(03-13-2018 10:46 AM)flash3200 Wrote:  First of all, the attendance figures are completely made up. Based on my own small sample size, when we were doing better v. worse, the actual butts in the seat count seemed closer to reported attendance numbers when the team was winning. The last two brutal seasons, the stands were effectively empty despite reported attendance figures still hovering around the FBS mandated minimum threshold of 20k. It is clear that the AD does a goal seek on freebie tickets issued just to meet minimum requirements of attendance.

Attendance will never look good at Rice...the best we can hope for is to hit the other deliverables and hope that maybe some of the 20k reported attendance on any given week actually shows up to the game (those tickets presumably are in the hands of the general public, not just in a drawer in the AD's office, right?). We can begin to complain about the marketing staff and lack of amenities at HRS when the action on the turf should demand that 20k people show up to watch. This includes having 1-2 decent OOC teams actually come to HRS and hanging a bunch of points on the dregs of the CUSA. Maybe, occasionally, there might be a game of national interest at some point late in the season should someone like a resurgent FAU or similar come to visit us and maybe more than a few adventure seekers will be required to sit in the upper decks.

I do agree with this. The frustration is real. There's no future in CUSA, as least not in it's current form. There's an incredible amount of ground to make up to get back. It can be done. Spend. A university like Rice cannot have insignificant athletics. As Rice commits more to athletics, the win totals will go up. Keep coaches and finish the renovation projects. I like to think people on campus understand that now. I hope they do.

(03-10-2018 03:52 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(03-10-2018 01:54 AM)flash3200 Wrote:  You can argue our bull crap extensions have done more harm than good because we extend the guys who have no where to go and we don't pay up enough for the guys/gals who are worth a full deployment of resources. What happens when pera or bloomgren meet the goals we are kicking around on this board? Give them a 50% raise and 2 years of extenze? They will be outta here next hiring cycle along with all of the recruits. It is clear the BOT sleepwalks through non contract years. That said, the BOT is justified because we haven't had a ton of all-star coaches slip through our hands in the recent past.

Every one likes to do their own impersonation of throwing the toad down the garbage disposal, but you can argue he was the first guy to come in and actually improve something, anything about Rice athletics. Wayne has done a lot, but he did it all on his own accord with minimal support from the university. Toad was the first guy to make a dramatic change both inside and outside the lines in a very short period of time. He turned out to be a total flake, but you can argue we didn't offer him enough at the time given he took a rotten owl pellet fermenting in the sun and turned it into a bowl appearance. Obviously with what we know now about his character you would let him walk 10 times out of 10, but at the time our offer was weak sauce considering what he had done for us and what the market was for HCs. Wayne literally had to get to the CWS before Reckling was built. That would be like waiting until we got into the playoffs to replace some bleachers. Toad had us fired up on all sorts of necessities to bring us out of the SWC stone age and into modern college football after just one season. You could give the benefit of doubt to the BOT for seeing through his ploys, but I doubt that due diligence outweighed status quo when they made their lowball offer to toad based on some of the other decisions that were made around the same time.

Pera & Bloomgren seem to be quality non-toad type individuals, so the BOT would be wise to properly ascertain their market value on this so-called annual evaluation and not simply push across a weak sauce corporate style 50% raise in the case they attain what has been unattainable at Rice. I don't know if WG has ever been close to being hired away, but you get the feeling the guy is a true saint for sticking with us through his years of domination. I don't know how much $$$ he left on the table since college baseball hasn't blown up like the other sports, but you have to think with how the MO has been in the past that he certainly punched below his weight for a few years at Rice.

+1. Good post to the discussion topic

I won't defend Todd Graham as a person, but as a football coach it is undeniable he has above-average talent. How much is a point of debate.
I sometimes wonder what the last decade of football here at Rice would have looked like if we had ponied up and paid him to stay, and if he, not the last guy & Co. was the football coach at Rice for these ten years.

Some said at the time he left that he was a crappy football coach and we would have lost a lot with him. I think that seems like understandable sour grapes. Whether we like it or not, the facts of his post-Rice head coaching record indicate he was a very good football coach. I'll not defend anything else about the man.

I do, however, speculate that Rice football would have won a lot more over these past 10 years with a very good football coach like Todd, and even with Todd had the money been able to be worked out. That is what leads me to agree with Flash's post above, and my oft-stated opinion that Rice's main problem in athletics (well, the main sports, anyway) is that Rice patently refuses to recognize the reality of the market they are in, wishing and hoping it away.

