(11-27-2015 10:12 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 07:58 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't think anyone thinks it's easy. I haven't seen a single post from anyone suggesting that it's easy. If you have, I'd be really interested in seeing a link.

How about the post saying that anybody here could have done as well or better?

I think that's absolutely nuts if anybody actually said that.

(11-27-2015 08:12 AM)owl40 Wrote:  For Rice, just head scratcher that you have three DB's that are/were starting in the NFL this year plus a bunch of other guys that have made it to that level, others who were all conference, etc. over past few years but the D play is just been so poor (sans one year and even that I believe was around 50ish).
Now we are without any real NFL talent (maybe Lyons gets a FA look) and you are seeing what happens as Rice ranked #112 in FBS playing a schedule of poor offensive teams (7 of 11 Rice's games were against teams ranked below 75 in Total Offense). You look at top 25 of FBS for Total D and see schools like Georgia Southern, Air Force, Appy St., Cent. Mich, SD St., Utah St., etc. Top spots are hardly occupied with Alabama and other SEC schools. No reason why Rice can't play solid D. If DB manages to cling on for another year, he has to make a DC change and inject some energy, personality, and new schemes into action.

Transferring from another thread, I think it fits better in the context here.

Offense sells tickets, defense wins games, special teams win championships. At first I thought that would be DB's philosophy, given his background on the D side of the ball. I'm happy with that philosophy, but it is obviously not DB's. I don't know what his is, other than recruit better and hope to God it works. I think you can be a middle of the CUSA team with that approach. That's pretty much who we are. We've had 1 championship, 4 losing records and 3 winning records in the last 7 years (including this year, since we cannot get to a winning record this year). That's about as close as you can get to the middle.

But our defense under DB has never been good, our special teams rarely so, and nobody is going to buy a ticket to watch the meerkat.

(11-27-2015 08:59 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:20 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Rick,

I think it's very reasonable to expect that Bailiff can produce a repeat of 2012-2014. Why? Because he has already done that. I expect some sort of cyclic pattern, with good years looking like 2012-2014 and bad years looking like 2009-2011. Why? Because he has already done that. I really don't expect the EZF to make much difference. Why? Because that hasn't been the impact of similar facilities on comparable programs. I think Bailiff is perfectly capable of producing a mid-range CUSA football program. Why? Because that's what he has done and that's who we are today.

So here's my question for you. Are we happy to be a mid-range CUSA football program?

69, Rick-- yes, DB has had a one, single, multi-year upcycle (2nd half of 2012 - '14); however, it occurred following a 3-year down-cycle (which immediately followed a 10-win season in 2008). And those down years were far worse than the up years were good. More to the point, if we want to base this cycle theory on past precedent under DB, we would expect another year or two in the down cycle before we rebound; NOT a rebound next season (especially not with an inexperienced QB, and losing our two best offensive and defensive linemen).

Unless we're tying the up cycle to an uptick in recruiting from our winning seasons (bowl wins, conference championship), as opposed to recruiting following 2010-11.

Again, I'm OK with your opinions. You could be right in the long run. But you're mischaracterizing my theory.

(11-27-2015 10:36 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 10:12 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 07:58 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't think anyone thinks it's easy. I haven't seen a single post from anyone suggesting that it's easy. If you have, I'd be really interested in seeing a link.

How about the post saying that anybody here could have done as well or better?

I think that's absolutely nuts if anybody actually said that.

Someone actually said that, but in his defense, I don't think he actually thought about it much before he typed it. (i.e., the statement hasn't been repeated)

"Cycles" that include losing seasons - losing seasons! - against the dregs of FBS that now overpopulate our schedule aren't going to get us anywhere. We don't have *time* for that. Just being associated with CUSA is bad enough to be harmful to our health, but losing seasons will mire us in this toxic dump forever.

I could accept "troughs" of losing seasons if the peaks included wins against the Top 25. We have no reason, however, to hope for that level of accomplishment from the present staff.

