(09-17-2015 01:54 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The biggest difference between marketing at UH and Rice is that they talk about a lot of things that don't pan out, or at least don't pan out the way they said they would... while we tend to wait until the ink is dry to talk about them.

Case-in-point, I've seen numerous renditions of augmentations to various UH athletics facilities over the last decade or so, only a few of which actually came to fruition, and the funding was 'questionable'... and while Greenspan seems to have tried to mimic that with the 'south complex' that never came about, it had previously AND SINCE been our penchant not to announce things until they were essentially funded and ready to break ground.

UH can talk about not scheduling FCS programs as if it is important, but to be honest, p5 programs don't seem to have much trouble doing so themselves.... and given our recent and future schedule including USC, UCLA, Purdue, Kansas, A&M, Miss State, Texas, Tech, Baylor, Notre Dame etc... as MA points out, we could have essentially argued the same thing.

I'll harken back to what i have repeatedly said, and apologize for doing so...

The issue for p5 is revenue.... and that is really it. I include 'buts in the seats' or 'eyes on TV' as revenue.

If UH's marketing puts more casual fans in the seats, that is great... but they have to be there to see UH, or at the very least, a rivalry game... and not merely to see their (already p5) opponent. UT and A&M, so vicariously the Big12 and SEC have already decided that they don't really need either of us to reach the Houston market.

Anybody that would like and watch UH simply because they are good will already like Alabama or Baylor or UT or A&M for the same reasons. That doesn't mean that they still won't get the nod over us for their enrollment or Boise for their location, but I suspect that the p5 knows that Rice (or UH) would be better in p5 than we are in CUSA, and Alabama would be worse in g5 than in the SEC.... meaning they can 'get there' quality-wise either way... and that the questions are 1) will they simply take the money and run as we did in the SWC and 2) whether they expand or dilute the pie when they join.

I still believe (jmho) that outside of their own alums, UH dilutes the pie, at least as far as the Big12 and SEC go. The people in Houston that root for UH only if they are good are already rooting for Alabama or Baylor or UT or A&M or TCU for the same reasons. Rice and our academic reputation gives people a reason OTHER than 'because we are good' to root for us... and those people wouldn't necessarily root for Alabama or A&M.

Currently, we're just not good enough for them to bother with.

Here would be the question. If UH and Rice were both top 25 with some consistency, which game vs a team like Alabama would bring more 'casual' fans? UH will of course argue UH, but I'm not so sure. I think if we marketed it as the 1980's Notre Dame - Miami game was (not quite so obvious as convicts vs Catholics but still as david/goliath with an actual solid chance to win) I think we might do exceptionally well. I think there is a 'different' fan who wants to see the smart kids win which 'expands' the pie

Off the top of my head, UH really hasn't announced anything that hasn't panned out since the aughts. They announced a new stadium (complete), a new bball practice facility (complete in Novemberish 2015), Baseball upgrades (complete), Hofheinz renovations (funded, starting in 2016), a football practice facility (new announcement, construction to start after completion of basketball renovations), and a new baseball facility that I don't know much about yet. So, I'm not really sure what facilities you are talking about that were announced and not funded and never started. However we don't need to get into sources of funding here because that is a completely other long conversation, and thats been brought up here recently.

Also, UH isn't focused on putting casual fans in seats at the moment. They really want alumni and students at the game. The students showed up (7k of them) at the first game. There is a thread from late July/Early August on this board making fun of the UH AD for calling out the alumni to come to games because such a low % of them care. If there are any casual UH fans who root for them just because they are good, they are the same people who would probably also root for Rice if Rice was good. (They probably also root for the Cowboys, Lakers, and Yankees and are horrible people). I get that there are some people that root for Rice because of it's academic reputation, but that's a double edged sword because I know people who feel like that also makes Rice stuck up and that they shouldn't be good at athletics despite the fact that there are many public schools plus Stanford and Duke who are good at both.

I think the answer to your questions are 1) they would not take the money and run. I don't think I need to remind you of the thread here questioning the dollars UH is putting into athletics from various sources. It's been made a clear priority. 2) Probably it would dilute the pie, just as Rice would, at least for the immediate future because Houston is major city for LSU, UT, ATM, etc. and UH can barely sellout their stadium. So of course they aren't going to be bringing in more TV sets to make more money, unless they perform like TCU is now after they were to be added.

