Quote:"Rice is a really good team. We knew what we were getting ourselves into. We knew that they might get some yardage on us and they did. When they got into the redzone we just buckled down and made sure that they didn't get any more yardage and made sure not to let them convert."JUNIOR DEFENSIVE LINEMAN JULIEN OBIOHA - Gigem 247

Quote:“Anytime you play a dual threat quarterback there is some difficulty to it. I mean I've been used to it since I've played him in high school so I was kind of expecting that coming out, but it's just being more disciplined being able to know when he might break down and try to make a play.”- SENIOR LINEBACKER JUSTIN BASS - Gigem 247

Quote:Rice gained 141 yards rushing vs ND and 240 vs A&M.

ND's DTs and LBs did a much better job in gap control as opposed to A&M. ND also ran speed option so A&M four different types of option to face and I don't remember them running speed option as much vs ND.

If I'm A&M, I schedule Rice every year as long as they are running spread option because so many teams in the SEC West run it.- Jeff Tarpley - Gigem 247

Quote:Finally, there was an unexpected bonus Saturday night. The Aggies really hadn’t faced a team that could rush the passer yet and Rices’ undersized ends didn’t figure to be much of a challenge in that regard. However, they gave A&M’s starting tackles Germain Ifedi and Cedric Ogbuehi all they wanted in terms of beating them with get off, punch, and bend. They got two sacks and they forced Kenny Hill to step up multiple times in the pocket or make plays on the move. So far, the only teams on A&M’s schedule that I’ve seen that can generate a pass rush like that are LSU and Missouri. Thus, it’s not going to be easy for opposing defenses to stop A&M unless they can find a way to generate pressure via the blitz. - Jeff Tarpley - Gigem 247

Monday thoughts

Quote:I also think Rice is a better team than people seem to think just because they're Rice. They won 10 last year and even with the loss in personnel, they looked well coached, strong, and had a very solid athlete at QB.- HappyKuykendahl- Gigem 247

Quote:I think we are seeing a "think tank" approach to what we are doing on both offense and defense. Now is the time to see what you have and what you can do. We should have Rice on the schedule as often as possible to prepare for the rest of the SEC West onslaught.-slmnsam1 - Gigem 247

More good stuff at the article detailing what could have been an Aggie approach to throw off future opponents.

I hope we get A&M back on the schedule soon. I think that there is a growing mutual respect between the two schools. Who knows, if the SEC ever wanted to lock down Houston, A&M might become an ally and a cheap, easy, budding rivalry game. I'm mean we all know that it as it is, we still have a ways to go. But A&M, LSU, and a Nerd rivalry game against Vandy every year would be outstanding. We would take our lumps for sure, but recruiting would be incredible. Anyhoo, I can dream right?

(09-16-2014 09:51 AM)Pan95 Wrote:  I hope we get A&M back on the schedule soon. I think that there is a growing mutual respect between the two schools. Who knows, if the SEC ever wanted to lock down Houston, A&M might become an ally and a cheap, easy, budding rivalry game. I'm mean we all know that it as it is, we still have a ways to go. But A&M, LSU, and a Nerd rivalry game against Vandy every year would be outstanding. We would take our lumps for sure, but recruiting would be incredible. Anyhoo, I can dream right?

I hope so too. Playing teams like aTm and LSU are the way for Rice to improve. College station and Houston are very close as well, which is always beneficial for building a rivalry (even if it is one sided for a while)

Thanks for collecting and posting these comments. Several of these ags will probably be playing on Sundays soon and it is good to hear positive things about our team from a good caliber opponent.

I wouldn't want to play three $EC teams every year, but alternating between A&M and LSU and having an ongoing series with Vanderbilt would be attractive.

As for A&M saying complimentary things about our players, that is to be expected to a degree because they want to convince themselves that they whipped a decent team. I too saw some good things on Saturday, but I'm not going to start talking about us as if we're on a par with a second-tier $EC outfit. I mean, look at what Mississippi State did to us last December.

When we finally show some intent and discipline by taking a lead into the half against one of these teams, I will start to believe in our coaches. Until then, it's the same ol', same ol'.