I think if we'd had Todd or a like coach over the last 10 years instead of what we settled down for, we'd have had several CUSA championships (more than one for sure), we'd have gotten the EZF done somewhat faster (as he would have pushed for it harder and raised a bunch of the money himself, as he seems to be the kind of guy who recognizes that participating in fund-raising helps improve his own paycheck and position), we'd have likely at least once been close to or participated in the Access Bowl game, and we definitely would have put Rice on the National Radar of college football fans as a program on the rise and one that would be considered and sought after for any potential conference realignment. The reasons I believe these things is simply looking at the facts of what happened here instead and what Todd did both here and elsewhere on the field.

I hope Coach Bloomgren can be as good, and stay a while. I hope Rice will pay the big-time dollars to him if he does and not try to cheap it out yet again, because the truth is if we really want Rice to have a competitive program and one that is a source of national admiration instead of national ridicule, we have to be willing to pay the Head Coach 1) more than any other university employee (a LOT more) and 2) competitive with the market of College Head Football Coaches that exists in reality, not in our extremist idealised fantasy world.

Artist: Dionne Warwick
Album: Presenting Dionne Warwick
Song: "Wishin' and Hopin'"
Songwriter: Burt Bacharach & Hal David
February 10, 1963 Scepter Records

(03-14-2018 10:23 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I won't defend Todd Graham as a person, but as a football coach it is undeniable he has above-average talent. How much is a point of debate.
I sometimes wonder what the last decade of football here at Rice would have looked like if we had ponied up and paid him to stay, and if he, not the last guy & Co. was the football coach at Rice for these ten years.

Pretty sure Rice did try to pony up to keep Todd Graham. It was just that, unbeknownst to Rice, while he was literally negotiating a new contract with Rice, he was also negotiating a contract with Tulsa. Not sure that the Tulsa contract was substantially better than what Rice offered, but they didn't have the recruiting restrictions and likely had better facilities (hard to be too much worse than Rice in January 2007).

edit: I went back and read a few of the old chron articles and blog posts to refresh my memory. Rice did pony up and signed him to an extension on a Tuesday (while he was simultaneously negotiating with Tulsa), but he seems to have used that to get a better offer from Tulsa and left on Thursday. He got $1.1 million per season from Tulsa, which one of the articles says is twice what his Rice extension paid and that Rice would not match it once he told them. Putting aside Todd Graham's personality, I am thrilled that Rice did not pay him $1.1 million per season in 2007. He wasn't that good of a coach and Rice didn't have that kind of money!

(03-14-2018 10:23 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I sometimes wonder what the last decade of football here at Rice would have looked like if we had ponied up and paid him to stay, and if he, not the last guy & Co. was the football coach at Rice for these ten years.

Not sure there's an athletics program, tbh. The general read from people in the know has been that Todd pulled a few things that you could get away with at Tulsa/elsewhere, but not here. (Remember the player who died on his watch.)

OwlNumbers (IIRC; sorry if I'm completely wrong on this) had some insights into this.

(03-14-2018 10:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:23 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I won't defend Todd Graham as a person, but as a football coach it is undeniable he has above-average talent. How much is a point of debate.
I sometimes wonder what the last decade of football here at Rice would have looked like if we had ponied up and paid him to stay, and if he, not the last guy & Co. was the football coach at Rice for these ten years.

Pretty sure Rice did try to pony up to keep Todd Graham. It was just that, unbeknownst to Rice, while he was literally negotiating a new contract with Rice, he was also negotiating a contract with Tulsa. Not sure that the Tulsa contract was substantially better than what Rice offered, but they didn't have the recruiting restrictions and likely had better facilities (hard to be too much worse than Rice in January 2007).

Reader's Digest version:
Maybe it's not exactly the way we think it is.
(you may skip to next post)

In-Depth version:

I understand your perspective on this, Big. Many share this view. I'm speculating here, so take it with a grain of salt to play Devil's advocate (an appropriate allusion, no?) But looking back at what happened both here at Rice and in College Football over the last decade, I wonder if instead of being a subject for soreness and self-pity on Rice's part, the Todd Graham situation as it presented itself and unfolded was really a lost opportunity to slingshot Rice back into a desirable and competitive job instead of tumble back to what we have more or less been for half-a-century: a retire in place job.

