(12-26-2014 02:02 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  1. Why is there talk of firing DB?
The man has won bowl-won conference-won bowl in three seasons. Let's fire the coach that has turned Rice into a winning program for three seasons in a row. That's logical.

Please let's stop with this. In ANY situation involving 'fanatics', you're going to get differences of opinion. Those with that opinion are entitled to it and it's an obviously small minority. We'd be far better served by giving the opinion LESS attention and not MORE by constantly arguing with it. It is NOT an opinion without any merit whatsoever. Plenty of schools have fired 'successful' coaches. It's precisely how we got Hatfield. I'm using your post to respond to... and not singling you out as being one of those who has often responded. Frankly, I think you may be one who is being given an incorrect impression of how many of us are in 'that' camp because of all the discussion.

Quote:2. We need to schedule BC then cancel Baylor. Then fill the remaining open date with Texas Tech/Houston/SMU/Texas State/Tulsa. All very winnable games, wherever we would play them.

Let's face it, if we played PERFECT football we would still lose to Baylor by 3 TDs. It would be Thermopylae but with 3 Spartans instead of 300. We play PERFECT football against UT and we win. BC, Army and any of those teams are winnable without absolutely perfect games.

Don't get me wrong, I put my blood, sweat and tears into Rice football and would love for them to beat Baylor. But at the end of the day let's be reasonable. Try to put Rice in the best positions to win. We don't need 3 P-5s on the schedule and I'd rather play BC than Baylor. Baylor is way more likely to cause injuries, physically and morale-wise on a team. Not to mention we could beat BC.

agree 98%.

I said 2+ years ago we need to try and project years when 'name' teams will be down and try and schedule them. I'd rather play (just pulling out obvious names... clearly it isn't possible) p5 2014 BC (45), UT (40) and Michigan (61) than 2014 Marshall (32) La Tech (41) and Air Force (69)

I'm not excited about playing #7 Baylor, especially in that we probably aren't getting paid to do it.

(12-26-2014 02:02 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  1. Why is there talk of firing DB?
The man has won bowl-won conference-won bowl in three seasons. Let's fire the coach that has turned Rice into a winning program for three seasons in a row. That's logical.
2. We need to schedule BC then cancel Baylor. Then fill the remaining open date with Texas Tech/Houston/SMU/Texas State/Tulsa. All very winnable games, wherever we would play them.
Let's face it, if we played PERFECT football we would still lose to Baylor by 3 TDs. It would be Thermopylae but with 3 Spartans instead of 300. We play PERFECT football against UT and we win. BC, Army and any of those teams are winnable without absolutely perfect games.
Don't get me wrong, I put my blood, sweat and tears into Rice football and would love for them to beat Baylor. But at the end of the day let's be reasonable. Try to put Rice in the best positions to win. We don't need 3 P-5s on the schedule and I'd rather play BC than Baylor. Baylor is way more likely to cause injuries, physically and morale-wise on a team. Not to mention we could beat BC.

I'm not a fan of playing Baylor and wouldn't schedule them on a go-forward basis, but I wouldn't cancel this game either. As Hambone said, I doubt they're paying us much, and we can save our P5 opponents for paydays. I would be okay with BC or USA to fill the opening, for obviously different reasons.

We just need to take care of our own program. I've outlined the places where I'd like to see improvement next year. Anybody else got any ideas?

Looks like the BC idea is out: http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-col...2015-maine

According to this ...

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/conf-usa/rice-owls.php

... Baylor is scheduled to visit HRS in 2016 (assuming we don't sell it to Reliant or they buy the game out). Perhaps the inaugural home game post-EZF?

Also looks like we have HOME P5 games scheduled against Stanford in 2017, Northwestern in 2018, and Baylor/A&M in 2019.

Would imagine that the increased emphasis on upgrading P5 non-conference scheduling may put a couple of these games at risk (although if we continue to produce solid seasons going forward maybe we can minimize that risk).