(09-16-2014 10:32 AM)Wiessman Wrote:  I wouldn't want to play three $EC teams every year, but alternating between A&M and LSU and having an ongoing series with Vanderbilt would be attractive.

As for A&M saying complimentary things about our players, that is to be expected to a degree because they want to convince themselves that they whipped a decent team. I too saw some good things on Saturday, but I'm not going to start talking about us as if we're on a par with a second-tier $EC outfit. I mean, look at what Mississippi State did to us last December.

When we finally show some intent and discipline by taking a lead into the half against one of these teams, I will start to believe in our coaches. Until then, it's the same ol', same ol'.

I think that Miss St may be one of the surprise teams of 2014. They needed one more play like 5 games last year to have been big time.

(09-16-2014 11:38 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  I think that Miss St may be one of the surprise teams of 2014. They needed one more play like 5 games last year to have been big time.

Their next three games are LSU, A&M, and Auburn. If they come out of that 6-0 or even 5-1, they'll definitely be big time.

you have to remember about Miss State and the SEC... They were without that QB for most of the year... AND they play in the SEC.

I don't remember what it was like last year but I suspect it was similar.... They are ranked 28th in the country and currently in 10th place (by ranking) in the SEC.

Let that sink in for a minute.

They have 5 games in their division where they will be playing a team in the top 15 (likely losses for even a very good team, right?)... They could be the 16th best team in the country and BARELY qualify for a bowl. I think that is essentially what happened last year. Heck, Arkansas is #46 (which would likely be a top 2 finish for a CUSA team any year and the runaway leader (thus far) this year) and because they played Auburn OOC, I'm pretty sure they'll have to pull an upset just to win 4 games.

The Pac12 is similar, but not quite as top-heavy. The 35th best team in the country will likely finish 8th in their league.

Compare that to the ACC where #33 probably wins the Coastal division and plays for the championship, but #52 (still pretty good) might finish 10th.


The HIGHEST ranked team in CUSA is 74, in the Belt 87. Those teams will all have at least 8 and probably closer to 10 wins and be ranked FAR lower than 3-4 win Arkansas

THIS is why I've said we need to strive to be a +/- 40th best team year in and year out... REGARDLESS of what that means relative to CUSA. Most years, it would make us competitive with or even superior to more than half of the p5 schools which is where the money and recognition and fan interest is...

I can't articulate this well, but I think our biggest selling point to a p5 conference (if that is still the goal) would be that while our goal is to be as good as we CAN be, we aren't big enough to 'hide' enough exceptions and/or aren't willing to sacrifice our purpose to compete with the top 10 teams every year.... and they need 'good', but not TOO good teams on their conference schedule.

Plus, it certainly wouldn't keep us from competing for the CUSA championship if that remains our goal

Mississippi state was a very hot and cold team last year. They played several good teams close (Auburn, South Carolina) but also eked out some lousy wins against Arkansas, Bowling Green and Kentucky.

6-6 Mississippi State (going into the Bowl game) may have been ranked higher than 10-3, but not enough to justify 44-7.

(09-16-2014 12:45 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Mississippi state was a very hot and cold team last year. They played several good teams close (Auburn, South Carolina) but also eked out some lousy wins against Arkansas, Bowling Green and Kentucky.

6-6 Mississippi State (going into the Bowl game) may have been ranked higher than 10-3, but not enough to justify 44-7.

Bowling Green won 10 games and the MAC Championship last year. Not sure I'd call them lousy.

I've made the comment that there appears to be a number of stratifications of teams. You can't quantify it, but in an attempt to be clear... I think there are 10 or so teams at the top who CAN beat any of the other 10... and would virtually NEVER lose to anyone not in their tier... then a second group... then a third. I think Mississippi State played near the top of their stratification, and we played near the bottom of ours in the bowl game. The crowd, the atmosphere, the temperature probably all made a difference.

We should have played better, no doubt. There are all sorts of reasons why... but IMO, the biggest issue is that they were in tier 2 and we were in tier 3... and played to the extremes of our tiers. I THINK that Jonathan or someone has attempted to quantify what I'm talking about.

Second tier in SEC West can still mean that you are a top 20 team. We are not back on that level.

It was nice back when we played LSU and A&M each year and held our own against them.