I could also accept the occasional losing season if our schedules had anywhere near the sort of quality that Boise, Utah, Louisville, and TCU did when they were having their multiple double-digit-win, fortune-changing seasons. However, they do not. The world will not care at all if we average 7-8 wins a year, with one losing season every four, against schools they've never heard of.

I'm sorry but at some point, if your supposedly rational, objective analysis keeps leading you to conclude that we can't do much better than this, and you don't think a change in course of *some* sort is warranted - be it in coaching, scheduling, spending, or even better, all three - then the "complacent" label fits.

(11-27-2015 10:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:12 AM)owl40 Wrote:  For Rice, just head scratcher that you have three DB's that are/were starting in the NFL this year plus a bunch of other guys that have made it to that level, others who were all conference, etc. over past few years but the D play is just been so poor (sans one year and even that I believe was around 50ish).
Now we are without any real NFL talent (maybe Lyons gets a FA look) and you are seeing what happens as Rice ranked #112 in FBS playing a schedule of poor offensive teams (7 of 11 Rice's games were against teams ranked below 75 in Total Offense). You look at top 25 of FBS for Total D and see schools like Georgia Southern, Air Force, Appy St., Cent. Mich, SD St., Utah St., etc. Top spots are hardly occupied with Alabama and other SEC schools. No reason why Rice can't play solid D. If DB manages to cling on for another year, he has to make a DC change and inject some energy, personality, and new schemes into action.

Transferring from another thread, I think it fits better in the context here.

Offense sells tickets, defense wins games, special teams win championships. At first I thought that would be DB's philosophy, given his background on the D side of the ball. I'm happy with that philosophy, but it is obviously not DB's. I don't know what his is, other than recruit better and hope to God it works. I think you can be a middle of the CUSA team with that approach. That's pretty much who we are. We've had 1 championship, 4 losing records and 3 winning records in the last 7 years (including this year, since we cannot get to a winning record this year). That's about as close as you can get to the middle.

But our defense under DB has never been good, our special teams rarely so, and nobody is going to buy a ticket to watch the meerkat.

Thanks for moving my comments. I was wrong to post them on the Callahan thread. Not fair to Bryce and the success he is having. Apologies for that.

It is weird dynamic. On the left-hand, it is a great to watch Rice guys succeed at the next level. So proud of them understanding the obstacles they have faced to get there.

Then five-seconds later I can't help shifting my thinking to thoughts like 'if so many of these guys can play at this level (and start) and make plays, then why can't Rice be competitive (esp on D)'?

(11-27-2015 05:17 PM)owl40 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 10:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:12 AM)owl40 Wrote:  For Rice, just head scratcher that you have three DB's that are/were starting in the NFL this year plus a bunch of other guys that have made it to that level, others who were all conference, etc. over past few years but the D play is just been so poor (sans one year and even that I believe was around 50ish).
Now we are without any real NFL talent (maybe Lyons gets a FA look) and you are seeing what happens as Rice ranked #112 in FBS playing a schedule of poor offensive teams (7 of 11 Rice's games were against teams ranked below 75 in Total Offense). You look at top 25 of FBS for Total D and see schools like Georgia Southern, Air Force, Appy St., Cent. Mich, SD St., Utah St., etc. Top spots are hardly occupied with Alabama and other SEC schools. No reason why Rice can't play solid D. If DB manages to cling on for another year, he has to make a DC change and inject some energy, personality, and new schemes into action.

Transferring from another thread, I think it fits better in the context here.

Offense sells tickets, defense wins games, special teams win championships. At first I thought that would be DB's philosophy, given his background on the D side of the ball. I'm happy with that philosophy, but it is obviously not DB's. I don't know what his is, other than recruit better and hope to God it works. I think you can be a middle of the CUSA team with that approach. That's pretty much who we are. We've had 1 championship, 4 losing records and 3 winning records in the last 7 years (including this year, since we cannot get to a winning record this year). That's about as close as you can get to the middle.

But our defense under DB has never been good, our special teams rarely so, and nobody is going to buy a ticket to watch the meerkat.

