(12-26-2014 07:20 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Pollard was playing well at the end of the year too (outside of the La Tech game perhaps). He's back I believe in 2015.

Good catch, thanks.

(12-26-2014 07:00 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 06:54 PM)owl95 Wrote:  Here's a slight tangent. This is Driphus' full season stats including the bowl:
Stat CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
Season 191 331 2842 57.7 8.59 88 24 8 27 148.9

A pretty solid year, though the sack number seems a bit high. His rushing stats:

ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
121 401 3.3 43 1

I think he had a pretty good year and I'm very excited to see what he can do next year, but where do you guys think his 2014 performance ranks in terms of recent QBs, say in the last ~10 years? Chase Clement probably has the best 2 seasons in the last 10 years, but how does this year compare to the rest?

I don't believe that it is fair to compare this season to those of other quarterbacks, in that he was playing hurt for so long. I did see more aggressiveness in his rushing attempts in Hawai'i - perhaps because he knew he was done for the season after this game, and didn't need to hold back as much?

That's what I was thinking during the game. I really think he had a pretty nice season, especially when you factor in that he was playing hurt.

(12-26-2014 07:00 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 06:54 PM)owl95 Wrote:  Here's a slight tangent. This is Driphus' full season stats including the bowl:
Stat CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
Season 191 331 2842 57.7 8.59 88 24 8 27 148.9

A pretty solid year, though the sack number seems a bit high. His rushing stats:

ATT YDS AVG LNG TD
121 401 3.3 43 1

I think he had a pretty good year and I'm very excited to see what he can do next year, but where do you guys think his 2014 performance ranks in terms of recent QBs, say in the last ~10 years? Chase Clement probably has the best 2 seasons in the last 10 years, but how does this year compare to the rest?

I don't believe that it is fair to compare this season to those of other quarterbacks, in that he was playing hurt for so long. I did see more aggressiveness in his rushing attempts in Hawai'i - perhaps because he knew he was done for the season after this game, and didn't need to hold back as much?

One thing that excites me about 2015 is that both of our 10-win seasons were recorded with experienced senior QBs at the helm.

Another:
Postseason wins as QB:
Clement 1 (Sr.)
McHargue 1 (Sr.)
Jackson 2 (Fr.,Jr.)

(12-26-2014 06:31 PM)owl95 Wrote:  Well the interesting thing to me is to see what DB's 2nd generation of recruiting yields in terms of talent. The seniors graduating this year and last year were the 1st generation of DB recruits, mostly after the 2008 Texas Bowl win. We had some great talent graduate and move on to the NFL(Too many to name and we all know who they are). That story, along with the 3 straight bowls is now part of the Rice recruiting pitch and recruits who have decided to come to Rice based on the last 3 years are now the new underclassmen. Optimistically, I'm hoping that the talent in this 2nd generation of recruits will be even greater than the guys who just graduated since the program is now on more solid footing than 4 years ago.

Don't forget the EZF

My wish list for next year:

1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

(12-26-2014 09:06 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My wish list for next year:

1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

5. Kill the Meerkat for good.
6. Dramatically improve clock management.

I am very excited about Driphus headed into next year.

His accuracy this season was inconsistent, but he protected the ball.

Hopefully the coaches evolve and let him use more tempo next year. and hopefully he runs more and better following the shoulder surgery

(12-26-2014 10:03 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  I am very excited about Driphus headed into next year.

His accuracy this season was inconsistent, but he protected the ball.

Hopefully the coaches evolve and let him use more tempo next year. and hopefully he runs more and better following the shoulder surgery

I will add one: instead of having the co-oc's micromanage each play, let the senior QB make (some?) adjustments based on what he sees at the line (audibles). Get DJ the play with twenty seconds on the play clock and let him run the show. He has demonstrated the judgement (even playing hurt this year) to earn it. DJ will have a better sense of who has a good matchup, which people are tired. He can also keep blitzers (not reindeer impersonators) from timing their starts against the expiring play clock.

