(11-13-2014 01:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Given that it was expected to be a rebuilding year, and that 7-5 with a minor bowl looks like the most likely case now, that's not half bad, even in the little sisters of the poor league that has become CUSA.
This.
We can finish anywhere for 6-6 to 9-3, and all are within the realm of possibility. I think 8-4 is very, very possible . . . . maybe even probable. And I will NOT give up on 9-3 until proven otherwise.
And after last year, those lobbying against a contract extension, or some of them, were expressing their fears that last year's senior laden team was not to be taken as a norm and that we would have a real problem with this rebuilding year. Some of the predictions were pretty poor. And when we started slow, there were even some posters thinking we might be lucky to win 4 or 5.
Rick, please show me those posts, as I think you are exaggerating greatly. Given our schedule, very few of us thought we'd have a poor W-L record, and almost everyone believed that 7-5 was a worst case scenario. Those of us with knowledge of the situation knew that, despite the losses from last year's squad, we still had a ton of returning talent, including a bunch of redshirt Freshmen who were better athletes than many of the 5-year Seniors who had departed. Those of us vehemently against giving Bailiff an extension were arguing such based on many other factors (which have been discussed on this board repeatedly) unrelated to the projected W-L record in 2014.
I have posted previously that we should not have given an extension because it was a senior-laden team playing extraordinarily weak competition. But I didn't follow that up with any predictions that this season would be a rebuilding year, given the range of play-quality possible from the QB position, and the fact that in this league, who could even tell if you were rebuilding. On the contrary, the first two names that come to mind forecasting rebuilding have been some of Bailiff's most vocal supporters.
As for the game, a lot is stacked against the Owls. I don't know if anyone has brought up the officials yet, but you certainly wonder if the conference will protect its prized team. Regardless, I like the player leadership on this team and the way we've handled adversity this year, and expect a good game on Saturday.
I will respond to Walt, but I wasn't specifically thinking about you when I made my post. I did use the word "some", because the feeling wasn't universal.
(11-13-2014 01:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Given that it was expected to be a rebuilding year, and that 7-5 with a minor bowl looks like the most likely case now, that's not half bad, even in the little sisters of the poor league that has become CUSA.
This.
We can finish anywhere for 6-6 to 9-3, and all are within the realm of possibility. I think 8-4 is very, very possible . . . . maybe even probable. And I will NOT give up on 9-3 until proven otherwise.
And after last year, those lobbying against a contract extension, or some of them, were expressing their fears that last year's senior laden team was not to be taken as a norm and that we would have a real problem with this rebuilding year. Some of the predictions were pretty poor. And when we started slow, there were even some posters thinking we might be lucky to win 4 or 5.
Rick, please show me those posts, as I think you are exaggerating greatly. Given our schedule, very few of us thought we'd have a poor W-L record, and almost everyone believed that 7-5 was a worst case scenario. Those of us with knowledge of the situation knew that, despite the losses from last year's squad, we still had a ton of returning talent, including a bunch of redshirt Freshmen who were better athletes than many of the 5-year Seniors who had departed. Those of us vehemently against giving Bailiff an extension were arguing such based on many other factors (which have been discussed on this board repeatedly) unrelated to the projected W-L record in 2014.
Walt, I used the word 'some'. After you posted this, both I45 and Owl69/70/75 expressed that (1) they had been against the extension, and (2) their position was fueled by concern that we (read: Coach Bailiff) had not shown we (he) could sustain success, (i.e. we would slip back like we did in 2009).
The Parliament has a wide range of positions within positions. Some of the posters (obviously not you) had stated positions that implied what I posted above, if not worded that way verbatim.
Others (knowledgeable of the situation, prescient if you prefer, like yourself) opposed the extension on principle because you don't believe David will get us where you want us to be. But you realized that we would be 7-5 at a minimum due to David's recruiting and red-shirt program, and therefore my post did not apply specifically to you.
So maybe my post was accurate (I did qualify the wording, by using "some"), but it's just that not everyone who opposed the extension was thinking exactly like you? I mean you could infer from your post that some of us here just aren't as knowledgeable, (you did say "those of us with knowledge", so I might assume that there is a "rest of us without") so maybe they could have stumbled on the same position as you without having the right basis for it.