Let's look back and see:

Scenario A (the prevailing view):
1. Hat, a "name" coach we had hired was done, bottoming out the program at 1 win.
2. We found Todd and hired him to take Hat's place and settle into the "Rice Way."
3. Todd got lucky and won because of luck, not any special coaching talent he had.
4. Todd signed extension, but negotiated in bathroom stall at New Orleans Bowl instead of coaching bowl game vs Troy.
5. We tried to match, but cried foul at his negotiating tactics, as it's not the "Rice Way."
6. Todd leaves for Tulsa, we get a "better" coach in last guy & Co.
7. Rice is "happier" without a coach like Todd and many say so.
8. Rice proceeds to lose it's butt over the past decade and sinks further into obscurity that it had been when Todd started after Hat.

Scenario B (an alternative, missed opportunity view):
1. Hat, a "name" coach we had hired was done, bottoming out the program at 1 win.
2. We found Todd, who was an "up and comer" with regional connections that were relevant to Rice, fire in his belly and a willingness to disregard the "Rice way" in order to move the program into being a more normal D-I Head Coaching job (and to get himself paid more.)
3. Todd quickly evaluated what he had to work with here, adjusted quickly to the personnel, pushed his players to be better than they were the year before and won because of moxie. his own brand of leadership (which definitely rubbed many here the wrong way) and coaching acumen a bit of luck. He also went outside the traditional "Rice way" to make things happen immediately he thought the program needed, and he found a way to get them done: truck, stadium seats, pressure washing, (yes, yellow on the redesigned unis) etc... He appeared to have raised an above-normal for a Rice Head Coach portion of needed funds on his own.
4. Todd signed extension, but negotiated in bathroom stall at New Orleans Bowl distracting him from what should have been his primary duties of coaching bowl game vs Troy, and lost game.
5. Rice, in a real negotiating scenario for a hot coaching prospect for the first time in ages, tried to match, signed and announced Todd's raise, but cried foul at his ongoing negotiating tactics, as it's not the "Rice Way." Rice decides it will not use Todd's tactics an a much-needed excuse to catapult the program back into the big-time by re-raising the ante with an iron-clad higher offer to chase Tulsa off and, even if not successful in getting Todd to stay, keeping that significantly higher payout for a new head coach several tiers above what Rice traditionally was willing to go after. Rice would have never needed to actually sign Todd higher, but could have used the higher numb er and it's willingness to pay more as a way of stating "Rice is ready to play in the big-time of D-I and compete for decent talent across the board because that is the reality of the Head Coaching market in D-I today.

Yes, what Todd did wasn't kosher, but Rice needed (and still appears to need) something exceptional to happen to have an excuse to play the game the way it is not the way it wanted it to be and this was a perfect opportunity to "normalize" the Rice job and serve notice to all that it was changing and finally willing to play the game as the market dictated. Rice could blame Todd for the increased level of pay to satisfy the stubborn powers that be and have a valid scapegoat, while still transforming the program (thread title, after all.)

Rice could also jettison Todd later and eat the payment to further solidify its announcement that things were finally different on South Main after 40 years of descent into oblivion. Then Rice could move boldly forward without the self-imposed financial encumbrances of its past and finally "show them how its done" like it always claims it will. There'd be bite behind the bark for a change, and many would take notice and want to participate and cheer us on (and fill the stadium?)
6. Todd leaves for Tulsa, we get a significantly worse coach in last guy & Co. and get taken for a ride to oblivion believing his lies (about how great he and your team really was despite the many re-repeated on-field embarrassments) instead of Todd's. Difference being Todd's lies get you wins and elevate the program while costing you more, other guy's lies get you mostly losses, ridicule, and you still end up paying him and his buddies more than you were used to.
7. Rice is worse off without a coach like Todd and many say so; and may more stay away completely.
8. Rice proceeds to lose it's butt over the past decade and sinks further into obscurity that it had been when Todd started after Hat.
9. Rice hires Bloomgren. Jury is out: will he win and leave due to Rice not being willing to pay whatever necessary (significantly more than it ever has before?) Will he lose and be another guy & Co.? Will he be middling and not move the needle, but get paid a bit more each year and keep things more or less the way they've been for 50 years? Time will tell.

I want Rice to invest in a way that demonstrates to itself and the college sporting world that it is just as good as any other D-I program. I think that adds value to the Rice degree in the modern society we live in. I think it adds value to the school overall and gives alumns something to remain significantly and more regularly connected to the school than ANY other single achievement in today's modern world. I think those are good things to do far any university.

