BOWL ELIGIBLE SEASONS FOR RICE since....


1996 and 1997 (7-4 both years)

Just thought I'd clear that up in case you read or heard otherwise elsewhere :)

nice catch.

I will always feel bad for the players and coaches on that team, having decisively beaten ranked teams in conference that got to bowl instead.

I still think the 97 team is the best team we have had since Jess Neely. And the refs stole the game on two horrible roughing the k calls.

the game against... ???

I'm guessing Texas ... I thought it was a little closer, but Texas won 38-31?

AFA? That may have been a game that determined whether we went to a bowl or not, but that was in 1998.

In fact, the closest loss in 1997 was the Rice v. Texas game.

(10-27-2013 11:02 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 06:48 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 11:30 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 05:53 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  FIRST BACK-TO-BACK BOWL ELIGIBLE SEASONS FOR RICE since....


1996 and 1997 (7-4 both years)

Just thought I'd clear that up in case you read or heard otherwise elsewhere :)

nice catch.

I will always feel bad for the players and coaches on that team, having decisively beaten ranked teams in conference that got to bowl instead.

I still think the 97 team is the best team we have had since Jess Neely. And the refs stole the game on two horrible roughing the k calls.

the game against... ???

I'm guessing Texas ... I thought it was a little closer, but Texas won 38-31?

AFA? That may have been a game that determined whether we went to a bowl or not, but that was in 1998.

In fact, the closest loss in 1997 was the Rice v. Texas game.

Yes the tu game, sorry

(10-27-2013 09:20 AM)RiceOwl75 Wrote:  Isn't it amazing how much complaining we are doing about a 6-2 Rice team. We've scored 40+ points the last 2 weeks and have a great chance to win the West Division. When was the last time we could say this? Frankly, I'm going to enjoy this season. We could win 10 games.

True, true, but consider: the Florida Atlantic team which had us beat until an inexplicable series of turnovers with 4 minutes left just got crushed by Auburn. Truly there are tiers of talent which are highly disparate. We are succeeding in a very weak conference, enjoyable though it is, but we still have coaches who can take up to 90 seconds to get off one measly play, and indifferent play at QB. The play calling is suspect and frankly, we are not all that great compared to the elite teams.

Still, it beats losing. UTEP had possibly the worst college pass defense I have ever seen, with Rice receivers consistently getting waaaay open behind the last defender. We could have put up 100 today on that pass defense. And, of course, their running defense was weak too. So, enjoy, but North Texas and Tulane may really test us. I hope we pass the tests.

(10-27-2013 11:23 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 11:02 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 06:48 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 11:30 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(10-26-2013 05:53 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  FIRST BACK-TO-BACK BOWL ELIGIBLE SEASONS FOR RICE since....


1996 and 1997 (7-4 both years)

Just thought I'd clear that up in case you read or heard otherwise elsewhere :)

nice catch.

I will always feel bad for the players and coaches on that team, having decisively beaten ranked teams in conference that got to bowl instead.

I still think the 97 team is the best team we have had since Jess Neely. And the refs stole the game on two horrible roughing the k calls.

the game against... ???

I'm guessing Texas ... I thought it was a little closer, but Texas won 38-31?

AFA? That may have been a game that determined whether we went to a bowl or not, but that was in 1998.

In fact, the closest loss in 1997 was the Rice v. Texas game.

Yes the tu game, sorry

I remember that as very winnable. Like 1998, I think there were unnecessary penalties. But I don't remember the ebb and flow of the game.

(10-27-2013 11:50 AM)elf owl Wrote:  True, true, but consider: the Florida Atlantic team which had us beat until an inexplicable series of turnovers with 4 minutes left just got crushed by Auburn. Truly there are tiers of talent which are highly disparate. We are succeeding in a very weak conference, enjoyable though it is, but we still have coaches who can take up to 90 seconds to get off one measly play, and indifferent play at QB. The play calling is suspect and frankly, we are not all that great compared to the elite teams.