That's still probably a better place than people who were fine with an extension in light of the conference championship, and I fall in there.
(This post was last modified: 11-13-2014 11:05 PM by Rick Gerlach.)
(11-13-2014 01:25 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: Given that it was expected to be a rebuilding year, and that 7-5 with a minor bowl looks like the most likely case now, that's not half bad, even in the little sisters of the poor league that has become CUSA.
This.
We can finish anywhere for 6-6 to 9-3, and all are within the realm of possibility. I think 8-4 is very, very possible . . . . maybe even probable. And I will NOT give up on 9-3 until proven otherwise.
And after last year, those lobbying against a contract extension, or some of them, were expressing their fears that last year's senior laden team was not to be taken as a norm and that we would have a real problem with this rebuilding year. Some of the predictions were pretty poor. And when we started slow, there were even some posters thinking we might be lucky to win 4 or 5.
Rick, please show me those posts, as I think you are exaggerating greatly. Given our schedule, very few of us thought we'd have a poor W-L record, and almost everyone believed that 7-5 was a worst case scenario. Those of us with knowledge of the situation knew that, despite the losses from last year's squad, we still had a ton of returning talent, including a bunch of redshirt Freshmen who were better athletes than many of the 5-year Seniors who had departed. Those of us vehemently against giving Bailiff an extension were arguing such based on many other factors (which have been discussed on this board repeatedly) unrelated to the projected W-L record in 2014.
I have posted previously that we should not have given an extension because it was a senior-laden team playing extraordinarily weak competition. But I didn't follow that up with any predictions that this season would be a rebuilding year, given the range of play-quality possible from the QB position, and the fact that in this league, who could even tell if you were rebuilding. On the contrary, the first two names that come to mind forecasting rebuilding have been some of Bailiff's most vocal supporters.
As for the game, a lot is stacked against the Owls. I don't know if anyone has brought up the officials yet, but you certainly wonder if the conference will protect its prized team. Regardless, I like the player leadership on this team and the way we've handled adversity this year, and expect a good game on Saturday.
I will respond to Walt, but I wasn't specifically thinking about you when I made my post. I did use the word "some", because the feeling wasn't universal.
No worries, just making sure it was clear that there was some distinction between the discussed concepts.
Many reasons. We are 6-0 against teams with three or fewer wins, 0-3 against teams with 4 or more wins. Marshall has 9 wins.
The game is at Marshall.
I suspect that Marshall has been looking forward all year to get revenge and will be pumped up.
I saw a part of Marshall's game at USM. After falling behind 14-0 on the road, Marshall outscored its opponent 63-3. Final - 63-17. Simply awesome. There is a reason Marshall is 9-0.
Marshall is also playing for a major bowl spot, and is the favorite if they can remain undefeated. Sure, they haven't beaten anybody worse a grain of salt yet, but unlike Rice, they have blown out virtually everyone on their schedule. Their median game performance ranking is well over 10 points higher than ours. In fact, their average performance ranking is considerably better than our best performance ranking. Add to that the home field advantage (which has been HUGE for Marshall the past 2 seasons), the motivational factor (avenge last year's loss, and stay in the lead for not only CUSA championship but major bowl birth), and the reality that Marshall's strength on offense (QB play and longball threat) is our greatest weakness/vulnerability (made worse with Covington out and Hill ineligible for the first half), and The Herd should be at least 2 TD favorites going in.
Marshall 48
Rice 23 (as Bailiff continues to settle for meaningless FGs)
Nearly 3. They open at -19.5.
If you listen to the Marshall fans on the conference board, about 17 points of that is for the home field.
Haven't read anything past the first page, but texas teams are 0-11 in huntington. It may be 20 pts vs texas teams :)
(11-09-2014 09:40 PM)owl40 Wrote: All the reasons to be pessimistic are listed above and agree.
However, plenty of reasons to be optimistic.
Marshall is #50 in rushing D (we are #31). Marshall posters do admit this is their kryptonite this year if there is something to nitpick at. Would expect us to use time-of-possession advantage and keep Cato and company off the field. I do think we have an advantage between the tackles.
