Interesting to see if Lynch rumor is true what happens to Edmonson if he gets leapfrogged in the coaching pecking order? He has OC experience from SMU and a bunch of experience at SEC schools (LSU, Auburn, and Miss. St). One would have thought he was natural choice if there was going to be a 'promote from within' culture.

I'm not sure one game is a "promote from within" opportunity. This to me is an audition... as much for the guy who gets the job as the guy who doesn't. Obviously, there isn't much time to develop a different style, but there is an opportunity to present a different perspective on that style.

next season, with a new QB and a different style of runner (perhaps) it can be a VERY different offensive style

(12-09-2013 08:55 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I'm not sure one game is a "promote from within" opportunity. This to me is an audition... as much for the guy who gets the job as the guy who doesn't. Obviously, there isn't much time to develop a different style, but there is an opportunity to present a different perspective on that style.

next season, with a new QB and a different style of runner (perhaps) it can be a VERY different offensive style

Can be, but doesn't need to be. If Driphus Jackson is our QB, I can see us being just as effective running the same offense, with Dillard and Davis our primary RBs (with Turner being our short yardage guy). Don't we also have a couple impressive true Freshman RBs coming in? Davis may not have the power and pysicality that Ross brings, but he's much more of a breakaway threat. I'd also love to see him on kickoff returns. On the receiver corp, we lose Moore and Kubiac, but return our best and most productive guys in Taylor, Parks and Cella, as well as a hopefully healthy Hull.

My point is that we are who we are right now... and I would expect that this offense will be functionally the same. Not that we can't add a few wrinkles, and perhaps change a few things... but we are a run-heavy spread team.

Next year, we COULD be the same basic team as you describe, but we could also be a pistol, throw on the run team or pass to run.... speed to get to the power rather than power to get to the speed.

I'm merely trying to say that the skills required guy to best utilize our current system may not be the skills required to take us forward.... and/or what we do 12/31/13 doesn't HAVE to determine what we do spring 2014. It may, but it doesn't have to. In my mind, the two jobs are different interviews. THIS one is, what can you do in 3 weeks with the 20 or so regulars on offense... and the other is what can you do in 8 months with 40. If it's the same guy, fine. If it's not, that's fine too. I just don't want us to pick the best guy for 2014 and ignore 2013... or feel that if we hire someone for 2013, that we HAVE to give him the job in 2014.

This is mostly written in response to the fact that there appear to be at least two candidates on the staff and undoubtably many more across the country.

Maybe it's been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but I'm thinking we're looking at a two-fold process: an interim OC (which is why we're hearing Lynch and Edmondson), and then a permanent hire as we head into January when lots of coaching staffs start to turn over, with promotions and other moves.

With regards to a permanent hire for OC, weren't there reports by JD on his twitter feed once the Reagan rumors started that several people had called Rice for the open position? Any word on who those individuals may have been?

(12-10-2013 12:51 AM)gsloth Wrote:  Maybe it's been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but I'm thinking we're looking at a two-fold process: an interim OC (which is why we're hearing Lynch and Edmondson), and then a permanent hire as we head into January when lots of coaching staffs start to turn over, with promotions and other moves.

Hopefully those moves don't involve Thurmond getting poached.

(12-10-2013 12:51 AM)gsloth Wrote:  Maybe it's been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but I'm thinking we're looking at a two-fold process: an interim OC (which is why we're hearing Lynch and Edmondson), and then a permanent hire as we head into January when lots of coaching staffs start to turn over, with promotions and other moves.

Hambone quizzically checks mic to see if it's on, or if he's been typing in invisible ink.

I'd be very surprised if the only coach we lose is Reagan. Bailiff is likely on Wake Forest's list. There's a decent chance we have a brand new staff next season. Thurmond will be looked at after the vast improvement made by defense. We usually can't compete for coaches with big conference schools. Rice has to decide if it wants to continue to build on recent success by paying more to keep coaches.

(12-09-2013 08:25 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Interesting to see if Lynch rumor is true what happens to Edmonson if he gets leapfrogged in the coaching pecking order? He has OC experience from SMU and a bunch of experience at SEC schools (LSU, Auburn, and Miss. St). One would have thought he was natural choice if there was going to be a 'promote from within' culture.

They probably want to keep him on the sideline and interacting with McHargue to keep things as normal as possible.

(12-10-2013 02:04 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  I'd be very surprised if the only coach we lose is Reagan. Bailiff is likely on Wake Forest's list. There's a decent chance we have a brand new staff next season. Thurmond will be looked at after the vast improvement made by defense. We usually can't compete for coaches with big conference schools. Rice has to decide if it wants to continue to build on recent success by paying more to keep coaches.

Wake has already picked a coach.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...en-falcons

But, I do agree. There needs to be push from the alumni and fans to allow for a bigger budget so we can have a better chance at keeping some of these guys around.

Bailiff will not go anywhere. Pay Thurmond, he has done a great job.

(12-10-2013 02:04 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Bailiff is likely on Wake Forest's list.

Doubt that he ever was.

Look, the Marshall win was great, and there is some merit to the view that "16-4 is awesome, no matter how many UTEPs and NMSU's we played"

But I don't believe Bailiff has the signature win that would allow a P5 AD to sell Bailiff to his constituency.