This is either an unfortunate choice of words or grossly unfair. Our quarterback(s) may not be the second coming of John Elway or Brett Favre, but this suggests that the don't care about winning or succeeding. I don't see how you could possibly have meant that.

Didn't see the game or listen to it, so I can't comment much.

Wonderful to be bowl-eligible so early in the season. Last year wasn't really fun until the SMU game, this year is a lot more fun. Nice to hear Rice had success because of effort (Julius White !!!) and talent (and maybe even execution?!?)!

I do agree that generally Reagan has a tendancy to move away from what is working to something cute or tricky at least once a game. I get the point about, "if it worked, we wouldn't complain." Problem is, not many of the cute/trick offensive plays (weird formations or more standard trickery) work. I used to wish Rice would do these kind of things more, but now that we are it really isn't a strength. If Rice seemed to do a good job executing those plays, then I'd be all for utilizing them (think Boswell's onside). But Rice's offense isn't known for its precise execution and going for cute/tricky just seems like a wasted play. I do wish Rice used faster tempo (which has been done with some success this year, and has been fun to watch) and more pre-snap movement. But maybe that doesn't play to Rice's strenghts, adn I'm with Owl 69/70/75 that execution of what they do call is more important at this point (and with this schedule) than the playcalls themselves.

I am glad Rice is throwing more deep passes, even though it isn't necessarily a McHargue strength. It was frustrating to watch so many incompletes against FAU, but most teams on Rice's schedule will have some susceptibility with the deep ball and showing that Rice will take its shots every game will help keep defenses a little more honest. As long as McHargue is throwing those deep balls into 1-on-1 situations instead of double or triple coverage!

Wonderful to be bowl-eligible so early in the season. Last year wasn't really fun until the SMU game, this year is a lot more fun. I'd much rather be griping and winning than griping and losing! And of course I will be cheering more than I'm griping

Great performances from several Owls today. From where I was, we looked to be 3 questionable PI calls away from a 56-0 win. 45-7 is good, too. Let's put 45 more on UNT (and give them less).

Seen some deserved praise for Julius not giving up on their big play, but I would like to see more for our goal-line defense. Huge stops kept us in the UH game, and kept UTSA out. Forced that turnover yesterday to give us the jolt we needed after a pretty slow start.

What a @#$%^&@ idiot! I'm sure he got an ear full from upper management. I was so proud of our team yesterday for many reasons but playing Jay was at the top!

(10-27-2013 10:49 AM)I45owl Wrote:  ESPN talking head makes a demeaning and regrettable comment, but it is ESPN...

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-rice-owls

(10-27-2013 12:02 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I am glad Rice is throwing more deep passes, even though it isn't necessarily a McHargue strength.

Catching deep balls may be such a distinctive strength of Jordan Taylor that we should be doing a lot more of it.

I'm no talent scout, but my eyes say he, covington, and the two corners are our best talents.

(10-27-2013 12:02 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Didn't see the game or listen to it, so I can't comment much.

Wonderful to be bowl-eligible so early in the season. Last year wasn't really fun until the SMU game, this year is a lot more fun. Nice to hear Rice had success because of effort (Julius White !!!) and talent (and maybe even execution?!?)!

I do agree that generally Reagan has a tendancy to move away from what is working to something cute or tricky at least once a game. I get the point about, "if it worked, we wouldn't complain." Problem is, not many of the cute/trick offensive plays (weird formations or more standard trickery) work. I used to wish Rice would do these kind of things more, but now that we are it really isn't a strength. If Rice seemed to do a good job executing those plays, then I'd be all for utilizing them (think Boswell's onside). But Rice's offense isn't known for its precise execution and going for cute/tricky just seems like a wasted play. I do wish Rice used faster tempo (which has been done with some success this year, and has been fun to watch) and more pre-snap movement. But maybe that doesn't play to Rice's strenghts, adn I'm with Owl 69/70/75 that execution of what they do call is more important at this point (and with this schedule) than the playcalls themselves.