Their stud RB (Johnson) did not play against USM b/c of knee issues. Not 100% for us.
We beat this same team last year. Discounting their garbage time TD in the C-USA game, we were up by 3TD's. Hard for anyone in Rice locker room to lack confidence we can beat them.
Last time Bailiff and staff were in Huntington, was a late McG fumble away from a W and that was not a good Rice team. Obviously different teams now but all the home field worth 17-pts chatter from Herd fans did not seem to affect Rice then. Hard to think why it would be different now.
Marshall has not played a bad game yet. One has to believe they are due. Regression towards the mean. That clearly happened last year against us. All good teams over a long season have an egg or two.
We are playing for something more than just beating them. Team is much better than earlier in season and focused on the goals they have.
Maybe giving our staff too much credit but they showed an awesome game plan last year with lots of new wrinkles out of existing plays/formations. One has to believe Rice staff has been ready for this game and showing lots of plays/formations in earlier games to set-up the wrinkles for this game. The bubble screen pump fake to go deep, the zone read pass options, reverse action off zone read, action off speed option, etc. all should be ready to go this week. I think Marshall has aggressive D and will be prepared for our tendencies. Thus, the action of that will be key this week for some big plays.
Much of their margin of victory is distorted from continuing to run up score late. They have to given their schedule. I don't blame them. As example last week, they were up 35-14 against USM in 4Q and continued to push it to get to 63-14.
Ironically, I think bad/cold weather benefits us more than them. Our style is suited for it. We saw that last year.
As I posted before C-USA title game, I view this like the Stanford/Oregon series. Oregon blows out all opponents while Stanford does not against same teams but when they play each other, different game and most years a very, very close game with different results compared to other Oregon opponents. Let's hope it is not same as this years results but I do think the Marshall stats need to be thrown out when playing us.
We have pulled our starters in the 3rd quarter in half our games this season. Talking 3rd string finishing. We pulled starters in middle of 4th vs USM.
(11-09-2014 09:40 PM)owl40 Wrote: All the reasons to be pessimistic are listed above and agree.
However, plenty of reasons to be optimistic.
Marshall is #50 in rushing D (we are #31). Marshall posters do admit this is their kryptonite this year if there is something to nitpick at. Would expect us to use time-of-possession advantage and keep Cato and company off the field. I do think we have an advantage between the tackles.
Their stud RB (Johnson) did not play against USM b/c of knee issues. Not 100% for us.
We beat this same team last year. Discounting their garbage time TD in the C-USA game, we were up by 3TD's. Hard for anyone in Rice locker room to lack confidence we can beat them.
Last time Bailiff and staff were in Huntington, was a late McG fumble away from a W and that was not a good Rice team. Obviously different teams now but all the home field worth 17-pts chatter from Herd fans did not seem to affect Rice then. Hard to think why it would be different now.
Marshall has not played a bad game yet. One has to believe they are due. Regression towards the mean. That clearly happened last year against us. All good teams over a long season have an egg or two.
We are playing for something more than just beating them. Team is much better than earlier in season and focused on the goals they have.
Maybe giving our staff too much credit but they showed an awesome game plan last year with lots of new wrinkles out of existing plays/formations. One has to believe Rice staff has been ready for this game and showing lots of plays/formations in earlier games to set-up the wrinkles for this game. The bubble screen pump fake to go deep, the zone read pass options, reverse action off zone read, action off speed option, etc. all should be ready to go this week. I think Marshall has aggressive D and will be prepared for our tendencies. Thus, the action of that will be key this week for some big plays.
Much of their margin of victory is distorted from continuing to run up score late. They have to given their schedule. I don't blame them. As example last week, they were up 35-14 against USM in 4Q and continued to push it to get to 63-14.
Ironically, I think bad/cold weather benefits us more than them. Our style is suited for it. We saw that last year.
As I posted before C-USA title game, I view this like the Stanford/Oregon series. Oregon blows out all opponents while Stanford does not against same teams but when they play each other, different game and most years a very, very close game with different results compared to other Oregon opponents. Let's hope it is not same as this years results but I do think the Marshall stats need to be thrown out when playing us.
