(01-03-2014 09:41 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  It's funny that a lot of our alumni coaches (Roper, Bates, Mehringer) were quarterbacks who never really played for us all that much (Bates did a bit I suppose but Mehringer was a walk-on).

I also wonder if Larry Izzo will be available shortly (or are the Giants committed to keeping their coaching staff intact)?

The Giants long-time OC (Gailbraith) was forced to "retire" yesterday, but Coughlin will remain as head coach (justifiably so). Consequently, I'd be very surprised if the Giants make any other changes.

(01-03-2014 09:41 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  It's funny that a lot of our alumni coaches (Roper, Bates, Mehringer) were quarterbacks who never really played for us all that much (Bates did a bit I suppose but Mehringer was a walk-on).

Yeah, the best players don't always make the best coaches.

Mehringer was not a walk-on. He was one of the last Hatfield recruits. IIRC he was said to be a candidate for the QB job in 2009 (for what that's worth) but his playing career was cut short by injury.

(01-02-2014 08:36 PM)Ranger Wrote:  I value loyalty as a very important trait. But it is not the only important trait. There are other stakeholders and he needs to consider their concerns. I sometimes get the idea that he thinks he is "President for Life." He seems to make staffing decisions based on "loyalty" with little regard to merit. That might suit his particular needs, but I am not sure it serves the university community well.

I think this states the situation very well, not to mention that - if this plays out as we are assuming it has - his reluctance to look for new, ambitious coaches would indicate a lack of same from himself.

Cant Bailiff find a smart OC in the high school ranks in Texas w or from the college ranks who runs an up tempo offense and more imagination. I thought the play calling by Edmonson was below average at the Liberty bowl. Same crap we saw from Reagan all year until he woke up for the Marshall game.

Larry Edmonson is expected to be named OC.

Does this mean that Driesbach was not available?
[/quote]

Part of the dilemma is that a new OC hired from outside will bring a new scheme and potentially new terminology. When Beaty left, had Bailiff hired an outside OC, the team would have been on its third OC in as many years. I think that Bailiff wanted some measure of continuity for the offense and choose to promote Reagan. Now I do recall that Bailiff jokingly said that the Liberty Bowl would be an audition for Edmondson.

As to the subject of offensive identity, that is a bit hard to grasp for Rice. We clearly have a defensive identity in place because Bailiff is a defense coach and he believes in the 4-2-5. Offensively, we did not seem to have a clear system in place albeit in the last few years of Reagan being OC we have emphasized a run first spread option. It could be that Bailiff is sold on the offensive scheme that Reagan has established and does not want to deviate from what has been established. Therefore, he is more likely to promote from within provided that said person has been on staff long enough to have a firm grasp of the offense. If I had my druthers I would have gone with Lynch. But if Edmondson is the guy, then there will be an opening for QB coach/Passing coordinator or RB coach/Run game coordinator. I could see two hires if Edmonson is the choice for OC. I could see Lynch being promoted to Passing coordinator and then two hires to fill the RB coach and WR Coach spots. Lynch is one to watch for sure.

Larry Izzo as a special teams and linebackers coach. That would be fantastic but he is probably too rich now to want to couch :).

ote='Fort Bend Owl' pid='10240767' dateline='1388760076']
It's funny that a lot of our alumni coaches (Roper, Bates, Mehringer) were quarterbacks who never really played for us all that much (Bates did a bit I suppose but Mehringer was a walk-on).

I also wonder if Larry Izzo will be available shortly (or are the Giants committed to keeping their coaching staff intact)?
[/quote]

Larry Izzo wouldn't make any sense as an OC, but the basic reality is that lots and lots of bright offensive minds at lower levels or even as D1 position coaches would LOVE to get their call-up as a D1 OC. The salary we offer would be more than enough for them.

What we do know is that Edmondson has received his call-ups to be a D1 OC, and he has failed miserably. The bowl game was only the latest installment.

(01-02-2014 09:44 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(01-02-2014 09:36 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  You have to wonder where the AD is on this

At a minimum this should give pause to those advocating a lifetime contract for DB

Don't recall anyone advocating for a lifetime contract. Thought most responses were there should be some reward for this season, but an extension seemed unnecessary at this time. But, maybe I missed it while I was in Memphis.

Also, not really sure where you are going with the first comment about Dr. K.

I was being hyperbolic with the lifetime contract comment.

