(12-10-2013 05:45 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 03:56 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 02:57 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  I went with 2013 because of the defense. This is a complete team. If we had had a defense in 1997, we would have beaten Texas again.

Again, based on the data above, the 1996 team played the toughest SOS of the bunch, and was rated quite a bit better (18 slots per Massey) at the end of the season than the 1997 team (and slightly better than 2008, by 4 positions).

SoS is factored into one's rankings-- whether it's Massey, Sagarin or any other. In all likelihood, '96 was rated higher primary because of the more difficult schedule.

Sure, that factored in. But regardless, at 7-4, with the blowout win over Utah (ranked), and having a much better defense than the 1997 team, they deserve to be in the conversation, probably more so than 1997. They also had a 6-2 conference record, which was the best we'd had since Neely, until this year IIRC. I think earlier it was posted that this was Kalu's and Izzo's senior year. And they had Chad Nelson pulling the trigger on the option, ranked in top 2 or 3 in nation in rushing. 1997 was a good year, but the numbers favor 1996, per Baker '13's post earlier in this thread (Jonathon had posted similar information about all teams over the last 20 years a few weeks back.

Probably not much difference between being ranked 40 (1996) and 44 (2008), so I'm not arguing one way or the other, just that they get short shrift because those teams got 'negotiated' out of bowls. Anyway you cut it, if your team makes the Top 40, you really should be bowling.

I hope this year's team drops into the 40's somehow after the Bowl season dust settles. (gotta root for an impressive Owl win, and losses by a number of teams in front of us).

Given the choices, I'd rank it as :

the 2008 offense, the 1997 offense and the 2013 offense;
the 2013 defense, the 1997 defense and the 2008 defense; and
the 2013 kicking game, the 1997 kicking and the 2008 kicking.

As much as I enjoy offensive football, the old adage that offense puts butts in seats, defense wins games and kicking wins championships still holds true. On that basis I give 2013 the nod as best TEAM, with 1997 second and 2008 third. I prefer championships over games over butts in seats, as much as I would like to have all three.

JMHO

I agree that the depth is also what separates 2013. We've never had depth before.

Crazy thought I just had. If we win Liberty, we end the season in the top 25.

(12-10-2013 06:27 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Crazy thought I just had. If we win Liberty, we end the season in the top 25.

Most likely, just as in 2008.

(12-10-2013 06:27 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Crazy thought I just had. If we win Liberty, we end the season in the top 25.

That's really what I had hoped, prior to the season. Of course, I'd hoped to have two more wins in pocket, but I didn't expect UH to be good, and didn't expect UNT to be as good as they were (or I expected Rice to be better).

(12-10-2013 08:05 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 06:27 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Crazy thought I just had. If we win Liberty, we end the season in the top 25.

That's really what I had hoped, prior to the season. Of course, I'd hoped to have two more wins in pocket, but I didn't expect UH to be good, and didn't expect UNT to be as good as they were (or I expected Rice to be better).

If we had the two more wins you speak of, we would in the Top25 now.

(12-10-2013 06:59 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 06:27 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Crazy thought I just had. If we win Liberty, we end the season in the top 25.

Most likely, just as in 2008.

We only received votes in '08, we didn't actually end the year ranked.

I think if Marshall, North Texas, Texas A&M, and Houston all win their bowl games (which I think is likely as Marshall, NT and A&M are favored and Houston is a 2.5 pt underdog) that will really help us in computer rankings.

On coaches poll, looking at teams above us in votes/rankings, you are going to see many of them lose. We need about five teams above us to lose to get into top 25 and there are many to choose from as Duke, Miami, Texas, Iowa, Cincy, Wisconsin, and Fresno and USC in same game. All of these teams (except USC) are underdogs who could lose their bowl game and a loss will drop them out of top-25 as they are barely in now or ahead of us in others receiving votes. Hard to see (sans a blow-out) any of the teams below us leapfrogging us (e.g. Notre Dame, Bowling Green, Va Tech, etc.) if we get a convincing W.

So if we take care of business, very realistic to see us end in Top-25 in Coaches Poll.

(12-10-2013 02:05 AM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  

(12-09-2013 08:33 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(12-09-2013 07:52 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  

(12-09-2013 06:32 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(12-09-2013 06:26 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  Let's not forget that the 2008 Owls went up 38-0 against a pretty good Western Michigan team in the Texas Bowl. Let's see how the 2013 Owls do against Mississippi State first. The 2013 defense is more solid, but the 2008 defense wasn't chopped liver either. They came up with some timely picks and stops. The 2008 defense lacked depth, but it had some key playmakers (Raines, Sendejo). The 2008 DL (Cheta Ozougwu, Scott Solomon, Chance Talbert, Aaron Williams) was better-than-average for a Rice team.

Ugokwe was serviceable at RB with 809 yards for the year in 2008, and Chase Clement ran for 693 yards more. Dillard and Casey put any defense on its toes. The 2008 offense was considerably more versatile and simply got it done. The 2013 offense simply hasn't shown the same kind of consistency. It would be interesting to see Chase Clement operate the 2013 offense, and I think Clement would make better use of last year's talent such as Luke Willson, Taylor Cook, and Vance McDonald.

Another key benchmark for comparison is the play against UH. The 2008 UH team (with Sumlin and Keenum) was better than the 2013 UH team with its frosh stars. Rice drop-kicked UH in 2008, while the 2013 Owls struggled and lost against an inexperienced UH.