EDIT: Clawson doesn't have a P5 win. Lost by 1 at Missy State. Beating NIU by 20 is his big win. Overall much more HC experience than Bailiff and strong trajectories at Fordham, Richmond, and BGSU

I don't think Bailiff is going anywhere. But, we need to be concerned about losing Thurmond and having the appropriate budget to hire a great OC.

Now is the time people. Some may tire of me saying it, but it is the truth.

Thurmond is the guy who needs to get paid this year. And enough money to attract an up-and-coming OC would be nice as well. I like that this Bailiff team finally started to play some defense, but I want to see if he can maintian next year before getting all excited. He's not going anywhere this year, nobody is going to want to sell alumni on a coach wilth 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011 on his resume. Win 8 next year, with all the losses from this year, and he'll start attracting interest.

(12-10-2013 02:21 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 02:04 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Bailiff is likely on Wake Forest's list.

Doubt that he ever was.

Look, the Marshall win was great, and there is some merit to the view that "16-4 is awesome, no matter how many UTEPs and NMSU's we played"

But I don't believe Bailiff has the signature win that would allow a P5 AD to sell Bailiff to his constituency.

EDIT: Clawson doesn't have a P5 win. Lost by 1 at Missy State. Beating NIU by 20 is his big win. Overall much more HC experience than Bailiff and strong trajectories at Fordham, Richmond, and BGSU

I wouldn't be surprised if he was on the list somewhere because he has coached somewhere with strict academic standards and has put together a +.500 record in the past two years. Obviously he wasn't high on the list, but I think he was probably someone they considered.

(12-10-2013 02:32 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Thurmond is the guy who needs to get paid this year. And enough money to attract an up-and-coming OC would be nice as well. I like that this Bailiff team finally started to play some defense, but I want to see if he can maintian next year before getting all excited. He's not going anywhere this year, nobody is going to want to sell alumni on a coach wilth 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011 on his resume. Win 8 next year, with all the losses from this year, and he'll start attracting interest.

I was thinking about this the other day, currently Bailiff is at a -7 with regards to wins and losses. If he wins the bowl game and pulls off another 10-3 season, he'll finally break .500 with Rice.

Bailiff has worked too hard and is just now reaping the rewards. I wouldn't think he'd WANT to go anywhere else for a while yet.

D1 is absolutely correct that we need to step up to keep Thurmond (or hire someone DEMONSTRABLY just as good) and replace Reagan with someone even better. We KNOW how long it took and how many failures it took to get to Thurmond... we can't afford to keep trying to get lucky in those hires.

If Thurmond gets a BCS HC offer (yes, we are BCS) we won't be able to keep him and should wish him well. If he gets a major AQ (we aren't AQ and neither is UH after this year) DC offer, we probably can't keep him and should wish him well. What we CAN'T have happen is that he get hired as a DC by another non-AQ, or as HC for a "lower" tier. In fact, we need to be the guys who can hire a successful DC at a belt or wac or MTN WEST school as a DC for us because we can/will pay more for success. (I'd say CUSA but I'd mean it for a point of reference... I wouldn't really want to poach other conference teams if I could help it)

We need to be in that middle ground between successful non-AQ schools and un/modestly successful AQ schools. Just like our professors... we should pay up vs the people we think we should be "better than" for quality, but not make financially unintelligent decisions merely because we can. I think Mack is a very good coach. I don't think he's worth anywhere NEAR what they pay him. I think lots of people could do as good or better job for far less, but they pay him that because they can.

Ballparking... for conversation... and as a goal... It seems that AQs are $2mm for HC, 500k for O/D-C and 250k for assistants. Non AQs are more like 600k for HC 150k for O/D-C and 80k for assistants. I think we could do QUITE well if we were more like $1mm for HC (paying even more for a proven winner against AQ schools) 350-500 for coordinators and 125-175 for assistants.

We are PERHAPS talking $1mm more for coaches combined, but I think if VASTLY improves our ability to win and retain winning coaches. It puts us below SMU still (VERY top heavy) and about where Tulsa and UH are.. with perhaps more focus on assistants. We ARE a unique place to recruit to, but lots of these great assistant coaches will NEVER be "Rice guys" as much as they are family men trying to build their own career. We can greatly increase our ability to attract and retain assistants if we pay better. We shouldn't continue to hope to get lucky every few years in our hires.

This year, we need to worry about DC.

Next year, if Bailiff can have another good year (8+ regular season wins) , he may well get offers. An LB win and 8 RS wins next year put him at 25 out of the last 33 and three straight bowls. Should get him some attention.

(12-10-2013 02:36 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 02:32 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Thurmond is the guy who needs to get paid this year. And enough money to attract an up-and-coming OC would be nice as well. I like that this Bailiff team finally started to play some defense, but I want to see if he can maintian next year before getting all excited. He's not going anywhere this year, nobody is going to want to sell alumni on a coach wilth 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011 on his resume. Win 8 next year, with all the losses from this year, and he'll start attracting interest.

I was thinking about this the other day, currently Bailiff is at a -7 with regards to wins and losses. If he wins the bowl game and pulls off another 10-3 season, he'll finally break .500 with Rice.

He broke .500 at the end of 2008, 13-12. IIRC, first Rice football coach to be over .500 after 2 years since Jess.