Finally, regarding your alternate universe where UH and Rice are both good. I actually would love to see Houston split like LA between the USC and UCLA folks. Now, that would be awesome. I would expect Rice to have fans better than USC because some of those folks are dirty just like their athletic department.

(09-17-2015 11:04 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 01:54 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The biggest difference between marketing at UH and Rice is that they talk about a lot of things that don't pan out, or at least don't pan out the way they said they would... while we tend to wait until the ink is dry to talk about them.

That is the difference in the methods, while I would argue that the biggest difference is the results. While Rice and UH have, in a lot of ways, played to a draw in recent history, the general perception is that UH is somewhat relevant, while Rice isn't. Sure, this may not get them into the Big XII, and no one is fawning over them like people did with TCU, but they have achieved some level of better brand perception than we have.

Part of that, IMO is attitude. they talk about no FCS and playing and beating P5 teams even if they aren't good. We are still arguing and patting ourselves on the back for beating Marshall, which while a good win, is stunningly irrelevant to anyone but us and them. At the same time our last AD is running around with his sandwich board comments.

Change is coming, we certainly have it with the new regime, but there is a fundamental attitude difference still. Methods are what they are, you agree with some and disagree with others, but there is a mentality and perception gap and UH is ahead.

Reputation wise, UH is still cashing in on the "signature" wins by Sumlin and co. Beating two top 25 teams in ECU and Tulsa in 2008, #5 Ok St at Ok St, Texas Tech at Robertson, and at Miss St. in 2009 really gave UH the perception as relevant leading up to the 13-1 campaign in 2011 where UH finished in the top 25. Losses to Tx St in 2012 and UTSA and Tulane last year prove that UH isn't the same under Sumlin, but Herman got a ring 8 months ago and has got people expecting him to be the next Briles/Sumlin caliber coach, and that's why I think there is a perception gap. I think Tom is turning around the program from where Levine was headed, but beating a Louisville team that is now 0-3, and who beat UH by less than a TD 2 years ago in a conference game with Bridgewater and DeVante Parker really doesn't mean as much as people think it does. They just have name recognition and a fancier conference patch on their uniform this year. Also, UH plays nobody this year. There isn't an opponent remaining that is not beatable. They may not win every game but there are probably 6-7 automatic W's and the rest are games that UH has at home against evenly matched teams. This is another reason that UH is publicly saying they are going to schedule differently. The schedule this year is garbage and no one is happy about it.

When I think about Rice's recent history, there are certainly a good amount of W's but it's mostly conference opponents that the non G5 fan would really care about. They played tough in some of their OOC games, but there really isn't that game that really made the city stand up and take notice. Now my personal opinion is that CDB has done a good job of getting talent at Rice, as proven by the alumni playing in the NFL. But sending good solid players (mostly on D) to the NFL and winning 7-8 games a year doesn't get people to take notice like winning a big game, being on Sportscenter. So at some point he needs to turn a corner and win a big game against a good P5 team (not Kansas). Houston won 8 games last year and attendance declined because 2 of the 4 losses were bad losses at home and the wins were nothing special.

Honestly, that's the only difference between the two teams, because it's certainly not that one is playing at a significantly higher level year in and year out or even that one is in a better conference than the other, although the AAC does have a marginally higher TV contract, that's still not on the order of a P5 deal.

I think I saw where UH and Oklahoma will play in the Houston Bowl next year. I hope one of our games in 2019 will be in the Texas Bowl. The Bowl gets tremendous publicity in Houston.

(09-17-2015 02:08 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 12:58 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  Buried in the story were two interesting points. The first was reference to talks between Rice and Houston to extend the Bayou Bucket series in 2020 and 2021. I guess that means it takes a break in 2019?

Rice has filled its 2019 non-conference schedule:

Home: Baylor, Texas A&M, Wake Forest

Road: Army

(09-18-2015 12:19 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  I think I saw where UH and Oklahoma will play in the Houston Bowl next year. I hope one of our games in 2019 will be in the Texas Bowl. The Bowl gets tremendous publicity in Houston.

(09-17-2015 02:08 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 12:58 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  Buried in the story were two interesting points. The first was reference to talks between Rice and Houston to extend the Bayou Bucket series in 2020 and 2021. I guess that means it takes a break in 2019?

Rice has filled its 2019 non-conference schedule:

Home: Baylor, Texas A&M, Wake Forest

Road: Army

Yes the AdvoCare Kickoff has Oklahoma vs Houston in 2016 and LSU vs BYU in 2017.

