(03-20-2014 06:58 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(03-19-2014 11:10 PM)HatchetMan Wrote:  Delusions of grandeur with the ACC talk - will never happen to any realist. The Stanford model is ideal but we'll never attain that level, at least not in this lifetime. The best and most efficient move to promote Rice's brand would be to move to the Ivies. Now, is that possible, who the hell knows, but I think it's a better possibility than ACC (or something equivalent). Rice is stuck in a rut and needs to make a move.

No, I think everyone but you knows. The Ivies will never, ever let anyone else in. Period. Why would they? And sports are only secondary, it's their overall brand. "Ivy League" is synonymous with "best, most elite schools in the country" and they aren't going to share that with anyone. Us getting into the SEC or Big 10 is *much* more likely even though it's highly, highly improbable because the chance of the Ivies ever letting someone else in is zero. Not .000000000000000001%, zero.

Exactly.

(03-20-2014 07:29 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  The most realistic scenario to move to a P5 conference would be to go to the Big XII if they are to go back to twelve (or fourteen) teams. I know this isn't as glamorous as going to the ACC or SEC, but I surely wouldn't complain if we had either UT or OU coming to town each year. To me, the ACC or SEC moves seem unattainable, whereas the Big XII seems like a stretch, but infinitely more attainable.

From everything I've heard, this is Dr K.'s goal...and he does have a mentor high up in the Big 12 administration. Can we please stop talking about the P5, given the AAC is NOT going to replace the old Big East in the mix with the big boys. As for the Ivies, aside from the reality that we'd never be invited into the exclusive club, I fail to see how this helps the Rice brand. Many of us from the northeast would never consider going to Rice if it were part of the Ivy League. Rather, one of the allures was big time college athletics.

(03-20-2014 07:29 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  The most realistic scenario to move to a P5 conference would be to go to the Big XII if they are to go back to twelve (or fourteen) teams. I know this isn't as glamorous as going to the ACC or SEC, but I surely wouldn't complain if we had either UT or OU coming to town each year. To me, the ACC or SEC moves seem unattainable, whereas the Big XII seems like a stretch, but infinitely more attainable.

I agree, except that I suspect the Big 12 would have lost UT and/or OU in that scenario, and might become a formerly P5 conference. Though even in that case it would probably become the best non-P5 conference and still a huge move up. (I can see the argument for the SEC - say they add NC State and then us to solidify their foothold in Texas and add a western counterweight to Vandy. But I don't see it happening.)

More generally, I think the next big shakeup might be more among the non-power conferences, with a clearer hierarchy established. If the AAC/MWC raid CUSA again, or the Big 12 implodes and the remains look to add programs and we are left behind again, I don't see how we recover. However, I think we have a shot at putting ourselves in a good position to be one of the most attractive expansion candidates.

(03-20-2014 07:48 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 07:29 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  The most realistic scenario to move to a P5 conference would be to go to the Big XII if they are to go back to twelve (or fourteen) teams. I know this isn't as glamorous as going to the ACC or SEC, but I surely wouldn't complain if we had either UT or OU coming to town each year. To me, the ACC or SEC moves seem unattainable, whereas the Big XII seems like a stretch, but infinitely more attainable.

I agree, except that I suspect the Big 12 would have lost UT and/or OU in that scenario, and might become a formerly P5 conference. Though even in that case it would probably become the best non-P5 conference and still a huge move up. (I can see the argument for the SEC - say they add NC State and then us to solidify their foothold in Texas and add a western counterweight to Vandy. But I don't see it happening.)

More generally, I think the next big shakeup might be more among the non-power conferences, with a clearer hierarchy established. If the AAC/MWC raid CUSA again, or the Big 12 implodes and the remains look to add programs and we are left behind again, I don't see how we recover. However, I think we have a shot at putting ourselves in a good position to be one of the most attractive expansion candidates.

From what I'm gathering, We have the smallest fan base of any D-1 school in the south - it would take more than location to attract interest.

(03-20-2014 07:56 AM)HatchetMan Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 07:48 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 07:29 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  The most realistic scenario to move to a P5 conference would be to go to the Big XII if they are to go back to twelve (or fourteen) teams. I know this isn't as glamorous as going to the ACC or SEC, but I surely wouldn't complain if we had either UT or OU coming to town each year. To me, the ACC or SEC moves seem unattainable, whereas the Big XII seems like a stretch, but infinitely more attainable.

I agree, except that I suspect the Big 12 would have lost UT and/or OU in that scenario, and might become a formerly P5 conference. Though even in that case it would probably become the best non-P5 conference and still a huge move up. (I can see the argument for the SEC - say they add NC State and then us to solidify their foothold in Texas and add a western counterweight to Vandy. But I don't see it happening.)