Actually, from reading BC boards, it appears that they might have one more opening as reports are that their Northern Illinois series has been pushed back a year. I'm not sure, but scouring the schedules, BC and USA may be are only options unless we want to schedule FCS (which I wouldn't be opposed to).

(12-26-2014 02:30 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 02:02 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  1. Why is there talk of firing DB?
The man has won bowl-won conference-won bowl in three seasons. Let's fire the coach that has turned Rice into a winning program for three seasons in a row. That's logical.

I would guess that <1% of people who read the Parliament think Coach Bailiff should be replaced. The whole idea has been blown out of proportion, mostly because some people who continue to express concerns are being cast as people who think Bailiff should be fired. Some of them were 2.5 seasons ago. I was one of them 2.5 seasons ago. After the UH and Memphis losses in 2012, I think "Fire Bailiff" was an eminently reasonable position for a fan to take. And lets be honest, I would bet that 90% of FBS schools would have fired Bailiff at least by the Memphis loss

Kumbaya.

I think he would have been fired if that had not been the week of Centennial Homecoming. That having been said, sometimes perspective works out. Let's get him the resources (asst. Coach funding, EZF, Marketing) to succeed!

(12-26-2014 02:43 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  We just need to take care of our own program. I've outlined the places where I'd like to see improvement next year. Anybody else got any ideas?

The bowl game gave me lots of encouragement. I saw a different defense and some new play makers.

Offense started much as we've started many games... and then went into a complete funk before finally 'coming around'.

On the plus side, I saw some under-center and pistol and 2 back sets which I liked... changes the angles... we just didn't always execute them very well as you'd expect given the short teaching session. One very crucial 3rd and short I recall, we had the perfect play called and blocked... but the snap was low... bobbled and the defender we needed to miss got back in position in time to trip the back. Frankly, I'm a bit more concerned about the losses on the OL than of Hull and Taylor... not because those two won't be missed... just because I'm aware of guys behind them who can also make plays... and I'm not as aware of guys on the line. I'm thinking, but without any knowledge that a healthy Driphus... maybe with some early help in staying healthy from Turner in obvious running situations (but still a threat to pass) is really going to have to carry the offense early as guys 'figure themselves out'... and the coaches need to help make that happen as quickly as possible.

We lose a lot on defense but have a lot (and maybe a WHOLE lot) coming back... Again, impetus on getting ready to play fast.

I'd like for the offensive coaches to keep the foot on the gas more, especially early in the season so that we can work on things/back-ups etc more. I don't want a QBs or lineman's first serious pass play to be as a starter. Rather than get a lead and milk the clock in the third quarter, try and expand the lead in the third and then milk it with the back-up in halfway through the 4th.... but still running the offense/getting some real reps with the whole offense

(12-26-2014 02:41 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 02:02 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  1. Why is there talk of firing DB?
The man has won bowl-won conference-won bowl in three seasons. Let's fire the coach that has turned Rice into a winning program for three seasons in a row. That's logical.

Please let's stop with this. In ANY situation involving 'fanatics', you're going to get differences of opinion. Those with that opinion are entitled to it and it's an obviously small minority. We'd be far better served by giving the opinion LESS attention and not MORE by constantly arguing with it. It is NOT an opinion without any merit whatsoever. Plenty of schools have fired 'successful' coaches. It's precisely how we got Hatfield. I'm using your post to respond to... and not singling you out as being one of those who has often responded. Frankly, I think you may be one who is being given an incorrect impression of how many of us are in 'that' camp because of all the discussion.

Quote:2. We need to schedule BC then cancel Baylor. Then fill the remaining open date with Texas Tech/Houston/SMU/Texas State/Tulsa. All very winnable games, wherever we would play them.

Let's face it, if we played PERFECT football we would still lose to Baylor by 3 TDs. It would be Thermopylae but with 3 Spartans instead of 300. We play PERFECT football against UT and we win. BC, Army and any of those teams are winnable without absolutely perfect games.