(09-18-2015 11:28 AM)sacoog06 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 11:04 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 01:54 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The biggest difference between marketing at UH and Rice is that they talk about a lot of things that don't pan out, or at least don't pan out the way they said they would... while we tend to wait until the ink is dry to talk about them.

That is the difference in the methods, while I would argue that the biggest difference is the results. While Rice and UH have, in a lot of ways, played to a draw in recent history, the general perception is that UH is somewhat relevant, while Rice isn't. Sure, this may not get them into the Big XII, and no one is fawning over them like people did with TCU, but they have achieved some level of better brand perception than we have.

Part of that, IMO is attitude. they talk about no FCS and playing and beating P5 teams even if they aren't good. We are still arguing and patting ourselves on the back for beating Marshall, which while a good win, is stunningly irrelevant to anyone but us and them. At the same time our last AD is running around with his sandwich board comments.

Change is coming, we certainly have it with the new regime, but there is a fundamental attitude difference still. Methods are what they are, you agree with some and disagree with others, but there is a mentality and perception gap and UH is ahead.

Reputation wise, UH is still cashing in on the "signature" wins by Sumlin and co. Beating two top 25 teams in ECU and Tulsa in 2008, #5 Ok St at Ok St, Texas Tech at Robertson, and at Miss St. in 2009 really gave UH the perception as relevant leading up to the 13-1 campaign in 2011 where UH finished in the top 25. Losses to Tx St in 2012 and UTSA and Tulane last year prove that UH isn't the same under Sumlin, but Herman got a ring 8 months ago and has got people expecting him to be the next Briles/Sumlin caliber coach, and that's why I think there is a perception gap. I think Tom is turning around the program from where Levine was headed, but beating a Louisville team that is now 0-3, and who beat UH by less than a TD 2 years ago in a conference game with Bridgewater and DeVante Parker really doesn't mean as much as people think it does. They just have name recognition and a fancier conference patch on their uniform this year. Also, UH plays nobody this year. There isn't an opponent remaining that is not beatable. They may not win every game but there are probably 6-7 automatic W's and the rest are games that UH has at home against evenly matched teams. This is another reason that UH is publicly saying they are going to schedule differently. The schedule this year is garbage and no one is happy about it.

When I think about Rice's recent history, there are certainly a good amount of W's but it's mostly conference opponents that the non G5 fan would really care about. They played tough in some of their OOC games, but there really isn't that game that really made the city stand up and take notice. Now my personal opinion is that CDB has done a good job of getting talent at Rice, as proven by the alumni playing in the NFL. But sending good solid players (mostly on D) to the NFL and winning 7-8 games a year doesn't get people to take notice like winning a big game, being on Sportscenter. So at some point he needs to turn a corner and win a big game against a good P5 team (not Kansas). Houston won 8 games last year and attendance declined because 2 of the 4 losses were bad losses at home and the wins were nothing special.

Honestly, that's the only difference between the two teams, because it's certainly not that one is playing at a significantly higher level year in and year out or even that one is in a better conference than the other, although the AAC does have a marginally higher TV contract, that's still not on the order of a P5 deal.

Exactly.

(09-18-2015 10:42 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 11:04 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Methods are what they are, you agree with some and disagree with others, but there is a mentality and perception gap and UH is ahead.

The sandwich board approach doesn't seem to bother UH. It seems to really bother us.

I don't get it. It seems to be effective, not sure why we pooh-pooh at it.

Of course they are ahead because they have beat top 25 teams in the past. We will continue to be crapped on until we get a signature win but everybody is in love with Bailiff and miss the big picture. We will continue to get no respect until there is a couching change. We had our chance against Texas and we blew it but this is nothing new with Bailiff. By the way Seagarins in USA Today ranks us in the low 90s still. Great progress since Bailiff has been here only 9 years.

(09-18-2015 12:31 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 10:42 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 11:04 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Methods are what they are, you agree with some and disagree with others, but there is a mentality and perception gap and UH is ahead.

The sandwich board approach doesn't seem to bother UH. It seems to really bother us.

I don't get it. It seems to be effective, not sure why we pooh-pooh at it.

Is it better to have an old couch or a group of armchair experts? Also at what point does he run out of cushion and we get tired of the performances?

At least our performances aren't reclining declining. Because if it was, he would be on the hot seat.

(09-18-2015 11:28 AM)sacoog06 Wrote:  Off the top of my head, UH really hasn't announced anything that hasn't panned out since the aughts.