More generally, I think the next big shakeup might be more among the non-power conferences, with a clearer hierarchy established. If the AAC/MWC raid CUSA again, or the Big 12 implodes and the remains look to add programs and we are left behind again, I don't see how we recover. However, I think we have a shot at putting ourselves in a good position to be one of the most attractive expansion candidates.

From what I'm gathering, We have the smallest fan base of any D-1 school in the south - it would take more than location to attract interest.

DING! DING! DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

Lets not forget that expansion/realignment is all about money. P5 conferences are going to add schools that bring monetary value. Rice has an exceptional academic reputation. It graduates it's student-athletes, has integrity and plays by the rules. Everyone knows that. If all this were about academics, Rice would have been part of the creation of the BIG12.

Although Rice resides in Houston, it doesn't deliver the market because the market is already delivered. People here already watch the SEC and Big 12 on television. Those conferences have already established a recruiting foothold in Texas and Houston. They don't need Rice.

And what's this talk about the PAC12, ACC and BIG10? Being that academics are it's top priority, does anyone here honestly believe that any president or BOT at Rice is going to okay a move that will have student-athletes flying all over the country for a softball or volleyball game? Get real people! Where's the reality? This board is so grounded in the delusional and grandiose. OMG! Psychiatrists prescribe medications for this stuff!

(03-20-2014 01:08 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Lets not forget that expansion/realignment is all about money. P5 conferences are going to add schools that bring monetary value. Rice has an exceptional academic reputation. It graduates it's student-athletes, has integrity and plays by the rules. Everyone knows that. If all this were about academics, Rice would have been part of the creation of the BIG12.

Although Rice resides in Houston, it doesn't deliver the market because the market is already delivered. People here already watch the SEC and Big 12 on television. Those conferences have already established a recruiting foothold in Texas and Houston. They don't need Rice.

And what's this talk about the PAC12, ACC and BIG10? Being that academics are it's top priority, does anyone here honestly believe that any president or BOT at Rice is going to okay a move that will have student-athletes flying all over the country for a softball or volleyball game? Get real people! Where's the reality? This board is so grounded in the delusional and grandiose. OMG! Psychiatrists prescribe medications for this stuff!

The Emperor Has No Clothes.

I've just started reading this board (had no idea it existed previously) and one of the first threads I stumble upon is covered in dribble regarding Rice to the SEC/ACC/Big10/PAC12. What's really sad is some people actually believe this could happen.

(03-20-2014 01:08 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  And what's this talk about the PAC12, ACC and BIG10? Being that academics are it's top priority, does anyone here honestly believe that any president or BOT at Rice is going to okay a move that will have student-athletes flying all over the country for a softball or volleyball game? Get real people! Where's the reality? This board is so grounded in the delusional and grandiose. OMG! Psychiatrists prescribe medications for this stuff!

The BOT okayed the move to the WAC, and that involved much more travel than the the Big 12 would. I don't foresee an invitation to the Big 12 [edit: or the conferences you listed], but the BOT wouldn't turn it down because of travel.

Another misconception is that Rice's academic standards don't bend in the least for athletics. Granted Rice's standards are higher than most D-1 schools', but Rice is not - and never has been - pure as the driven snow here. More like off-white.

Idealizing your alma mater much, some of you.

(03-20-2014 01:30 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 01:08 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  And what's this talk about the PAC12, ACC and BIG10? Being that academics are it's top priority, does anyone here honestly believe that any president or BOT at Rice is going to okay a move that will have student-athletes flying all over the country for a softball or volleyball game? Get real people! Where's the reality? This board is so grounded in the delusional and grandiose. OMG! Psychiatrists prescribe medications for this stuff!

The BOT okayed the move to the WAC, and that involved much more travel than the the Big 12 would. I don't foresee an invitation to the Big 12 [edit: or the conferences you listed], but the BOT wouldn't turn it down because of travel.

C'mon now. The Rice BOT approved that move because Rice had nowhere else to go. It was WAC 16 or independence. And remember that SMU, UTEP and Tulsa were also part of that disaster, so we did have three rivals nearby. Leebron also made it clear at the sports forum a couple years ago that Rice would never be involved in any move that would have student-athletes missing any class. I would expect any Rice president in the future, who will obviously have academics as his main priority, to feel the same way.

If Rice is going to do big things athletically, it's going to have to do it from where it's at, which is completely possible.

(03-20-2014 01:18 PM)HatchetMan Wrote:  What's really sad is some people actually believe this could happen.

No more sad than those who are convinced it can't.

We WERE in the SWC and there are a few schools not terribly dissimilar to us in p5 conferences

I'd also point out that conferences like the SEC don't really have any trouble reaching the casual football fan in Houston or anywhere else... so all of this talk about 'adding to the pot' is really just a smoke-screen.