(03-14-2018 11:27 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 10:23 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I won't defend Todd Graham as a person, but as a football coach it is undeniable he has above-average talent. How much is a point of debate.
I sometimes wonder what the last decade of football here at Rice would have looked like if we had ponied up and paid him to stay, and if he, not the last guy & Co. was the football coach at Rice for these ten years.

Pretty sure Rice did try to pony up to keep Todd Graham. It was just that, unbeknownst to Rice, while he was literally negotiating a new contract with Rice, he was also negotiating a contract with Tulsa. Not sure that the Tulsa contract was substantially better than what Rice offered, but they didn't have the recruiting restrictions and likely had better facilities (hard to be too much worse than Rice in January 2007).

Reader's Digest version:
Maybe it's not exactly the way we think it is.
(you may skip to next post)

In-Depth version:

I understand your perspective on this, Big. Many share this view. I'm speculating here, so take it with a grain of salt to play Devil's advocate (an appropriate allusion, no?) But looking back at what happened both here at Rice and in College Football over the last decade, I wonder if instead of being a subject for soreness and self-pity on Rice's part, the Todd Graham situation as it presented itself and unfolded was really a lost opportunity to slingshot Rice back into a desirable and competitive job instead of tumble back to what we have more or less been for half-a-century: a retire in place job.

Let's look back and see:

Scenario A (the prevailing view):
1. Hat, a "name" coach we had hired was done, bottoming out the program at 1 win.
2. We found Todd and hired him to take Hat's place and settle into the "Rice Way."
3. Todd got lucky and won because of luck, not any special coaching talent he had.
4. Todd signed extension, but negotiated in bathroom stall at New Orleans Bowl instead of coaching bowl game vs Troy.
5. We tried to match, but cried foul at his negotiating tactics, as it's not the "Rice Way."
6. Todd leaves for Tulsa, we get a "better" coach in last guy & Co.
7. Rice is "happier" without a coach like Todd and many say so.
8. Rice proceeds to lose it's butt over the past decade and sinks further into obscurity that it had been when Todd started after Hat.

Scenario B (an alternative, missed opportunity view):
1. Hat, a "name" coach we had hired was done, bottoming out the program at 1 win.
2. We found Todd, who was an "up and comer" with regional connections that were relevant to Rice, fire in his belly and a willingness to disregard the "Rice way" in order to move the program into being a more normal D-I Head Coaching job (and to get himself paid more.)
3. Todd quickly evaluated what he had to work with here, adjusted quickly to the personnel, pushed his players to be better than they were the year before and won because of moxie. his own brand of leadership (which definitely rubbed many here the wrong way) and coaching acumen a bit of luck. He also went outside the traditional "Rice way" to make things happen immediately he thought the program needed, and he found a way to get them done: truck, stadium seats, pressure washing, (yes, yellow on the redesigned unis) etc... He appeared to have raised an above-normal for a Rice Head Coach portion of needed funds on his own.
4. Todd signed extension, but negotiated in bathroom stall at New Orleans Bowl distracting him from what should have been his primary duties of coaching bowl game vs Troy, and lost game.
5. Rice, in a real negotiating scenario for a hot coaching prospect for the first time in ages, tried to match, signed and announced Todd's raise, but cried foul at his ongoing negotiating tactics, as it's not the "Rice Way." Rice decides it will not use Todd's tactics an a much-needed excuse to catapult the program back into the big-time by re-raising the ante with an iron-clad higher offer to chase Tulsa off and, even if not successful in getting Todd to stay, keeping that significantly higher payout for a new head coach several tiers above what Rice traditionally was willing to go after. Rice would have never needed to actually sign Todd higher, but could have used the higher numb er and it's willingness to pay more as a way of stating "Rice is ready to play in the big-time of D-I and compete for decent talent across the board because that is the reality of the Head Coaching market in D-I today.

Yes, what Todd did wasn't kosher, but Rice needed (and still appears to need) something exceptional to happen to have an excuse to play the game the way it is not the way it wanted it to be and this was a perfect opportunity to "normalize" the Rice job and serve notice to all that it was changing and finally willing to play the game as the market dictated. Rice could blame Todd for the increased level of pay to satisfy the stubborn powers that be and have a valid scapegoat, while still transforming the program (thread title, after all.)