Don't get me wrong, I put my blood, sweat and tears into Rice football and would love for them to beat Baylor. But at the end of the day let's be reasonable. Try to put Rice in the best positions to win. We don't need 3 P-5s on the schedule and I'd rather play BC than Baylor. Baylor is way more likely to cause injuries, physically and morale-wise on a team. Not to mention we could beat BC.

agree 98%.

I said 2+ years ago we need to try and project years when 'name' teams will be down and try and schedule them. I'd rather play (just pulling out obvious names... clearly it isn't possible) p5 2014 BC (45), UT (40) and Michigan (61) than 2014 Marshall (32) La Tech (41) and Air Force (69)

I'm not excited about playing #7 Baylor, especially in that we probably aren't getting paid to do it.

Well it honestly seems "Fire DB" is a constant theme in every thread I've ever read. This year as an alum or the two previous as a player (it was blatantly obvious then, seems some of those calling for the firing have melted back into the woodwork). I was trying to point out, at this point, it would be a mistake. Therefore, I don't understand why it comes up in every football thread I have observed and/or participated in the last three years. I'm sorry but I won't sit idly by and not defend my former coaches (when they deserve it) and my former team.

I don't know that I've really seen that many "fire DB" posts. I've seen a lot of critical posts, and I agree with some and disagree with some. But I don't think that criticism of a particular element of our play is necessarily a "fire DB" comment. There are things I wish we did better, and I've been fairly vocal with my comments. But they are more from the point of view that I wish DB would do them than that DB should be fired.

What I have seen this year is a number of situations where someone posted what I felt to be a valid criticism and the response by a DB backer would accuse the poster of calling for DB to be fired.

I don't want him to be fired, but I am getting tired of the same problems persisting for 8 years. I've come to the conclusion that we're probably just going to have those same problems as long as DB is around, and if we can run off a string of 8, 9, and 10 win seasons despite them, I'll be okay living with that.

(12-26-2014 02:30 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 02:02 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  1. Why is there talk of firing DB?
The man has won bowl-won conference-won bowl in three seasons. Let's fire the coach that has turned Rice into a winning program for three seasons in a row. That's logical.

I would guess that <1% of people who read the Parliament think Coach Bailiff should be replaced. The whole idea has been blown out of proportion, mostly because some people who continue to express concerns are being cast as people who think Bailiff should be fired. Some of them were 2.5 seasons ago. I was one of them 2.5 seasons ago. After the UH and Memphis losses in 2012, I think "Fire Bailiff" was an eminently reasonable position for a fan to take. And lets be honest, I would bet that 90% of FBS schools would have fired Bailiff at least by the Memphis loss, if not earlier.

That said, the past is the past. Most of us who felt that way have backed far off that position. I certainly have. I am happy Coach Bailiff is the head coach at Rice. I still have some concerns, but I would much rather see Coach Bailiff get more resources to see if he can allay my concerns than start over with an unknown. And if Coach Bailiff gets those resources and continues improving the program, then I hope he stays forever.

I do hope some people who used to be in the "Fire Bailiff" crowd would be a little less strident in expressing their concerns. I also hope the people that love Bailiff and have always been in his corner can understand the frustrations a lot of us felt in mid-2012 and that quite a few still harbor concerns about certain aspects or decisions ... But that it doesn't mean peoe think he should be fired or that the program would be better off without him.

Kumbaya.

Very, very well stated. Mid-2012 I think just about everyone was on that train. I know, during the first half of that season, the "should I graduate this summer and go play my senior year somewhere else while attending grad school" thoughts had turned into a full class schedule analysis to see what it would take to finish school in time. However, that was not because of Bailiff. That was because I, like the rest of my 2013 senior class, was fed up with the same cultural attitude of expecting to lose and being surprised/elated when we win (rather than expecting to win and being furious when we lose - the cultural mindset of the entire program now). Fortunately by the end of that season the tide was beginning to turn and that change is what we have seen over the last 2.5 years. A program on the rise.