(09-16-2014 11:38 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 10:32 AM)Wiessman Wrote:  I wouldn't want to play three $EC teams every year, but alternating between A&M and LSU and having an ongoing series with Vanderbilt would be attractive.

As for A&M saying complimentary things about our players, that is to be expected to a degree because they want to convince themselves that they whipped a decent team. I too saw some good things on Saturday, but I'm not going to start talking about us as if we're on a par with a second-tier $EC outfit. I mean, look at what Mississippi State did to us last December.

When we finally show some intent and discipline by taking a lead into the half against one of these teams, I will start to believe in our coaches. Until then, it's the same ol', same ol'.

I think that Miss St may be one of the surprise teams of 2014. They needed one more play like 5 games last year to have been big time.

(09-16-2014 12:57 PM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 12:45 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Mississippi state was a very hot and cold team last year. They played several good teams close (Auburn, South Carolina) but also eked out some lousy wins against Arkansas, Bowling Green and Kentucky.

6-6 Mississippi State (going into the Bowl game) may have been ranked higher than 10-3, but not enough to justify 44-7.

Bowling Green won 10 games and the MAC Championship last year. Not sure I'd call them lousy.

Rice won C-USA and got thumped 44-7. Bowling Green wasn't bad, but they weren't world beaters either.

Basically, BGSU isn't lousy but a team like Mississippi State beating them 21-20 is pretty lousy.

(09-16-2014 01:39 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 12:57 PM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 12:45 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Mississippi state was a very hot and cold team last year. They played several good teams close (Auburn, South Carolina) but also eked out some lousy wins against Arkansas, Bowling Green and Kentucky.

6-6 Mississippi State (going into the Bowl game) may have been ranked higher than 10-3, but not enough to justify 44-7.

Bowling Green won 10 games and the MAC Championship last year. Not sure I'd call them lousy.

Rice won C-USA and got thumped 44-7. Bowling Green wasn't bad, but they weren't world beaters either.

Basically, BGSU isn't lousy but a team like Mississippi State beating them 21-20 is pretty lousy.

Ok, that's a better explanation I guess. As we've seen from Jonathan Sadow's posts, teams aren't necessarily consistent with their performance.

(09-16-2014 02:18 PM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 01:39 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 12:57 PM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 12:45 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Mississippi state was a very hot and cold team last year. They played several good teams close (Auburn, South Carolina) but also eked out some lousy wins against Arkansas, Bowling Green and Kentucky.

6-6 Mississippi State (going into the Bowl game) may have been ranked higher than 10-3, but not enough to justify 44-7.

Bowling Green won 10 games and the MAC Championship last year. Not sure I'd call them lousy.

Rice won C-USA and got thumped 44-7. Bowling Green wasn't bad, but they weren't world beaters either.

Basically, BGSU isn't lousy but a team like Mississippi State beating them 21-20 is pretty lousy.

Ok, that's a better explanation I guess. As we've seen from Jonathan Sadow's posts, teams aren't necessarily consistent with their performance.

That's fair.

That Miss St. QB looked really good-see the ND QB this year

(09-16-2014 09:51 AM)Pan95 Wrote:  

Quote:"Rice is a really good team. We knew what we were getting ourselves into. We knew that they might get some yardage on us and they did. When they got into the redzone we just buckled down and made sure that they didn't get any more yardage and made sure not to let them convert."JUNIOR DEFENSIVE LINEMAN JULIEN OBIOHA - Gigem 247

Quote:“Anytime you play a dual threat quarterback there is some difficulty to it. I mean I've been used to it since I've played him in high school so I was kind of expecting that coming out, but it's just being more disciplined being able to know when he might break down and try to make a play.”- SENIOR LINEBACKER JUSTIN BASS - Gigem 247

Quote:Rice gained 141 yards rushing vs ND and 240 vs A&M.

ND's DTs and LBs did a much better job in gap control as opposed to A&M. ND also ran speed option so A&M four different types of option to face and I don't remember them running speed option as much vs ND.