Finally, beat LaTech. That is all

Back to scheduling. I think Baylor would like to keep the series going on a fairly permanent basis. They would like to do the same with SMU. I like the fact that they are straight up head to head with no 2 for 1. Finding teams willing to play Baylor has gotten a little difficult. Supposedly Baylor and Tenn were close on a game next year and the SEC said no dice.

(12-26-2014 11:37 PM)YOwl Ming Wrote:  I will add one: instead of having the co-oc's micromanage each play, let the senior QB make (some?) adjustments based on what he sees at the line (audibles). Get DJ the play with twenty seconds on the play clock and let him run the show. He has demonstrated the judgement (even playing hurt this year) to earn it. DJ will have a better sense of who has a good matchup, which people are tired. He can also keep blitzers (not reindeer impersonators) from timing their starts against the expiring play clock.

That's not going to happen without a philosophical change, because that's not the philosophy. I agree that it should happen, but I don't expect it.

(12-27-2014 02:04 AM)Converted Rice Wrote:  Back to scheduling. I think Baylor would like to keep the series going on a fairly permanent basis. They would like to do the same with SMU. I like the fact that they are straight up head to head with no 2 for 1. Finding teams willing to play Baylor has gotten a little difficult. Supposedly Baylor and Tenn were close on a game next year and the SEC said no dice.

I understand that from Baylor's point of view. I don't think it makes sense for Rice. Baylor doesn't pay enough to make it work for Rice, or hasn't in the past. With the new stadium, maybe that changes. But for Baylor to make sense for Rice, they have to bring more fans to Houston.

(12-26-2014 09:56 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 09:06 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My wish list for next year:
1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

5. Kill the Meerkat for good.
6. Dramatically improve clock management.

I agree conceptually with your additions. But 5 isn't happening without a change in philosophy. And you and I would probably disagree on the specifics of 6, in that we probably disagree on some principles of proper clock management.

(12-26-2014 09:06 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My wish list for next year:

1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

Regarding #2, we blocked a kick vs Hawaii, and I remember the last few years very important blocks against Purdue (game winner) and a block and return against UH to tie the game. We are tied for 66th with 1 block (the one versus Hawaii I assume) and there are six teams tied for first with 6 blocks. So we could try to put more emphasis on blocking, as it does have the ability to greatly swing momentum.

It always appears to me that kicking success is mostly dictated by the quality of your kicker, so I don't see that area improving much unless our kicker's accuracy does. Especially since we do not appear to have issues with kicks being blocked regularly.

The one area that sort of fits into this point is punting/returns. I think our return game, either blocking or returning could obviously use some improvement as we sorely lack excitement in KRs and PRs.

(12-27-2014 06:24 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 09:06 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My wish list for next year:

1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

Regarding #2, we blocked a kick vs Hawaii, and I remember the last few years very important blocks against Purdue (game winner) and a block and return against UH to tie the game. We are tied for 66th with 1 block (the one versus Hawaii I assume) and there are six teams tied for first with 6 blocks. So we could try to put more emphasis on blocking, as it does have the ability to greatly swing momentum.

It always appears to me that kicking success is mostly dictated by the quality of your kicker, so I don't see that area improving much unless our kicker's accuracy does. Especially since we do not appear to have issues with kicks being blocked regularly.

The one area that sort of fits into this point is punting/returns. I think our return game, either blocking or returning could obviously use some improvement as we sorely lack excitement in KRs and PRs.

We also blocked one in the bowl.

(12-27-2014 05:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 02:04 AM)Converted Rice Wrote:  Back to scheduling. I think Baylor would like to keep the series going on a fairly permanent basis. They would like to do the same with SMU. I like the fact that they are straight up head to head with no 2 for 1. Finding teams willing to play Baylor has gotten a little difficult. Supposedly Baylor and Tenn were close on a game next year and the SEC said no dice.