I think the casual Rice fan is 'different' enough from the casual football fan that we offer a unique, albeit smaller target market... and that our brand of football might appeal to similarly under-marketed constituencies in many other markets. What I mean is, alums of Harvard and Brown and Princeton and UChicago and MIT would certainly support their school... but their schools will never play UT or other similar schools in football. If we could put ourselves in a position to be their 'other' team, at least when it came to playing the ESUs (adopt the Tank McNamara mantra)...
then suddenly we have a far larger constituency, and one that virtually no other school can attract.

Of course, you have to be a credible threat to do well... but clearly UofH and UTSA and UNT aren't going to attract the Princeton grad.

Call it "Ted Kennedy" marketing.

Well, there's Leebron says when making speeches, and then there's what Rice has done historically - like elect an athlete and big-time athletics donor as board chairman. Do I believe Leebron or my lying eyes?

Yes Rice has to succeed where it's at, but that does not mean Rice would be above returning to a power conference.

Rice certainly was in the SWC, and as a founding member. When the SWC was formed, it was done so on the premise of banning together with other universities in the immediate area so that travel expenses wouldn't be an issue, so that fans could all travel to the games., and so students wouldn't miss any class time. All conferences were regional in nature and we had a good thing going for more than 80 years in the SWC. Enter money. Once the CFA contract expired and everyone was free to negotiate their own television contracts, everything changed and it hasn't stopped changing. Every decision now is based on money and that's the one area where Rice is sorely lacking. And yes, there are universities in P5 conferences that are similar to Rice. We all know who they are, but those schools have remained in same conference all this time because none of their members split and left them behind. In the SWC, Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas pulled the weight of all the other members and they just grew tired of it. In the SEC, PAC 12, BIG10 and ACC, there are enough state schools to do the heavy lifting and there's more than enough money to go around. That wasn't the case in the SWC. So, sure we were a member of the SWC, but for a completely different reason. The environment that allowed us to be part of that is now long gone.

(03-20-2014 03:40 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Every decision now is based on money and that's the one area where Rice is sorely lacking. And yes, there are universities in P5 conferences that are similar to Rice. We all know who they are, but those schools have remained in same conference all this time because none of their members split and left them behind. In the SWC, Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas pulled the weight of all the other members and they just grew tired of it. In the SEC, PAC 12, BIG10 and ACC, there are enough state schools to do the heavy lifting and there's more than enough money to go around. That wasn't the case in the SWC. So, sure we were a member of the SWC, but for a completely different reason. The environment that allowed us to be part of that is now long gone.

Edited to focus...

With all due respect, you're arguing that the environment is gone for us, but that it isn't gone for others. Either the environment is there or it isn't.

Other than the fact that they've had access to hundreds of millions more in TV revenue over the past 20 years, there isn't much difference between us and all of those schools you mention that are similar to us. Northwestern doesn't bring significantly more money or Alumni to the Big10 than we would as the next smallest school relative to them is 3 times their size... so while what you describe is SOMEWHAT more true of us than say Northwestern (and I'm merely picking them as an example) there is no indication that Northwestern has tried in any way to market themselves as I have suggested. Could they? Yes. But they don't.

Same for Vandy

Same for Duke

Same for Miami

Same for Stanford

Same for Baylor

Miami actually DID market themselves somewhat as I am suggesting, though to a different audience... Rather than go after Princeton grads, Miami went after wards of the state. While they were successful, their plan was easily imitated by almost everyone and was counter to the goals of the university. Ours would not be.



Bottom line, rather than argue about what is or is not possible... because that really says more about us and our individual perspectives than about really deciding what is and is not (in fact) possible... I'd point out that there is nothing in my suggestion that REQUIRES eventual membership in a p5 conference to be successful nor does stating that as a goal preclude success should that status not be attained.

To say it differently... striving for a high goal, whether or not you agree that it is attainable doesn't preclude us from increasing our attendance, revenue, profile, notoriety or ranking.

Deciding that such aspirations are 'impossible' could.

(03-20-2014 04:24 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  To say it differently... striving for a high goal, whether or not you agree that it is attainable doesn't preclude us from increasing our attendance, revenue, profile, notoriety or ranking.

Deciding that such aspirations are 'impossible' could.

Well put.

(03-20-2014 04:24 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-20-2014 03:40 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Every decision now is based on money and that's the one area where Rice is sorely lacking. And yes, there are universities in P5 conferences that are similar to Rice. We all know who they are, but those schools have remained in same conference all this time because none of their members split and left them behind. In the SWC, Texas, Texas A&M and Arkansas pulled the weight of all the other members and they just grew tired of it. In the SEC, PAC 12, BIG10 and ACC, there are enough state schools to do the heavy lifting and there's more than enough money to go around. That wasn't the case in the SWC. So, sure we were a member of the SWC, but for a completely different reason. The environment that allowed us to be part of that is now long gone.

Edited to focus...