Rice Football is a winning program that is trending up in our eyes and in the eyes of the rest of FBS. While there will always be concerns regarding the head coach, whether its Nick Saban, David Bailiff, or He Who Shall Not Be Named over in Arizona, there is a great deal to be excited about at Rice. The resources are beginning to come, JK is doing a great job raising expectations and providing necessary changes to reach those expectations, and Rice Football is in the middle of the best years it has seen since the Cotton Bowl years.

(12-26-2014 03:01 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  Well it honestly seems "Fire DB" is a constant theme in every thread I've ever read. This year as an alum or the two previous as a player (it was blatantly obvious then, seems some of those calling for the firing have melted back into the woodwork). I was trying to point out, at this point, it would be a mistake. Therefore, I don't understand why it comes up in every football thread I have observed and/or participated in the last three years. I'm sorry but I won't sit idly by and not defend my former coaches (when they deserve it) and my former team.

As I said, it seems to come up as often by people saying 'where are the naysayers now' as it does by the naysayers. The obvious response by a naysayer, even one who had no reason to say anything would now be to 'defend' the position... because they were 'challenged' to. Where are the naysayers? Same place they were before. The complaint is generally that we don't do well enough against top 50, and especially p5 teams. Fresno was neither. As great as the win was, it doesn't (by itself) address any of their concerns. I mean here we are talking about it, and I'm not one of the ones 'against' your opinion.

I never played for these coaches, but they are 'mine' as much as anyone else's... because they coach for a University and a program that I care very deeply about... and MY caring (and I suspect ultimately yours) goes far deeper than JUST these coaches or JUST these players... but to decades of coaches and players in the past and yet to come. There's an old adage about praising in public and chastising in private. This is 'our' (fans) private.

Nobody (save 1) is above criticism and while some certainly may not express it in the most constructive manner, it also isn't beyond reason that part of the reason why some people take offense at the criticism comes from a personal and not necessarily objective place.

We just don't need to be shouting each other down simply because we disagree on perspective.... because we DON'T really disagree on the goals, do we?

Where are the naysayers? Most of them are sitting right next to 'the Pollyannas' in the stands, and their money is right next to theirs in the budget, and their blood and sweat was right next to theirs on the field. This makes us FAR FAR different from most places... but we aren't perfect.... nor should we be.

It is possible to straddle both sides of this argument/debate.

For starters .. in our current conference with our existing coaching salary budget (HC and otherwise) - one can clearly argue that DB and the current staff are doing an above average (and possibly well above average) job. DB is clearly a good guy and representative for the school, the staff appears to recruit well, and we HOPEFULLY have hit a point where we are a consistently top quartile team within our conference.

However - even with that view - I think it's also perfectly rational to wonder whether we can go much higher than this with the current staff. BUT - in order to take that next step we'll likely need to significantly expand what we'd be willing to pay for a head coach (and rest of staff), probably find a way to improve our conference affiliation, and perhaps push for other structural upgrades.

I think the middle ground may come if we somehow end up with an incremental conference upgrade to the AAC or MWC. Would we consistently win in either of those leagues with the current staff/budget/infrastructure - who knows?

(12-26-2014 03:01 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  Well it honestly seems "Fire DB" is a constant theme in every thread I've ever read.

Was it a theme in this thread?

(12-26-2014 03:01 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  Well it honestly seems "Fire DB" is a constant theme in every thread I've ever read.

I really don't see that. I agree with Hambone. I think it's far more the people criticizing the naysayers who accuse them of "fire DB" comments than it is any of the naysayers actually calling for DB to be fired.

Obviously we had a "fire DB" thread recently, but I think that was sort of a tongue-in-cheek title. I don't think even his harshest critics have made firing DB a constant theme, or even any theme, in their posts.

(12-26-2014 02:41 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 02:02 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  2. We need to schedule BC then cancel Baylor. Then fill the remaining open date with Texas Tech/Houston/SMU/Texas State/Tulsa. All very winnable games, wherever we would play them.

Let's face it, if we played PERFECT football we would still lose to Baylor by 3 TDs. It would be Thermopylae but with 3 Spartans instead of 300. We play PERFECT football against UT and we win. BC, Army and any of those teams are winnable without absolutely perfect games.