I understand that from Baylor's point of view. I don't think it makes sense for Rice. Baylor doesn't pay enough to make it work for Rice, or hasn't in the past. With the new stadium, maybe that changes. But for Baylor to make sense for Rice, they have to bring more fans to Houston.

Baylor seems to be promoting travel to away games, now that home games are sold out. Maybe that will result in more fans coming to Houston. I certainly understand your perspective. It is a whole new dynamic for Baylor, being the team no one wants to play. A few years back, everyone wanted the Bears for Homecoming.

(12-27-2014 06:24 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 09:06 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My wish list for next year:
1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

Regarding #2, we blocked a kick vs Hawaii, and I remember the last few years very important blocks against Purdue (game winner) and a block and return against UH to tie the game. We are tied for 66th with 1 block (the one versus Hawaii I assume) and there are six teams tied for first with 6 blocks. So we could try to put more emphasis on blocking, as it does have the ability to greatly swing momentum.
It always appears to me that kicking success is mostly dictated by the quality of your kicker, so I don't see that area improving much unless our kicker's accuracy does. Especially since we do not appear to have issues with kicks being blocked regularly.
The one area that sort of fits into this point is punting/returns. I think our return game, either blocking or returning could obviously use some improvement as we sorely lack excitement in KRs and PRs.

The term kicking game refers to all kick phases, including punts, kickoffs, PAT/FG, kick blocks, and kick returns, so it covers all the areas you mention. We have improved tremendously since Naivar and then Patterson took over the area.

But if we are going to realize the dream of Walt and Hambone and Dr. K, among others, and get those signature wins, big plays in the kicking game are one of the primary sources of upsets. The targets should be something like 3-4 kick blocks and 2-3 return TDs (harder to return KOs under the new rules) and +3 on kicking game turnovers per season.

Based on Owl53's earlier comments, that will require more practice time than we now devote to the area. With the limits in effect today, prioritizing practice time means giving up some time for something else. Again it's a philosophy thing, but this is one area where I think the big play potential merits the emphasis. Maybe the extra time created when we move the locker rooms closer to the practice facilities will be used this way.

(12-26-2014 09:59 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  

(12-25-2014 06:42 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  Am I missing something or do we still need to schedule one OOC game? I see Texas/Baylor/Army.

Did CUSA go to a nine game schedule and I missed it?

And ... I think Thurmond is a Tulsa grad.

That wouldn't make OwlMom very happy.

You are right Tiki, this wouldn't make me happy. He is a great coach and even a better mentor. I can understand if this is something he really wants but I hope Rice will try hard to retain him.

(12-27-2014 09:02 AM)Converted Rice Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 05:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 02:04 AM)Converted Rice Wrote:  Back to scheduling. I think Baylor would like to keep the series going on a fairly permanent basis. They would like to do the same with SMU. I like the fact that they are straight up head to head with no 2 for 1. Finding teams willing to play Baylor has gotten a little difficult. Supposedly Baylor and Tenn were close on a game next year and the SEC said no dice.

I understand that from Baylor's point of view. I don't think it makes sense for Rice. Baylor doesn't pay enough to make it work for Rice, or hasn't in the past. With the new stadium, maybe that changes. But for Baylor to make sense for Rice, they have to bring more fans to Houston.

Baylor seems to be promoting travel to away games, now that home games are sold out. Maybe that will result in more fans coming to Houston. I certainly understand your perspective. It is a whole new dynamic for Baylor, being the team no one wants to play. A few years back, everyone wanted the Bears for Homecoming.

Yes, it's great to be a Baylor Bear these days. Same for a TCU Horned Frog. And Rice could have been either one with different leadership in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. TCU responded to the demotion to the WAC the way that I had hoped that Rice would.