As for Dr. K, I was suggesting, perhaps incorrectly, that he should take an interest in the OC hire, as by now he is probably aware of the impact that the (belated) change at DC seems to have had on our fortunes.

But maybe coaching staff is fully delegated to the HC. And I suppose that Dr. K may have his hands full with the dumpster fire over at MBB.

(01-03-2014 03:44 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(01-02-2014 09:44 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(01-02-2014 09:36 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  You have to wonder where the AD is on this

At a minimum this should give pause to those advocating a lifetime contract for DB

Don't recall anyone advocating for a lifetime contract. Thought most responses were there should be some reward for this season, but an extension seemed unnecessary at this time. But, maybe I missed it while I was in Memphis.

Also, not really sure where you are going with the first comment about Dr. K.

I was being hyperbolic with the lifetime contract comment.

As for Dr. K, I was suggesting, perhaps incorrectly, that he should take an interest in the OC hire, as by now he is probably aware of the impact that the (belated) change at DC seems to have had on our fortunes.

But maybe coaching staff is fully delegated to the HC. And I suppose that Dr. K may have his hands full with the dumpster fire over at MBB.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

I'm sure there is some interest, but just not sure how much input an AD gives in that situation, especially a first time D1 AD. And, yeah, I bet his hands are full trying to get things done being short-staffed in certain areas.

(01-03-2014 03:44 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(01-02-2014 09:44 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(01-02-2014 09:36 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  You have to wonder where the AD is on this

At a minimum this should give pause to those advocating a lifetime contract for DB

Don't recall anyone advocating for a lifetime contract. Thought most responses were there should be some reward for this season, but an extension seemed unnecessary at this time. But, maybe I missed it while I was in Memphis.

Also, not really sure where you are going with the first comment about Dr. K.

I was being hyperbolic with the lifetime contract comment.

As for Dr. K, I was suggesting, perhaps incorrectly, that he should take an interest in the OC hire, as by now he is probably aware of the impact that the (belated) change at DC seems to have had on our fortunes.

But maybe coaching staff is fully delegated to the HC. And I suppose that Dr. K may have his hands full with the dumpster fire over at MBB.

I would hope that the OC and DC positions are not fully delegated to the head coach's decision; they're simply too important for that, specially given Bailiff appears to be more of an administrator and recruiter than a hands-on, game-planning guy. I can see DB having final veto rights in selecting a candidate, but would think that the AD would demand significant input (particularly since this will be the first important and visible athletic hire in the Karlgaard era). If we're going to move up in the D-1 world and truly position ourselves for the next conference realignment move, NOTHING is more important to Dr. K than continuing the upward momentum of our football program (and this is coming from a Rice baseball guy).

I would hope that the OC and DC positions ARE fully up to Bailiff. He needs to be accountable for results and he can't be accountable to the extent necessary if he doesn't get his people. If anything, I think Bailiff has probably been guilty of going along to get along too much, instead of demanding what he truly needs.

(01-03-2014 03:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would hope that the OC and DC positions ARE fully up to Bailiff. He needs to be accountable for results and he can't be accountable to the extent necessary if he doesn't get his people. If anything, I think Bailiff has probably been guilty of going along to get along too much, instead of demanding what he truly needs.

Boy, do I disagree with you. Yes, Bailiff must be held accountable, as any head coach will be for everything that occurs within the football program, but he should not be allowed to freely pick his assistants without approval an input from Karlgaard (just as NFL head coaches don't get to carte blanche in picking their coaching staffs, though they ultimately get the final veto). One of Bailiff's primary weaknesses, IMO, is that he makes decisions-- both with regards to coaches and players-- more based on loyalty and seniority than skills and talent. That simply has got to change if we ever hope to get to the next level.

I do think Bailiff should be responsible for hiring the OC, because he's the head football coach. Karlgaard, however, should have input and be involved, because he controls the purse-strings on this matter. For instance, if Bailiff really wants to hire a specific OC candidate but needs more money, Karlgaard could help him out if they agreed on the hire.

Unfortunately, I don't think this is about money at all, and I suspect Karlgaard is not even involved right now. This promotion is about Bailiff's blind loyalty, and promoting poor performers is no way to run any business. In the competitive world of D1 football, it's also a good formula to get your hat handed to you in losses. If this hire goes through, Rice football is going to struggle.

(01-03-2014 04:03 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-03-2014 03:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would hope that the OC and DC positions ARE fully up to Bailiff. He needs to be accountable for results and he can't be accountable to the extent necessary if he doesn't get his people. If anything, I think Bailiff has probably been guilty of going along to get along too much, instead of demanding what he truly needs.