Rice could also jettison Todd later and eat the payment to further solidify its announcement that things were finally different on South Main after 40 years of descent into oblivion. Then Rice could move boldly forward without the self-imposed financial encumbrances of its past and finally "show them how its done" like it always claims it will. There'd be bite behind the bark for a change, and many would take notice and want to participate and cheer us on (and fill the stadium?)
6. Todd leaves for Tulsa, we get a significantly worse coach in last guy & Co. and get taken for a ride to oblivion believing his lies (about how great he and your team really was despite the many re-repeated on-field embarrassments) instead of Todd's. Difference being Todd's lies get you wins and elevate the program while costing you more, other guy's lies get you mostly losses, ridicule, and you still end up paying him and his buddies more than you were used to.
7. Rice is worse off without a coach like Todd and many say so; and may more stay away completely.
8. Rice proceeds to lose it's butt over the past decade and sinks further into obscurity that it had been when Todd started after Hat.
9. Rice hires Bloomgren. Jury is out: will he win and leave due to Rice not being willing to pay whatever necessary (significantly more than it ever has before?) Will he lose and be another guy & Co.? Will he be middling and not move the needle, but get paid a bit more each year and keep things more or less the way they've been for 50 years? Time will tell.

I want Rice to invest in a way that demonstrates to itself and the college sporting world that it is just as good as any other D-I program. I think that adds value to the Rice degree in the modern society we live in. I think it adds value to the school overall and gives alumns something to remain significantly and more regularly connected to the school than ANY other single achievement in today's modern world. I think those are good things to do far any university.

I think what we have here is AB negative.

(03-14-2018 10:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  edit: I went back and read a few of the old chron articles and blog posts to refresh my memory. Rice did pony up and signed him to an extension on a Tuesday (while he was simultaneously negotiating with Tulsa), but he seems to have used that to get a better offer from Tulsa and left on Thursday. He got $1.1 million per season from Tulsa, which one of the articles says is twice what his Rice extension paid and that Rice would not match it once he told them. Putting aside Todd Graham's personality, I am thrilled that Rice did not pay him $1.1 million per season in 2007. He wasn't that good of a coach and Rice didn't have that kind of money!

Responding to your edit (thanks for your diligence, Big, but then, I consider you to be in the minority of 10% of lawyers that are actually good at their jobs.)

My original post on this subject stated I was speculating. Please keep that in mind. No one can ever know with metaphysical certitude (to borrow an old JM phrase) what would or would not have happened. That's what sports boards are for! :)

I stated several times I don't defend the man or necessarily his tactics (I believe anyone should honor a contract--even a marriage oral contract, though it seems perfectly Okay and acceptable (even encouraged) in our society to violate that agreement, which seems infinitely worse than breaking Todd's little football coaching contract, but I digress). I do think he was a much better coach than we got afterwards, and would have done much better. And, as I posted above, I do think Rice could have turned the tables around on him and used his slimy negotiating tactics to publicly propel the school's program into a significantly better and more universally desirable position, then cut him loose and accomplished something more than we did, and come out smelling like a rose. Rice does not seem to have been that willing to think outside the box when it comes to sports and negotiations. "Unconventional wisdom?" It's just a slogan, not a philosophy it appears.

To me, it isn't worth the time or effort to discuss Todd Graham at this late date, except to the extent it might inform future decision-making. What I take out of the situation is that: (1) Rice could have hired a better coach in 2005 after Hatfield left, as Todd Graham's personality obviously did not fool everyone; and (2) Rice could have hired a better coach than Todd Graham both for the money they ended up paying Bailiff in 2007 and for the money Graham received at Tulsa in 2007. I think Rice solves #1 by getting coaches that have shown some past commitment to education (Bloomgren). #2 is always hard because you never quite know how a first-time head coach will do, and plenty of head coaches who don't succeed in one place are able to grow and learn and improve during their careers (not every retread is a retread).

(03-14-2018 12:29 PM)mrbig Wrote:  To me, it isn't worth the time or effort to discuss Todd Graham at this late date, except to the extent it might inform future decision-making. What I take out of the situation is that: (1) Rice could have hired a better coach in 2005 after Hatfield left, as Todd Graham's personality obviously did not fool everyone; and (2) Rice could have hired a better coach than Todd Graham both for the money they ended up paying Bailiff in 2007 and for the money Graham received at Tulsa in 2007. I think Rice solves #1 by getting coaches that have shown some past commitment to education (Bloomgren). #2 is always hard because you never quite know how a first-time head coach will do, and plenty of head coaches who don't succeed in one place are able to grow and learn and improve during their careers (not every retread is a retread).