Based on where we are now, I think money dictates two major P5 opponents plus UH, and the only major P5s that make financial sense are UT, aTm, and LSU (even on a 2 for 1 basis). The fourth OOC game should preferably be another similar academic school (service academies, Duke, Vandy, Northwestern, Stanford) on a home-and-home basis or a nearby FCS who will bring a crowd and won't demand a return trip. I'd shoot for the academic schools in the years we have UH at home and the FCS schools in the years UH is away. That would give us 6 home games except in the one year out of 6 where UH, LSU, and aTm were all on the road. That approach doesn't leave room for Baylor or SMU unless and until either they pay more and bring more fans or we get our base up to 30-35,000 and don't need the money as badly.

(12-26-2014 09:06 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My wish list for next year:

1. Learn to stop the deep ball.
2. Make the kicking game a weapon--blocking kicks, returning kicks for TDs, forcing turnovers.
3. Run an offense instead of running plays out of a grab bag.
4. Get more speed on the field.

I see this post quite often and still don't understand your complaints with the offense/play calling. I've been around football for a long time and have no idea what it means to "run plays out of a grab bag".

We do run an offense. We may not be a 1 scheme team having to just be a wishbone offense, or an air-raid offense, or a west coast offense. We have strengths in all 3 skill groups but are not dominant in any of the 3 so we take advantage of each by running an offense that can attack in multiple ways. That speaks to the intelligence and versatility of both the players and the coaches.

Secondly, "getting more speed on the field" is not as simple as you think. Speed doesn't necessarily mean execution. Some of our most effective players over the last few years were smart and consistent, but not necessarily fast. I.e. Nordstrom, Radcliffe, Wright, Kutzler, Ross, and Petersen to name a few.

(12-27-2014 05:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I understand that from Baylor's point of view. I don't think it makes sense for Rice. Baylor doesn't pay enough to make it work for Rice, or hasn't in the past. With the new stadium, maybe that changes. But for Baylor to make sense for Rice, they have to bring more fans to Houston.

It seems logical that Baylor would bring more fans to Rice now that they are an elite program. Last time they can to Rice in the RG III era, they were a great team but they had just become a great team and didn't yet have the reputation of a national power. Now they do and that could draw more Houston-based fans. Of course, we don't know that until they come to Rice stadium again.

I just want to see Rice with a winning record 3 games into the season. Starting 0-3 or even 1-2 makes it tougher for a casual fan to get excited about playing unfamiliar CUSA teams like ODU or Western Kentucky. But a 2-1 or 3-0 Rice team coming off a bowl win is easier to build excitement around for home games. At this stage, need to build up attendance, and repeatedly losing to Top 25 teams on the road does nothing for home attendance.

What is a bigger priority for the programs, playing a couple "body bag" type road games each season to make some $$$, or playing easier teams to build a winning record that can excite fans for home games? Because I believe the two have an inverse relationship. We'd all like to win those games against tough opponents on the road, but those are tough games for elite programs.

I used to be in the camp that wanted a couple tough OOC opponents for the money, UH, and a "like-minded" school. I am out of that camp for a few reasons:
(1) I took Mystery Owl's comment to heart about how hard those multiple road games against tough opponents is on the team.
(2) I think it dampens enthusiasm for home games to start off with multiple losses before the 1st home game.
(3) Related to 2, but I want to prioritize home attendance and excitement about the program over $$$ from the OOC schedule. That might not be possible financially, but it is a hopeful long term strategy that relies more on Rice and less on opponents.
(4) this doesn't mean I think the team should shy away from tough opponents ... We should just shy away from the ones who will never play us at home, or at least in Houston.

So I would rather see Rice playing 4 game OOC with home-and-homes against some mix of UH, SMU, Baylor, Stanford, Northwestern, Duke, Army, Nave, Air Force, etc. than see the team play 2 road games against the elites who will not come to Rice (UT, LSU, probably A&M now). I really like games against they academies because Coach Bailiff seems to have an unusually high degree of respect for those games and they attract national attention without pitting Rice against a team of 4-star or 5-star recruits.

Again, I think it is better for the team to (1) not be losing multiple road games before even playing at home; (2) increasing the chances of 10-win seasons; and (3) still be playing teams that are either local draws or like-minded schools.