I think I'm more referring to renderings that get dramatically changed, like our south facility becoming a north facility. Still, it has been a while for UH as you note... the aughts, lol. You don't have to do that when there are actually shovels on the ground, but it was part of the impetus to get you to the shovels. We've been discussing this issue for a few years now. We tried it under Greenspan and I think it actually hurt, rather than helped us get to the spending. It appears to have helped you get to it.

Nobody really heard much about Tudor or Patterson or Tennis or Track, certainly no drawings until they were essentially funded and ready to roll. Heck, even the rec center was a bit of a fait accompli

Quote:Also, UH isn't focused on putting casual fans in seats at the moment.

Understood. Us too. My point is that as members of a p5, that wouldn't be an issue for anyone I wouldn't think. p5's come with the fanfare and rivalries of the SWC, even if from distance. UH's biggest advantage over us is their internal size. We simply can't match it. The only way we can is by appealing to a different audience... like med center docs or engineers or foreigners who went to schools that didn't play college football... at least not 'big time' who connect with our academic mission. That may or may not make up the difference... but it's all we have. We aren't going to be 40,000 students, ever.

(09-18-2015 12:31 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 10:42 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The sandwich board approach doesn't seem to bother UH. It seems to really bother us.

I don't get it. It seems to be effective, not sure why we pooh-pooh at it.

When I responded to JK's fan survey earlier this summer, I made a point of asking for a swagger in Rice football, like we see at UH.

(09-18-2015 12:43 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  Of course they are ahead because they have beat top 25 teams in the past. We will continue to be crapped on until we get a signature win but everybody is in love with Bailiff and miss the big picture. We will continue to get no respect until there is a couching change. We had our chance against Texas and we blew it but this is nothing new with Bailiff. By the way Seagarins in USA Today ranks us in the low 90s still. Great progress since Bailiff has been here only 9 years.

sacoog06's posts have hammered home to me that UH fired a coach (Levine) who finished 8-5 with a bowl win over a P5 program, because that wasn't good enough.

Just let that sink in.

Shhhh...you're going to keep getting told your wrong for suggesting the Cougars are moving ahead of us. We're better than them at everything except lying, stealing, and cheating. Don't you ever ever think anything else.

(09-18-2015 12:43 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  Of course they are ahead because they have beat top 25 teams in the past. We will continue to be crapped on until we get a signature win but everybody is in love with Bailiff and miss the big picture. We will continue to get no respect until there is a couching change. We had our chance against Texas and we blew it but this is nothing new with Bailiff. By the way Seagarins in USA Today ranks us in the low 90s still. Great progress since Bailiff has been here only 9 years.

(09-18-2015 12:31 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 10:42 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 11:04 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Methods are what they are, you agree with some and disagree with others, but there is a mentality and perception gap and UH is ahead.

The sandwich board approach doesn't seem to bother UH. It seems to really bother us.

I don't get it. It seems to be effective, not sure why we pooh-pooh at it.

FTR, I did not start this thread with any intention of it turning into a discussion of Bailiff. I think we played to win on Saturday and just made too many mistakes. I think we will play to win again against Baylor. Fact is we do not have many P5 opportunities. It bothers me too that we haven't had a 'break though' victory against a known P5 but that does not IMO provide the only answer for why UH is beating us in the media.

(09-18-2015 12:31 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 10:42 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-17-2015 11:04 PM)Antarius Wrote:  Methods are what they are, you agree with some and disagree with others, but there is a mentality and perception gap and UH is ahead.

The sandwich board approach doesn't seem to bother UH. It seems to really bother us.

I don't get it. It seems to be effective, not sure why we pooh-pooh at it.

This could have two meanings.

I 'pooh pooh' anything that doesn't work, and it doesn't seem to work for us. It's an evaluation after the fact and I think that appropriate.

If you're asking why it doesn't work for us, I suspect because we are a smaller group and that these are people we know... or easily could know.... whereas UH with it's far larger student body and alumni base is less personal (in aggregate). I recall when Rupp? fairly publicly asked for 500mm to fund a bunch of buildings without much specificity, a lot of people were upset because I think they felt it was an obligation, not a goal.

(09-18-2015 12:54 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I think I'm more referring to renderings that get dramatically changed, like our south facility becoming a north facility. Still, it has been a while for UH as you note... the aughts, lol. You don't have to do that when there are actually shovels on the ground, but it was part of the impetus to get you to the shovels. We've been discussing this issue for a few years now. We tried it under Greenspan and I think it actually hurt, rather than helped us get to the spending. It appears to have helped you get to it.