If I'm A&M, I schedule Rice every year as long as they are running spread option because so many teams in the SEC West run it.- Jeff Tarpley - Gigem 247

Quote:Finally, there was an unexpected bonus Saturday night. The Aggies really hadn’t faced a team that could rush the passer yet and Rices’ undersized ends didn’t figure to be much of a challenge in that regard. However, they gave A&M’s starting tackles Germain Ifedi and Cedric Ogbuehi all they wanted in terms of beating them with get off, punch, and bend. They got two sacks and they forced Kenny Hill to step up multiple times in the pocket or make plays on the move. So far, the only teams on A&M’s schedule that I’ve seen that can generate a pass rush like that are LSU and Missouri. Thus, it’s not going to be easy for opposing defenses to stop A&M unless they can find a way to generate pressure via the blitz. - Jeff Tarpley - Gigem 247

Monday thoughts

Quote:I also think Rice is a better team than people seem to think just because they're Rice. They won 10 last year and even with the loss in personnel, they looked well coached, strong, and had a very solid athlete at QB.- HappyKuykendahl- Gigem 247

Quote:I think we are seeing a "think tank" approach to what we are doing on both offense and defense. Now is the time to see what you have and what you can do. We should have Rice on the schedule as often as possible to prepare for the rest of the SEC West onslaught.-slmnsam1 - Gigem 247

More good stuff at the article detailing what could have been an Aggie approach to throw off future opponents.

I hope we get A&M back on the schedule soon. I think that there is a growing mutual respect between the two schools. Who knows, if the SEC ever wanted to lock down Houston, A&M might become an ally and a cheap, easy, budding rivalry game. I'm mean we all know that it as it is, we still have a ways to go. But A&M, LSU, and a Nerd rivalry game against Vandy every year would be outstanding. We would take our lumps for sure, but recruiting would be incredible. Anyhoo, I can dream right?

I think there is a place for Rice in the SEC. I think the first time I posted about this on the Parliament was 2012. We need to continue to improve. We need to work academic, personal and political connections with A&M, LSU and Alabama. I should add Tennessee and Vandy to the mix. The SEC knows it is a dominant sports conference. I believe at least two of the powerhouses (and there are likely more) want to upgrade the conference in terms of academic prestige. Attracting A&M did that, to a degree. We love ribbing Aggies but A&M is a quality institution.

Karlgaard explained it succinctly: if adding a school to a conference decreases that conference's television revenue per member, then that school is not getting invited, nohow, no way. $$$ >> reputation.

(09-16-2014 06:47 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Karlgaard explained it succinctly: if adding a school to a conference decreases that conference's television revenue per member, then that school is not getting invited, nohow, no way. $$$ >> reputation.

Yup.

(09-16-2014 06:47 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Karlgaard explained it succinctly: if adding a school to a conference decreases that conference's television revenue per member, then that school is not getting invited, nohow, no way. $$$ >> reputation.

Karlgaard also explained that joining a P5 conference would likely greatly increase the budget deficit of the athletic program (at least in the short term) because the increase in shared revenue would be much less than the increase in expenditures required to be even remotely competitive (in terms of facilities, coaches salaries, etc.). The $30 million Rice currently spends plus $20 million in shared revenue would put us way at the bottom of spending in a P5 conference. Of course our direct revenue would increase some due to the increased interest in the games, but our direct revenue would never come close to that of a big state school. It would take a lot of work for Rice to come close even to the direct revenue of a bigger P5 private school. In the long term, if the program were run extremely well, being in a P5 conference might help the budget deficit. However, the potential for making it worse in the long term is also very real.

(09-17-2014 09:10 AM)temchugh Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 06:47 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Karlgaard explained it succinctly: if adding a school to a conference decreases that conference's television revenue per member, then that school is not getting invited, nohow, no way. $$$ >> reputation.

Karlgaard also explained that joining a P5 conference would likely greatly increase the budget deficit of the athletic program (at least in the short term) because the increase in shared revenue would be much less than the increase in expenditures required to be even remotely competitive (in terms of facilities, coaches salaries, etc.). The $30 million Rice currently spends plus $20 million in shared revenue would put us way at the bottom of spending in a P5 conference. Of course our direct revenue would increase some due to the increased interest in the games, but our direct revenue would never come close to that of a big state school. It would take a lot of work for Rice to come close even to the direct revenue of a bigger P5 private school. In the long term, if the program were run extremely well, being in a P5 conference might help the budget deficit. However, the potential for making it worse in the long term is also very real.