With all due respect, you're arguing that the environment is gone for us, but that it isn't gone for others. Either the environment is there or it isn't.

Other than the fact that they've had access to hundreds of millions more in TV revenue over the past 20 years, there isn't much difference between us and all of those schools you mention that are similar to us. Northwestern doesn't bring significantly more money or Alumni to the Big10 than we would as the next smallest school relative to them is 3 times their size... so while what you describe is SOMEWHAT more true of us than say Northwestern (and I'm merely picking them as an example) there is no indication that Northwestern has tried in any way to market themselves as I have suggested. Could they? Yes. But they don't.

Same for Vandy

Same for Duke

Same for Miami

Same for Stanford

Same for Baylor

Miami actually DID market themselves somewhat as I am suggesting, though to a different audience... Rather than go after Princeton grads, Miami went after wards of the state. While they were successful, their plan was easily imitated by almost everyone and was counter to the goals of the university. Ours would not be.



Bottom line, rather than argue about what is or is not possible... because that really says more about us and our individual perspectives than about really deciding what is and is not (in fact) possible... I'd point out that there is nothing in my suggestion that REQUIRES eventual membership in a p5 conference to be successful nor does stating that as a goal preclude success should that status not be attained.

To say it differently... striving for a high goal, whether or not you agree that it is attainable doesn't preclude us from increasing our attendance, revenue, profile, notoriety or ranking.

Deciding that such aspirations are 'impossible' could.

I agree. The environment is the same for everyone, but Rice's situation is unique in that it's home (SWC) fell apart. Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Purdue and Duke have never lost their home. They haven't had to find a new home in today's environment, luckily for them. The only reason I can think of for them not being left behind or kicked out of their respective conferences is because there are more than enough big state schools to do the heavy lifting for them. They each have 8 or 9 universities in their conference that bring in the money that Texas and Texas A&M had to bring in by themselves in the SWC. Their prospects wouldn't be much better than ours if they had ended up in the same boat. For example, Tulsa, SMU and Tulane will also never be members of a P5.

And while I don't see Rice ever ending up in a P5, I do agree that it's likely Rice will begin to make a mark nationally from CUSA or from some CUSA/Sun Belt merger in the future. Rice has finally seen the benefits of athletics success and I'm so excited to be a part of it. Facilities are being built up, coaches are being held accountable, attendance will rise as we continue to improve and build rivalries. We aren't fans of the Rice of the 80's. We're fans of a Rice that wants achieve the same amount success in athletics as it does in academics. It's amazing that I get to say that, because I never thought I'd be able to do so. These are incredible times on South Main. We're on the verge of being a major player in our conference, not just an afterthought.

(03-20-2014 04:45 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  I do agree that it's likely Rice will begin to make a mark nationally from CUSA or from some CUSA/Sun Belt merger in the future.

Of course you do.

(03-20-2014 04:24 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Bottom line, rather than argue about what is or is not possible... because that really says more about us and our individual perspectives than about really deciding what is and is not (in fact) possible... I'd point out that there is nothing in my suggestion that REQUIRES eventual membership in a p5 conference to be successful nor does stating that as a goal preclude success should that status not be attained.

To say it differently... striving for a high goal, whether or not you agree that it is attainable doesn't preclude us from increasing our attendance, revenue, profile, notoriety or ranking.

Deciding that such aspirations are 'impossible' could.

Yes, but the problem is, we keep putting the cart before the horse around here. Instead of debating off-the-wall theoreticals of which P5 conference we should target, why don't we figure out how to fix the problems you have listed? Because the only way those P5 theoreticals become any more realistic is by fixing the core problems this athletic department has. And fixing said problems will require work and effort from all of us beyond debating them here.

Look, you know how much of a die hard I am. But I also am a realist. Could we end up in the Big XII one day...way down the line (and I mean way down the line)...sure. But do I see it as likely, no. Should we stop asking said conferences about interest? Hell no. But, what the focus should be on right now is us and making Rice the best it can be. Because we are far from that right now. And that best may eventually get us to a big boy conference...but it may not and we will be at it in the AAC or right here in C-USA. All I want is Rice's best.

That's a bit of a chicken or egg question, though D1.

If you want to be considered at some point for inclusion, there are certain things you have to do to be considered. Among those things are expand your outreach and increase your profile by having success. These are (or should be) our goals REGARDLESS of whether or not we reach the point of inclusion

I believe that being considered a great destination for athletes who want to succeed at the highest levels both on and off the field is the sort of goal that will increase our chances of inclusion.... because it is unique from those who want you to choose between those goals... If that isn't our goal, then why were we ever in the SWC competing against schools like UT and the like to begin with? Much less still trying? We're not going to sell-out our academics to be successful... and you can't 'compete at the highest level' if you aren't trying to compete against the highest competition.

So we can't accomplish our stated mission if we don't strive for consideration to be included.