I am glad Rice is throwing more deep passes, even though it isn't necessarily a McHargue strength. It was frustrating to watch so many incompletes against FAU, but most teams on Rice's schedule will have some susceptibility with the deep ball and showing that Rice will take its shots every game will help keep defenses a little more honest. As long as McHargue is throwing those deep balls into 1-on-1 situations instead of double or triple coverage!

Wonderful to be bowl-eligible so early in the season. Last year wasn't really fun until the SMU game, this year is a lot more fun. I'd much rather be griping and winning than griping and losing! And of course I will be cheering more than I'm griping

well said. particularly interesting is what said about what you used to wish for, but now that you get it, not so much.

Nice to spend that last month or so discussing which bowl we might get instead of what we need to do to get a bowl.

(10-27-2013 12:02 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  Great performances from several Owls today. From where I was, we looked to be 3 questionable PI calls away from a 56-0 win.

No kidding. I was fuming over those PI calls in the first half. Good thing it didn't end up mattering. There's always at least one home game a year where we get bit by C-USA officiating; at least it was UTEP and not FAU or Kansas.

I kinda like the McHargue rugby kick formation for 4th and short near midfield. They have to respect the fake much more than they otherwise would, we can try to draw them offsides, and then when we kick, he's done a respectable job of pinning them.

On the other hand, that sequence that went Rice TO -> delay of game -> massive sack made me throw up in my mouth a little bit.

This was a good win, and a nice confidence builder going into the showdown in Denton. I really want a win to stay in the drivers seat for the conference championship race. Still have disappointing memories of beating UH in 2008 only to have Tulsa beat Marshall on a last second field goal to keep us out of the championship game.

(10-27-2013 12:19 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Nice to spend that last month or so discussing which bowl we might get instead of what we need to do to get a bowl.

Absolutely.

(10-27-2013 10:49 AM)I45owl Wrote:  ESPN talking head makes a demeaning and regrettable comment, but it is ESPN...

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-rice-owls

When I saw it late last night they did not say that, so I'm hoping this was the first comment and it was corrected by the time I watched.

(10-27-2013 11:56 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 11:50 AM)elf owl Wrote:  True, true, but consider: the Florida Atlantic team which had us beat until an inexplicable series of turnovers with 4 minutes left just got crushed by Auburn. Truly there are tiers of talent which are highly disparate. We are succeeding in a very weak conference, enjoyable though it is, but we still have coaches who can take up to 90 seconds to get off one measly play, and indifferent play at QB. The play calling is suspect and frankly, we are not all that great compared to the elite teams.

This is either an unfortunate choice of words or grossly unfair. Our quarterback(s) may not be the second coming of John Elway or Brett Favre, but this suggests that the don't care about winning or succeeding. I don't see how you could possibly have meant that.

Good call. I did indeed mean to convey a meaning without that connotation. Vague is the word that comes to mind concerning my utterance.
I would say our QB play has been spotty at times, exacerbated by they way the QBs are used (Wild Owl, Driphus cameos, nonexistence of a short passing plan.) McH looks tentative running since the Marshall injury of last year. Driphus can run but they don't let him, and who knows if he can pass?

If you haven't observed the inconsistency than perhaps we just have different grading standards. Compared to a certain QB we had not too many years ago, Mc H has still to perform near at a level his potential would suggest he might. Perhaps he is being strangled by our game plans. There is always something which can be improved. The 5-ten yard pass has disappeared from our repetoire. I wonder why. I don't blame the players for this.

Indifferent can mean so-so. I think McH wants to win just like any other champion and I don't sense an indifferent attitude in his approach to the job. I do think up to this point he has not reached the level of play I expected from last year's season. Everyone is accountable, even our Parliamentarians, who I am sure I will hear from shortly, if I have laid another egg.