Very informative analysis. I hope you're right. I believe we can win this.
Good luck Owls! Very tough home field in Huntington. That's the house of horrors where UH WR Patrick Edwards broke his leg in about 6 pieces on a band cart irresponsibly left behind the end zone. I think The Herd are still paying him off.
We actually didn't have to pay PH a dime.. He sued the conference and won a ton of money from CUSA (since the refs are supposed to inspect the field before the start of each half to make sure it's safe).. Then he tried to sue us but by that time he'd already got a good deal of cash from the league and was on his way to a 1,000 yard receiving season so judges ruled their was no grounds for the second suit and threw the case out. Somehow we got off scott free.. That's still one of the more embarrassing moments in Marshall history.
Not true. We settled with him. Official details were not made public but i heard 25k was the number.
What happened to Patrick Edwards still haunts me everytime I see a metal structure near a sports field (even when an ODU player ran James Mayden off the field into the bench earlier this year).
ECU's loss at Cinn pretty much assures us (imo) that CUSA's champ will be in the Peach.
We all know Marshall is in if they win out.
But if WE win out, consider this...
Cinn already lost to Memphis so Memphis has the tie breaker.
Memph lost to UCLA and Ole Miss (playing 'okay') and then lost to UH
That compares reasonably well with our losses at A&M, ND and ODU
However, That was all early... and Memphis would actually be co-champs with Cinn, only winning because of the tie breaker
We would have an outright championship, be on a 10 game winning streak and have 2 wins over 'better' ranked Marshall AND close behind them La Tech.
Obviously Marshall is in the drivers seat, but we equally control our destiny
Just win, baby. I don't care how or by how much... just win.
(This post was last modified: 11-14-2014 12:24 PM by Hambone10.)
I've only watched Marshall play FAU this season, and I wasn't particularly impressed. Marshall broke away late, but for much of the game, the result was very much in question. Cato is easily their best player and a very effective QB, but the rest of the team is nothing special. If the Rice D can get into Cato's head like last year, I expect good outcomes. Cato is talented, but he can certainly get flustered and try to do too much on his own. I hope Patt and Nordstrom are ready to give him a rough day.
Obviously, our weakness against defending the deep ball is always a concern, but if we can hang tight for the first half, I think we will be OK. If we can limit Marshall to 2 TDs or less in the first half, we'll be in the game. The longer the game is tight, the better the Owls' chances of winning. Marshall hasn't been challenged by a good team yet, and I think the Owls will quickly realize that Marshall's talent level is simply not the same as Notre Dame or Texas A&M. Even Bailiff's questionable tactics aside, I certainly favor the Owls in a dogfight in the 4Q. Marshall's bubble is ready to be popped.
If Bailiff wants to prove his doubters wrong, this is the game to do it. I am hoping the reason the offense looked anemic last week against UTSA is because the O has been practicing on wrinkles that will only be revealed against Marshall. I also consider DJ to be a major upgrade over McHargue, and I particularly like his competitiveness and will to win. I think DJ recognizes it's DJ vs. Cato in terms of offensive production, and I think DJ could truly rise to the occasion.
Rice 34, Marshall 31
(This post was last modified: 11-14-2014 01:23 PM by Bay Area Owl.)
(11-14-2014 01:17 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote: I've only watched Marshall play FAU this season, and I wasn't particularly impressed. Marshall broke away late, but for much of the game, the result was very much in question. Cato is easily their best player and a very effective QB, but the rest of the team is nothing special. If the Rice D can get into Cato's head like last year, I expect good outcomes. Cato is talented, but he can certainly get flustered and try to do too much on his own. I hope Patt and Nordstrom are ready to give him a rough day.
Obviously, our weakness against defending the deep ball is always a concern, but if we can hang tight for the first half, I think we will be OK. If we can limit Marshall to 2 TDs or less in the first half, we'll be in the game. The longer the game is tight, the better the Owls' chances of winning. Marshall hasn't been challenged by a good team yet, and I think the Owls will quickly realize that Marshall's talent level is simply not the same as Notre Dame or Texas A&M. Even Bailiff's questionable tactics aside, I certainly favor the Owls in a dogfight in the 4Q. Marshall's bubble is ready to be popped.