Don't get me wrong, I put my blood, sweat and tears into Rice football and would love for them to beat Baylor. But at the end of the day let's be reasonable. Try to put Rice in the best positions to win. We don't need 3 P-5s on the schedule and I'd rather play BC than Baylor. Baylor is way more likely to cause injuries, physically and morale-wise on a team. Not to mention we could beat BC.

agree 98%.

I said 2+ years ago we need to try and project years when 'name' teams will be down and try and schedule them. I'd rather play (just pulling out obvious names... clearly it isn't possible) p5 2014 BC (45), UT (40) and Michigan (61) than 2014 Marshall (32) La Tech (41) and Air Force (69)

I'm not excited about playing #7 Baylor, especially in that we probably aren't getting paid to do it.

I've posted this before, too. We have not fared well on the road against Art Briles offenses. A blowout loss in Waco next year does us no good. With the criticism this year about Baylor OOC scheduling, maybe we have an opportunity to help Baylor find a better opponent in return for releasing us?

(12-26-2014 03:20 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  It is possible to straddle both sides of this argument/debate.

For starters .. in our current conference with our existing coaching salary budget (HC and otherwise) - one can clearly argue that DB and the current staff are doing an above average (and possibly well above average) job. DB is clearly a good guy and representative for the school, the staff appears to recruit well, and we HOPEFULLY have hit a point where we are a consistently top quartile team within our conference.

However - even with that view - I think it's also perfectly rational to wonder whether we can go much higher than this with the current staff. BUT - in order to take that next step we'll likely need to significantly expand what we'd be willing to pay for a head coach (and rest of staff), probably find a way to improve our conference affiliation, and perhaps push for other structural upgrades.

I think the middle ground may come if we somehow end up with an incremental conference upgrade to the AAC or MWC. Would we consistently win in either of those leagues with the current staff/budget/infrastructure - who knows?

Well...we just decisively defeated the runner-up to the MWC. I would hope we could consistently win in that league. AAC is CUSA 3-4 years ago. They skim off the top from CUSA, although I'm not sure why they brought in Tulane...

Either way I am very optimistic about the 2015 season and we should at the very minimum be able to repeat an 8-5 season with a bowl game. Above .500 and bowl games should be the norm now.

(12-26-2014 03:22 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 03:01 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  Well it honestly seems "Fire DB" is a constant theme in every thread I've ever read.

Was it a theme in this thread?

Yes, there was a post referencing it. Seems to have been deleted now.

(12-26-2014 03:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 03:01 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  Well it honestly seems "Fire DB" is a constant theme in every thread I've ever read.

I really don't see that. I agree with Hambone. I think it's far more the people criticizing the naysayers who accuse them of "fire DB" comments than it is any of the naysayers actually calling for DB to be fired.

Bingo.

I have probably been one of the most critical (if not THE most critical) posters here and IMO, if I am not on the "replace the coach" train anymore, I'd be hard pressed to assume someone else is.

(12-26-2014 03:27 PM)RiceOwl53 Wrote:  Well...we just decisively defeated the runner-up to the MWC. I would hope we could consistently win in that league.

Fresno was at best the fifth best team in the MWC. Four teams in the Mountain Division have won 10 games (Boise St, Colorado St, Utah St, Air Force) if you include bowl season.

In fact, San Diego St and Nevada from the Mountain were at least comparable teams to Fresno St (and both won 7 games overall).

I hate making that argument because I don't want to take away from the bowl win ... but saying that Fresno was the MWC runner up - while technically correct - is quite misleading.

And I agree re: Tulane ... was a head scratcher even at the time and I'm guessing the AAC brass would love a do-over.

Also, every thread seems to devolve into this "he said/she said" bickering.

Back to the original thread, losing Hull and JT next year will hurt. Parks put up a heck of a performance in the bowl game and I have liked what I see from Mayden so far. So, some drop off but worthy candidates in the wings