Thanks for moving my comments. I was wrong to post them on the Callahan thread. Not fair to Bryce and the success he is having. Apologies for that.

It is weird dynamic. On the left-hand, it is a great to watch Rice guys succeed at the next level. So proud of them understanding the obstacles they have faced to get there.

Then five-seconds later I can't help shifting my thinking to thoughts like 'if so many of these guys can play at this level (and start) and make plays, then why can't Rice be competitive (esp on D)'?

Easy answer-- poor scheming, poor game planning and poor preparation.

(11-27-2015 05:19 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 05:17 PM)owl40 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 10:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:12 AM)owl40 Wrote:  For Rice, just head scratcher that you have three DB's that are/were starting in the NFL this year plus a bunch of other guys that have made it to that level, others who were all conference, etc. over past few years but the D play is just been so poor (sans one year and even that I believe was around 50ish).
Now we are without any real NFL talent (maybe Lyons gets a FA look) and you are seeing what happens as Rice ranked #112 in FBS playing a schedule of poor offensive teams (7 of 11 Rice's games were against teams ranked below 75 in Total Offense). You look at top 25 of FBS for Total D and see schools like Georgia Southern, Air Force, Appy St., Cent. Mich, SD St., Utah St., etc. Top spots are hardly occupied with Alabama and other SEC schools. No reason why Rice can't play solid D. If DB manages to cling on for another year, he has to make a DC change and inject some energy, personality, and new schemes into action.

Transferring from another thread, I think it fits better in the context here.

Offense sells tickets, defense wins games, special teams win championships. At first I thought that would be DB's philosophy, given his background on the D side of the ball. I'm happy with that philosophy, but it is obviously not DB's. I don't know what his is, other than recruit better and hope to God it works. I think you can be a middle of the CUSA team with that approach. That's pretty much who we are. We've had 1 championship, 4 losing records and 3 winning records in the last 7 years (including this year, since we cannot get to a winning record this year). That's about as close as you can get to the middle.

But our defense under DB has never been good, our special teams rarely so, and nobody is going to buy a ticket to watch the meerkat.

Thanks for moving my comments. I was wrong to post them on the Callahan thread. Not fair to Bryce and the success he is having. Apologies for that.

It is weird dynamic. On the left-hand, it is a great to watch Rice guys succeed at the next level. So proud of them understanding the obstacles they have faced to get there.

Then five-seconds later I can't help shifting my thinking to thoughts like 'if so many of these guys can play at this level (and start) and make plays, then why can't Rice be competitive (esp on D)'?

Easy answer-- poor scheming, poor game planning and poor preparation.

Maybe. Or maybe it takes more than just 1 or 2 players to make a defense very good. The best defense Rice has had under Bailiff was probably the 2013 defense, and that had a senior Gaines, junior Callahan, and sophomore Covington. But it also had positions that could be exploited, and no amount of scheming can completely cover that up.

The 3 best defenses under Bailiff are probably 2011, 2008 and 2013 (according to Football Outsiders S&P+ ratings). All 3 were top 80 defenses per that metric, with only 2013 being a top half defense (with a rating at 52nd). Who were the NFL players on those teams?

2008 - junior Sendejo, sophomore Solomon
2011 - senior Solomon, junior Gaines (awarded injury redshirt for this injury-shortened season), freshman Callahan
2013 - senior Gaines, junior Callahan, sophomore Covington

Those are the defenders that are currently in the NFL, and usually when led by NFL talent with experience from playing.

You would think that in 2009 and 2012, with more experience for players from the previous year, they could still do better. But the fact that they didn't shows some depth problems. The players were still good. But they're only 2 of many that are necessary to have even a decent defense.

This is not to say that there have been consistently good defenses here. They haven't, and for a HC with a defensive background, it's frustrating. But when there are experienced defensive players who had an NFL-quality ceiling, the defense does get better. But not Top 25 quality.

This doesn't speak well to the current defense, though. It should have been better than it is if we expect it to get back to even those top 80 levels anytime soon. In looking through the same metrics, there hasn't been a defense as bad as the 2015 version. Not even the 2007 one (which was actually nominally better than the 2009 on, which was the worse one to date.)