If Bailiff wants to prove his doubters wrong, this is the game to do it. I am hoping the reason the offense looked anemic last week against UTSA is because the O has been practicing on wrinkles that will only be revealed against Marshall. I also consider DJ to be a major upgrade over McHargue, and I particularly like his competitiveness and will to win. I think DJ recognizes it's DJ vs. Cato in terms of offensive production, and I think DJ could truly rise to the occasion.
Rice 34, Marshall 31
Cato was terrible in the FAU game and as a team we probably played our D game.. Not that, that will impact tomorrow's game at all but I wouldn't draw conclusions about our talent based off that game.
(11-14-2014 12:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: ECU's loss at Cinn pretty much assures us (imo) that CUSA's champ will be in the Peach.
We all know Marshall is in if they win out.
But if WE win out, consider this...
Cinn already lost to Memphis so Memphis has the tie breaker.
Memph lost to UCLA and Ole Miss (playing 'okay') and then lost to UH
That compares reasonably well with our losses at A&M, ND and ODU
However, That was all early... and Memphis would actually be co-champs with Cinn, only winning because of the tie breaker
We would have an outright championship, be on a 10 game winning streak and have 2 wins over 'better' ranked Marshall AND close behind them La Tech.
Obviously Marshall is in the drivers seat, but we equally control our destiny
Just win, baby. I don't care how or by how much... just win.
I thought the same thing when I saw ECU blow that game. Of course I want Rice to win out and be the Peach Bowl selection, but if we're unable to defeat Marshall, then I'm rooting for Marshall all the way. It would help this conference to get the spot and even win the Peach Bowl.
(This post was last modified: 11-14-2014 03:17 PM by owl95.)
(11-14-2014 12:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: ECU's loss at Cinn pretty much assures us (imo) that CUSA's champ will be in the Peach.
We all know Marshall is in if they win out.
But if WE win out, consider this...
Cinn already lost to Memphis so Memphis has the tie breaker.
Memph lost to UCLA and Ole Miss (playing 'okay') and then lost to UH
That compares reasonably well with our losses at A&M, ND and ODU
However, That was all early... and Memphis would actually be co-champs with Cinn, only winning because of the tie breaker
We would have an outright championship, be on a 10 game winning streak and have 2 wins over 'better' ranked Marshall AND close behind them La Tech.
Obviously Marshall is in the drivers seat, but we equally control our destiny
Just win, baby. I don't care how or by how much... just win.
MWC still has to be derailed.
CSU and Boise need to lose or be knocked out of their championship game. Utah St winning that division is best case scenario. CSU has easiest road having to only beat New Mexico and AF to reach the championship game. However, AF beat Boise earlier so will likely give CSU a game. Furthermore, Nevada lost to CSU and Boise by only 7 and 6 points (meaning they could reasonably be expected to win a rematch).
I for one am sick of hearing from the local media how good Marshall is and that the 21 point spread is a good bet on Marshall.
The boys are very confident (not over confident) that they can win this game. They are certainly not afraid of Marshall so I guess we will find out tomorrow won't we?
(11-14-2014 01:17 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote: Cato is easily their best player and a very effective QB, but the rest of the team is nothing special.
Watched the video. Still agree with the quote by BAO.
You forget that we watch some pretty good players make pretty good plays every week as well. Highlites are not what make a player special.
Your offense is driven by Cato. The rest of the team is obviously very good, but not special. Take that as a compliment to your best, most significant player, not as a knock on anyone else.
(11-14-2014 01:17 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote: Cato is easily their best player and a very effective QB, but the rest of the team is nothing special.
Watched the video. Still agree with the quote by BAO.
You forget that we watch some pretty good players make pretty good plays every week as well. Highlites are not what make a player special.
Your offense is driven by Cato. The rest of the team is obviously very good, but not special. Take that as a compliment to your best, most significant player, not as a knock on anyone else.
Its just not true. This team is loaded with talent. Cato may be the best player, but saying no one else is special (especially with johnson at RB) is silly. Just silly. I hope you both recant that statement now. Good luck vs La Tech and in the bowl game