Stat-wise, the 2008 defense was bad; very bad. And I question your comment about the 2008 offense being more versatile. More consistent? Absolutely. More explosive and aggressive? Again, yes. However, the 2013 offense is far more balanced. The 2008 offense HAD to put up 40+ points per game to stay in the game. This year's offense did not have to have such potency, thanks to the strong defense.

Over 13 games, the 2008 defense had 16 interceptions, while the 2013 defense only has 14 interceptions. The 2008 defense forced 22 sacks, while the 2013 defense only forced 19 sacks. The 2008 defense recovered 15 fumbles, better than the 2013 defense recovering only 11 fumbles. I'll readily concede the 2013 defense was more solid overall, but the 2008 defense was better at making sacks, fumbles, and interceptions happen. The 2008 defense was more disruptive even if they gave ground more easily. Look up the stats again, Walt.

The 2008 schedule was also considerably more tough. The 2008 Tulsa team was Toad's best there, far better than the 2013 version that forced us into OT. Gus Malzahn was the Tulsa OC in 2008-- what's he up to these days?? UH was better in 2008 with Sumlin and Keenum. USM wasn't a basketcase, and UTEP was better then too. UNT was shredded, 77-20 in 2008, even if they weren't as good then.

It's noteworthy that the 2008 Owls had a considerable advantage in outscoring opponents through the first three quarters, but dropped off noticeably in scoring in the 4th quarter (ie, games were in hand). The 2013 Owls were cumulatively outscored in the 3rd quarter and had to rely on outscoring opponents in the 4th quarter and in OT.

The 2013 offense is only more balanced in the sense they can't throw the ball nearly as well as the Clement-led offense. I'll refrain from making the Clement-McHargue skill comparison. Check these overall QB stats for comp-att-int, TDs:
2008: 339-516-7, 48 TDs
2013: 169-331-9, 20 TDs

In 2008, Rice rushed for 21 TDs, compared to the 2013 Owls rushing for 30 TDs. Simply put, the 2008 Owls scored many more TDs (19 more than the 2013 tally of 50). That's 38% more TDs in 2008 over 13 games...

If a defense can't stop your offense, who cares about balance anyway???

Despite the 2008 defense's turnover and sack advantage, they still gave up considerably (by a large number) more yards and points than this year's defense...and that is what one counts in measuring a defense. Second, perhaps my memory is deceiving me, but I don't recall too many games in 2008 that were "in hand" entering the fourth quarter. Quite honestly, I think we had just as many blowouts this year (4) than we did that year. No one is even attempting to compare Clement with McHargue, but the 2008 team HAD to pass because we really didn't have much of a running attack.

Let's just agree to disagree. I think you're grossly downplaying this year's offense which, while certainly inconsistent, was far from below average....and you're grossly overstating the 2008 defense, which gave up a ton of points-- even to less than stellar offenses. And there's no comparing the special teams play of the two squads.

I dunno, Walt, turnovers and sacks are pretty important metrics of a defense too. Just consider how the momentum shifted with Julius White's interception near the start of the second half against Marshall. It was the decisive defensive play. This is Todd Graham's football strategy in a nutshell: prolific offense paired with a bend-but-don't-break defense that forces turnovers and TFLs.

The 2008 defense was certainly not great, but it complemented the potent 2008 offense just fine. If you look at the box scores, the only game Rice required last-second heroics to win was Chris Jammer's pick-six to beat a decent Memphis squad. The games against USM, UTEP, and Army may seem close in the final score, but Rice had built some cushion in the 4Q. The 2013 squad went into two overtime games against weak opposition, and the FAU result was gifted to Rice. Tulane and UTSA were closer than they should have been.
[deletia]

One correction: the UTEP affair was not a build some cushion affair. See the box score. UTEP had a 17-7 lead quickly in the 1st, Rice turned it around and built a 35-20 lead early in the third, then UTEP roared back to 35-30 by the end of the 3rd, and the teams trade TDs throughout the 4th. Maybe you consider that third quarter lead a cushion, but it certainly didn't stay that way and took some 4th quarter heroics to keep scoring because the D wasn't stopping UTEP except for that second quarter. I definitely recall that one as feeling like a nailbiter on the order of Memphis.

This current Rice definitely had more of these close ones, but there was more than one squeaker along the way for the 2008 squad, in addition to their losses.

The 2008 UTEP-Rice game was a barnstormer, but it didn't require last-second heroics. When Rice took the lead in the 2Q, it never lost it again. The score was 49-37 until UTEP scored its last TD with 1:23 left in the game.

It is also worth remembering that the 2008 UTEP squad was a lot better than the 2013 basketcase edition.

in the 2008 Army game, Rice built up a 38-17 lead going into the 4Q, and Army's triple option offense is not designed to come back from a big deficit. Army did score two 4Q TDs to make it 38-31 with 4:15 left in the game, but Rice closed down the game.

Rice got the ball back, and kept it entirely on the ground using 7 plays to gain 36 yards and eat up almost three minutes of clock. Army got the ball one last time at their own 31 yard-line with 1:13 to work. They had to come out passing, and the Rice defense held them to 1 net yard over four downs. Chris Ptaszek made an important sack. Again, the defense wasn't so bad at times.

Army was a solid squad too with their big FB Collin Mooney.