Boy, do I disagree with you. Yes, Bailiff must be held accountable, as any head coach will be for everything that occurs within the football program, but he should not be allowed to freely pick his assistants without approval an input from Karlgaard (just as NFL head coaches don't get to carte blanche in picking their coaching staffs, though they ultimately get the final veto). One of Bailiff's primary weaknesses, IMO, is that he makes decisions-- both with regards to coaches and players-- more based on loyalty and seniority than skills and talent. That simply has got to change if we ever hope to get to the next level.

IMO, the coach should be able to pick his own coaches. As long as the $ are agreeable, the GM/AD should be ok with it.

If this is not the case, then I think there is a fundamental issue with the Head Coach. If you cant trust the HC to pick their own staff, then how do you expect them to lead a team to bigger and better things?

(01-03-2014 04:03 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-03-2014 03:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would hope that the OC and DC positions ARE fully up to Bailiff. He needs to be accountable for results and he can't be accountable to the extent necessary if he doesn't get his people. If anything, I think Bailiff has probably been guilty of going along to get along too much, instead of demanding what he truly needs.

Boy, do I disagree with you. Yes, Bailiff must be held accountable, as any head coach will be for everything that occurs within the football program, but he should not be allowed to freely pick his assistants without approval an input from Karlgaard (just as NFL head coaches don't get to carte blanche in picking their coaching staffs, though they ultimately get the final veto). One of Bailiff's primary weaknesses, IMO, is that he makes decisions-- both with regards to coaches and players-- more based on loyalty and seniority than skills and talent. That simply has got to change if we ever hope to get to the next level.

I think the bigger problem with Bailiff has been that he has not been held to a high enough standard of accountability. And I don't think it's fair to say, OK, we're going to pick your staff and then you have to win X games, or whatever standard you want to impose. If anything, I think Bailiff has gone along too much with his bosses wishes instead of insisting on what he needed. You're assuming those decisions were made by Bailiff. I think the pressure has been put on him to accept some substandard performers in order to hit budget numbers.

Losing is okay if you have a good enough excuse. If you don't know where you are going, the path of least resistance will get you there. The twin mantras of Rice athletics.

I think you hold him to a pretty high minimum level of acceptable performance and give him some leeway to figure out how to get there. And I think any sensible person makes different decisions when 4-8 is acceptable performance than he does when 7-5 is marginal. You can pick your guy, but it's on you if he doesn't work out.

Losing is okay if you have a good enough excuse. If you don't know where you are going, the path of least resistance will get you there. The twin mantras of Rice athletics.


[/quote]

I am cautiously optimistic that the new AD will repudiate those mantras. I suspect he is a person of talent and industry out to make a name for himself. He also comes from a program which has been the platinum standard in college athletics, winning the NACDA Cup trophy for ever (OK, once they lost it, but that was I believe in the early 90s.) I suspect he will not accept anything but the best. But he must go about it slowly. It probably would not hurt for those of you with access to him to let him know that he has support in the alumni base.

Quentis Roper? Where does he coach?

(01-03-2014 05:07 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Quentis Roper? Where does he coach?

Including time off for good behavior?

(01-03-2014 03:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would hope that the OC and DC positions ARE fully up to Bailiff. He needs to be accountable for results and he can't be accountable to the extent necessary if he doesn't get his people. If anything, I think Bailiff has probably been guilty of going along to get along too much, instead of demanding what he truly needs.

Agree. AD's micromanaging coaching staffs indicate systemic failures on multiple levels.

My thoughts responding to the plethora (credit to Howaad Cosell) of discussion points on DB's alleged selection of Edmondson as OC:

Some have posited that it is a bad choice based on previous results. I can't argue against that myself. I'm not a football guy other than long time fan. Some have questioned DB's wisdom in previous selections. Again, I'm not here to argue for or against those.

My suggestion is based on what I have seen in corporate life. If you are a talent developer you hire up-and-coming folks who have a lot of bright ideas and guide them to THEIR success. They ultimately move to to bigger and better things than what you are able to offer them, and then you begin again. If you value your own resume and (apparent) success, then you pick people who are loyal and responsive to your own ideas. Leiutenants to carry out your agenda, so to speak. You then apprentice them to your own system. So I guess the question I pose here is what does this audience see as DB's style? 'Hoping I have added some unique contributions to this discussion....