Being in a P5 would give us many advantages that weren't directly related to athletics. While we would increase the budget deficit in the short (and potentially long) term, Rice would likely see an increase in exposure, number of applicants, rankings, donations etc.

Of course, this is all conjecture. As Frizzy said, no p5 would invite us as things currently stand.

(09-17-2014 10:59 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 09:10 AM)temchugh Wrote:  

(09-16-2014 06:47 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Karlgaard explained it succinctly: if adding a school to a conference decreases that conference's television revenue per member, then that school is not getting invited, nohow, no way. $$$ >> reputation.

Karlgaard also explained that joining a P5 conference would likely greatly increase the budget deficit of the athletic program (at least in the short term) because the increase in shared revenue would be much less than the increase in expenditures required to be even remotely competitive (in terms of facilities, coaches salaries, etc.). The $30 million Rice currently spends plus $20 million in shared revenue would put us way at the bottom of spending in a P5 conference. Of course our direct revenue would increase some due to the increased interest in the games, but our direct revenue would never come close to that of a big state school. It would take a lot of work for Rice to come close even to the direct revenue of a bigger P5 private school. In the long term, if the program were run extremely well, being in a P5 conference might help the budget deficit. However, the potential for making it worse in the long term is also very real.

Being in a P5 would give us many advantages that weren't directly related to athletics. While we would increase the budget deficit in the short (and potentially long) term, Rice would likely see an increase in exposure, number of applicants, rankings, donations etc.

Of course, this is all conjecture. As Frizzy said, no p5 would invite us as things currently stand.

Since I brought it up, I'll reply.

I don't generally disagree with anything anyone has said, but I'd note that the SEC currently has #2,4,5,9, 15 and 28 in one division and #6, 16, 21 and 24 in the other.

Giving a simple example... there are a myriad of possibilities...

Whomever wins the SEC is in the playoff, right? I think that is a given, but how much would it be worth to the SEC to have 2 or even 3 teams in that playoff? Given the rankings, all it would take is a loss by Oregon (or even potentially only an uninspiring win) and the SEC could have 3 teams in... (ignoring the voting biases)...

What if #6 Georgia (who has already lost to #16 SC) beats #5 Auburn and Auburn beats A&M? Suddenly rather than potentially 3 teams in, they MIGHT have only one. That has to be worth a WHOLE lot of money and could literally happen every year. When you combine that with the fact that they often have some VERY high dollar out-of-conference games (against OTHER top 20 teams)... and the worst team in SEC west is #46 and the NEXT worst is #28, It's possible that a top 30 team doesn't go to a bowl because the conference schedules are just too tough AND they don't have much flexibility in their scheduling.

My point being that you're not necessarily talking about merely taking the same pot of money and dividing it more ways... but that a STRATEGIC addition of a team that a) won't be recruiting EXACTLY the same athletes b) might be committed to quality football, but not necessarily doing what it takes to consistently be top 20 football, while investing solidly in the other sports that bring 'brownie' points but no money... c) provides a quality, but not 'killer' opponent that could arguably make it easier for them to make more money. I mean let's be serious... Arkansas could easily be a top 15 or 20 team if they wanted to... could we? Top 40 for certain... top 20? I'd say that would be somewhat rare even in our perfect world.

I know we'd have to spend more money to get it back, but fortunately the income stream in p5's is predictable and we have an endowment that can manage an awful lot of float (when the income is that predictable)... but we STILL wouldn't take the academic or character risks that big schools can get away with.

The bottom line is that IF any of them called, we have the ABILITY to do what is necessary. The questions are 1) why would they call and 2) what will they require of us. I think our biggest selling points to both the University AND a p5 conference is that we would be good enough not to hurt the conference SOS, but not SO good that we would frequently make a 'murderers row' even worse.... and that we would EXPAND, rather than dilute the qualities of the conference... especially with regard to academics and 'other' sports. Frankly, I think our demographics would make us a nice target for MANY Olympic sports that we could and would have to fund. I think our biggest issues would be internal come in when we regularly go 4-0 OOC and then struggle to win 2 in conference to go to a bowl...