Nobody really heard much about Tudor or Patterson or Tennis or Track, certainly no drawings until they were essentially funded and ready to roll. Heck, even the rec center was a bit of a fait accompli

Fair enough. I think it's well understood that UH has a problem with fundraising. Most would be jealous of being able to just announce a new facility with a shovel in the ground already.

Quote:Understood. Us too. My point is that as members of a p5, that wouldn't be an issue for anyone I wouldn't think. p5's come with the fanfare and rivalries of the SWC, even if from distance. UH's biggest advantage over us is their internal size. We simply can't match it. The only way we can is by appealing to a different audience... like med center docs or engineers or foreigners who went to schools that didn't play college football... at least not 'big time' who connect with our academic mission. That may or may not make up the difference... but it's all we have. We aren't going to be 40,000 students, ever.

You have a point, but I still think winning against marquee opponents is the only true successful marketing in CFB. I think the academic reputation will follow naturally, and probably appeal to some crowds more than others, as you mention, but people will only jomp on board if a team can show it has a chance. Not to mention, I think this city likes to root for an underdog. There aren't too many front running teams in this city. Also, if Rice is ever going to turn this corner, they need to be that team of smart scrappy players who make good decisions, few mistakes, and out-execute everyone. That's not news, but it plays into to the reputation that this school has. Boise has always been a team that plays that way, but if it were Rice, it would go twice as far because Boise is not an academic school.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a coach bashing fest. I think it's a tough spot that this program is in. They are having a good number of W's but they need to take the next step. However, if you decide to move on from a coach who gets decent results, there's always a potential you will do worse than what you had. It's kind of like being the 9th best team in a conference in the NBA, a couple of seasons in a row. Should you tweak what you have or blow it up?

Or, if on the flip side if you do get a better coach, you better have your short list of new hires up to date and in your back pocket. Rice is familiar with this from Todd Graham (not to touch on a sore subject). The UH message board has had all kinds of threads about Herman replacing Strong after this year, which is unlikely that UT would hire such an inexperienced HC, but when Baylor and ATM have poached your last 2 good coaches, the paranoia sets in.

(09-18-2015 01:10 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 12:43 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  Of course they are ahead because they have beat top 25 teams in the past. We will continue to be crapped on until we get a signature win but everybody is in love with Bailiff and miss the big picture. We will continue to get no respect until there is a couching change. We had our chance against Texas and we blew it but this is nothing new with Bailiff. By the way Seagarins in USA Today ranks us in the low 90s still. Great progress since Bailiff has been here only 9 years.

sacoog06's posts have hammered home to me that UH fired a coach (Levine) who finished 8-5 with a bowl win over a P5 program, because that wasn't good enough.

Just let that sink in.

UH fired Levine after a 7-5 season (he did not coach the bowl game against Pitt).

Levine was fire because expectations were incredibly high when he was hired, as UH had just finished 13-1 and been ranked in the Top 20. His three years at the helm showed that he was obviously a regression in the coaching line at UH, so it is not a surprise that he was fired after three years.

Comparing him to Bailiff, which you obviously are, is a bit hard because while Bailiff did inherit a program on the rise (with a very upward trajectory of going from 1-10 to 7-6!) it started at the bottom. Now we're here.

(09-17-2015 12:00 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  Once again UH has crushed us with local media/marketing. The press release yesterday and the Chronicle article today talking about them scheduling up and playing more P5 opponents as well as eliminating games against FCS school has gotten huge play and fits right into the narrative they are pushing that they should be P5. We can debate whether or not it is working for them or not, but I would argue that they have at least positioned themselves as one of the most-ready G5 programs if and when someone does get moved up. At some point, after years and years of them saying it and the local media repeating it, perception becomes reality.

The genius of this recent marketing ploy is that they generated a bunch of positive publicity on very little actual news. So they are going to stop playing FCS teams- great. Other than out of necessity this year (and PVAM next year which I don't understand) we have basically had this stance for 6-7 years. They also played up their future P5 opponents and said they are looking for a non-conference balance of 2 P5 games and 2 G5 games- which is exactly what we are striving for I believe. Our future schedule includes games versus Stanford, USC, Baylor, Wake Forest, and Boise State. I guess it's not our style, but we could have put out effectively the same message as they did, but we didn't and now there is another occasion where UH gets treated as the only college option in town- and certainly the only one with higher aspirations.