I think it is relevant because it does explain past decision making (and given the same people are pretty much around in the background) some potential future decision making.

Our decision making seems to oscillate. We get spurned and hire a safe choice, then our confidence climbs, we hire someone better. Then this person may leave, our confidence craters and we crawl back to some safe hire who will never abandon us. We are deathly afraid of failure (except by taking the safe choice, we actually fail harder).

Yeah, quite simply the fact that Tulsa (even smaller than Rice) was willing to pay $1.1M to anyone in 2007 when Rice was at $550K should have set off alarm bells that the competitive landscape around us was still shifting much faster and that we needed to respond with extreme urgency. Now, that wouldn't necessarily have entailed outbidding Tulsa for Graham or even immediately jumping all the way up to the $1.1M aisle to shop for the next coach as long as we recognized that we were going to have to dig *somewhat* deeper than we had been planning, and fast, and as long as the *expectations* for the program were raised to match (and ideally exceed) the evidently raised expectations of our competitors.

Instead, we just stayed in the $550K aisle and got a pretty unremarkable football coach, one who had one good year at SWTSU and then had failed to sustain that (a harbinger of things to come), and then both back-burnered the increase-resources urgency AND showed far too much patience with on-field results.

Todd Graham was on to bigger and better things no matter if we matched Tulsa's offer or not. He knew he didn't have any players coming back. He struck while the iron was hot and made his exit to Tulsa. He's an opportunist.

(03-14-2018 09:26 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Todd Graham was on to bigger and better things no matter if we matched Tulsa's offer or not. He knew he didn't have any players coming back. He struck while the iron was hot and made his exit to Tulsa. He's an opportunist.

Again, if he was SO SO SO BAD, and everyone hated him how did he go undefeated against Rice under Bailiff?

He is a dick. but lets not act like he was so bad that no one wanted to play for him. He didn't run a country club, thats for sure, but that evil opposite retained enough players at Tulsa and was good enough to beat the **** out of Rice every single time.

The Toad is clearly not an ideal case study for teaching an AD on how to reach for talent, that is for certain. The guy was/is a total flake, blowhard, & opportunist like you say and it is hard to find anyone who genuinely would have wanted to deal with his shtick for more than a few years even though he appears to be a decent CFB coach (apparently no one is willing after his ~5 stops, so now he gets to be a faceless assistant in the NFL if he is lucky).

The interesting part of the situation that can be used for a case study is solely on how the Rice admin reacted to the situation: how unprepared we were to deal with success of any kind on the field. We are used to kicking around retreads, operating a retirement home for older successful coaches, and letting coaches who maintain merely a figment of competitive parity stick around for perpetuity. Literally zero plan if the coach actually goes out there and kicks ass and overachieves. Additionally, Toad brought a nice hot fire to fundraising/business development that we haven't seen since. Why not? It is just a simple matter of effort. Bailiff was a good guy yada yada and the EZF got built on his watch, but you never really heard him riding people hard about how far behind we are/were as the Toad did. You need at least some component of aspiration for our HCs on the staff so that they can push the admin, alums, donors, students, athletes, etc. closer to the goals of competing on a P5 level.

(03-14-2018 09:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:26 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Todd Graham was on to bigger and better things no matter if we matched Tulsa's offer or not. He knew he didn't have any players coming back. He struck while the iron was hot and made his exit to Tulsa. He's an opportunist.

Again, if he was SO SO SO BAD, and everyone hated him how did he go undefeated against Rice under Bailiff?

He is a dick. but lets not act like he was so bad that no one wanted to play for him. He didn't run a country club, thats for sure, but that evil opposite retained enough players at Tulsa and was good enough to beat the **** out of Rice every single time.

Tulsa had just finished a nice stretch under Steve Kragthorpe. There was plenty of talent and size on those Tulsa teams that Graham inherited. For some reason, Rice had only 55 scholarship players for Bailiffs first camp. There was nothing left. I'm not surprised that Tulsa handled Rice the way it did.

(03-15-2018 12:24 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:26 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Todd Graham was on to bigger and better things no matter if we matched Tulsa's offer or not. He knew he didn't have any players coming back. He struck while the iron was hot and made his exit to Tulsa. He's an opportunist.