In addition to all guys mentioned above, we have had plenty of other solid D-1 players (e.g. Bradshaw, Cheta, Raines, Nwosu, Bauer, Nordstrom, Jared Williams, Porras, etc.) over-the-years. Not necessarily NFL talent but plenty of talent for the C-USA schedule that was being played against. We are seeing this year the impact of losing so many older guys as newer guys are just that...new. Make a play, miss a play, make a play, miss a play.. Bottom line..need some changes to D schemes and energy and attitude. Even when current young guys get more experience, the expectation should not be better than any of the stats/teams referenced above. IMO the D has consistently underachieved relative to the talent on-the-field.

(11-27-2015 06:25 PM)owl40 Wrote:  In addition to all guys mentioned above, we have had plenty of other solid D-1 players (e.g. Bradshaw, Cheta, Raines, Nwosu, Bauer, Nordstrom, Jared Williams, Porras, etc.) over-the-years. Not necessarily NFL talent but plenty of talent for the C-USA schedule that was being played against. We are seeing this year the impact of losing so many older guys as newer guys are just that...new. Make a play, miss a play, make a play, miss a play.. Bottom line..need some changes to D schemes and energy and attitude. Even when current young guys get more experience, the expectation should not be better than any of the stats/teams referenced above. IMO the D has consistently underachieved relative to the talent on-the-field.

Bingo, and that's on the coaching!

(11-27-2015 05:17 PM)owl40 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 10:48 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-27-2015 08:12 AM)owl40 Wrote:  For Rice, just head scratcher that you have three DB's that are/were starting in the NFL this year plus a bunch of other guys that have made it to that level, others who were all conference, etc. over past few years but the D play is just been so poor (sans one year and even that I believe was around 50ish).
Now we are without any real NFL talent (maybe Lyons gets a FA look) and you are seeing what happens as Rice ranked #112 in FBS playing a schedule of poor offensive teams (7 of 11 Rice's games were against teams ranked below 75 in Total Offense). You look at top 25 of FBS for Total D and see schools like Georgia Southern, Air Force, Appy St., Cent. Mich, SD St., Utah St., etc. Top spots are hardly occupied with Alabama and other SEC schools. No reason why Rice can't play solid D. If DB manages to cling on for another year, he has to make a DC change and inject some energy, personality, and new schemes into action.

Transferring from another thread, I think it fits better in the context here.
Offense sells tickets, defense wins games, special teams win championships. At first I thought that would be DB's philosophy, given his background on the D side of the ball. I'm happy with that philosophy, but it is obviously not DB's. I don't know what his is, other than recruit better and hope to God it works. I think you can be a middle of the CUSA team with that approach. That's pretty much who we are. We've had 1 championship, 4 losing records and 3 winning records in the last 7 years (including this year, since we cannot get to a winning record this year). That's about as close as you can get to the middle.
But our defense under DB has never been good, our special teams rarely so, and nobody is going to buy a ticket to watch the meerkat.

Thanks for moving my comments. I was wrong to post them on the Callahan thread. Not fair to Bryce and the success he is having. Apologies for that.
It is weird dynamic. On the left-hand, it is a great to watch Rice guys succeed at the next level. So proud of them understanding the obstacles they have faced to get there.
Then five-seconds later I can't help shifting my thinking to thoughts like 'if so many of these guys can play at this level (and start) and make plays, then why can't Rice be competitive (esp on D)'?

It seems that everything about DB is some sort of weird one step forward, two steps backward progression. I think one factor is that our staff seems to do a good job of developing individual skills--hence the number of players in the NFL--but a poor job with team skills. Several years back, I described it several times as a good job of teaching football playing skills, but a poor job of teaching game-winning skills. I think that still holds.

I think our team performance under DB has always been less than the sum of our individual abilities. To take a step above the middle of CUSA, our team has to be greater than the sum of its parts, not less. I don't see, "Recruit better and pray to God that it works," as a way to get there.