I know this does not bother some of you, but it appears to me that UH is winning or has won in the race to be Houston's college team. I know this is true for the Chronicle. I'm not in Houston so I don't know about sports talk radio. And before the inevitable response about UT and A&M (and LSU, etc) being Houston's college team- I know and I am talking about local teams only that are fighting for scarce print and air time. I do believe that will be a factor if there is another move to add a team from Houston to a P5 (admittedly a big "if" but not totally impossible)

Heading home but before leaving a peer at work mentioned how UH was all over the news/media in this town yet Rice is almost an afterthought. We debated on the topic and concluded that we have to go beat reputable ranked programs until then no one outside of Rice cares about our bowl games. He then mentioned that he heard Dan Le Batard on the radio and he bashed, he said it was ugly what he said about Rice football. It was in regard to UT firing Patterson and Strong being 1-1. He said it was on Tuesday or Wednesday. I will see if I can find the podcast.

(09-18-2015 03:52 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 01:10 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  sacoog06's posts have hammered home to me that UH fired a coach (Levine) who finished 8-5 with a bowl win over a P5 program, because that wasn't good enough.

Just let that sink in.

UH fired Levine after a 7-5 season (he did not coach the bowl game against Pitt).

Levine was fire because expectations were incredibly high when he was hired, as UH had just finished 13-1 and been ranked in the Top 20. His three years at the helm showed that he was obviously a regression in the coaching line at UH, so it is not a surprise that he was fired after three years.

Comparing him to Bailiff, which you obviously are, is a bit hard because while Bailiff did inherit a program on the rise (with a very upward trajectory of going from 1-10 to 7-6!) it started at the bottom. Now we're here.

Actually I was thinking about Rice 2015. Our program is also on the upswing (thanks to Bailiff), and JK and Bailiff set some expectations of competing for a conference championship, notching a signature win, and finishing with a Top 25 ranking. I'm hopeful the Texas loss motivates the team for a monstrous season from here out.

(09-18-2015 02:43 PM)sacoog06 Wrote:  Fair enough. I think it's well understood that UH has a problem with fundraising. Most would be jealous of being able to just announce a new facility with a shovel in the ground already.

That's our quandry. That's what we like to do, but you can get yourself in the paper more if you have half a dozen renderings that are part of the 'public' funding campaign as opposed to those half a dozen renderings taking place behind the scenes with the guy(s) writing the big checks.

Quote:You have a point, but I still think winning against marquee opponents is the only true successful marketing in CFB. I think the academic reputation will follow naturally, and probably appeal to some crowds more than others, as you mention, but people will only jomp on board if a team can show it has a chance. Not to mention, I think this city likes to root for an underdog. There aren't too many front running teams in this city. Also, if Rice is ever going to turn this corner, they need to be that team of smart scrappy players who make good decisions, few mistakes, and out-execute everyone. That's not news, but it plays into to the reputation that this school has. Boise has always been a team that plays that way, but if it were Rice, it would go twice as far because Boise is not an academic school.

Agree with this 100%. I only didn't mention 'winning' this time because I think we agree it's necessary, regardless of what else you do. I think you've hit on our marketing strategy... IF we do everything else right.

Quote:I didn't mean for this to turn into a coach bashing fest. I think it's a tough spot that this program is in. They are having a good number of W's but they need to take the next step. However, if you decide to move on from a coach who gets decent results, there's always a potential you will do worse than what you had. It's kind of like being the 9th best team in a conference in the NBA, a couple of seasons in a row. Should you tweak what you have or blow it up?

Or, if on the flip side if you do get a better coach, you better have your short list of new hires up to date and in your back pocket. Rice is familiar with this from Todd Graham (not to touch on a sore subject). The UH message board has had all kinds of threads about Herman replacing Strong after this year, which is unlikely that UT would hire such an inexperienced HC, but when Baylor and ATM have poached your last 2 good coaches, the paranoia sets in.

Oh believe me, we get it. This is an annual subject here, or at least has been for a decade or so now. There's a lot to like about Bailiff... and only one thing not to. He can obviously fix that, but of course the question then begs... suppose he does... will he STILL stay? If he doesn't, what do we do then?

UH is lock stock for atheltics and if you make fun of it or hate it, it does not matter to UH, we are all in!! We are going to be made fun of , hated, angered at, it makes no difference! Its going to HAPPEN!