Again, if he was SO SO SO BAD, and everyone hated him how did he go undefeated against Rice under Bailiff?

He is a dick. but lets not act like he was so bad that no one wanted to play for him. He didn't run a country club, thats for sure, but that evil opposite retained enough players at Tulsa and was good enough to beat the **** out of Rice every single time.

Tulsa had just finished a nice stretch under Steve Kragthorpe. There was plenty of talent and size on those Tulsa teams that Graham inherited. For some reason, Rice had only 55 scholarship players for Bailiffs first camp. There was nothing left. I'm not surprised that Tulsa handled Rice the way it did.

Considering he was at Tulsa for 4 years, it is interesting that we attribute all his success to his predecessor. If he ran off all his players, wouldn't he have been in trouble in year 2?

Oh.. also that Todd Graham beat Tulsa in 2006 on the road when they were coming off that nice stretch. So basically Rice beat Tulsa with Graham. Rice got beat by Graham when he went to Tulsa..

Let's not let facts get in the way of the rah-rah narrative, shall we?

(03-15-2018 12:39 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 12:24 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:26 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Todd Graham was on to bigger and better things no matter if we matched Tulsa's offer or not. He knew he didn't have any players coming back. He struck while the iron was hot and made his exit to Tulsa. He's an opportunist.

Again, if he was SO SO SO BAD, and everyone hated him how did he go undefeated against Rice under Bailiff?

He is a dick. but lets not act like he was so bad that no one wanted to play for him. He didn't run a country club, thats for sure, but that evil opposite retained enough players at Tulsa and was good enough to beat the **** out of Rice every single time.

Tulsa had just finished a nice stretch under Steve Kragthorpe. There was plenty of talent and size on those Tulsa teams that Graham inherited. For some reason, Rice had only 55 scholarship players for Bailiffs first camp. There was nothing left. I'm not surprised that Tulsa handled Rice the way it did.

Considering he was at Tulsa for 4 years, it is interesting that we attribute all his success to his predecessor. If he ran off all his players, wouldn't he have been in trouble in year 2?

Oh.. also that Todd Graham beat Tulsa in 2006 on the road when they were coming off that nice stretch. So basically Rice beat Tulsa with Graham. Rice got beat by Graham when he went to Tulsa..

Let's not let facts get in the way of the rah-rah narrative, shall we?

I'm not arguing that he's a bad coach, and I can't explain why he ran so many players off at Rice and not Tulsa. Tulsa was the next logical step for him. He'd be going to a place that had good players and that pays coaches, while leaving behind a school with only 55 scholarship players and barely any returning talent. He rode the wave of success on to what he saw as a bigger and better opportunity. Interpret that any way you want

I am always amazed by how many people here still hero worship Toad.

(03-15-2018 12:24 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 09:26 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Todd Graham was on to bigger and better things no matter if we matched Tulsa's offer or not. He knew he didn't have any players coming back. He struck while the iron was hot and made his exit to Tulsa. He's an opportunist.

Again, if he was SO SO SO BAD, and everyone hated him how did he go undefeated against Rice under Bailiff?

He is a dick. but lets not act like he was so bad that no one wanted to play for him. He didn't run a country club, thats for sure, but that evil opposite retained enough players at Tulsa and was good enough to beat the **** out of Rice every single time.

Tulsa had just finished a nice stretch under Steve Kragthorpe. There was plenty of talent and size on those Tulsa teams that Graham inherited. For some reason, Rice had only 55 scholarship players for Bailiffs first camp. There was nothing left. I'm not surprised that Tulsa handled Rice the way it did.

Was the "55 scholarship players for Bailiff's first camp" ever substantiated? And are we sure that was the first FALL camp, after adding 20/25 scholarship freshmen?
That one has always struck me as BS

(03-15-2018 02:08 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I am always amazed by how many people here still hero worship Toad.

Another straw man attempt

Who hero worshipped him in this thread? We merely are adding facts to call bull**** on him being a horrible coach or that no one wanted to play for him - his years at Tulsa clearly invalidate those claims.

Todd Graham is a decent, slightly above average FBS coach.

David Bailiff is a slightly below average FBS coach (IMO).

Todd Graham is a below average person, even amongst his peers.

David Bailiff is an above average person, even when compared to the rest of the world.