Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

(11-30-2015 10:21 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

(11-30-2015 07:30 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 11:42 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 06:01 PM)baker-13 Wrote:  For ease of lookup, I'm adopting Massey's SOS here (not the Massey composite, the actual Massey ratings):

2015: 125th
2014: 79
2013: 87
2012: 105
2011: 63
2010: 93
2009: 84
2008: 87
2007: 114
2006: 78
2005: 73

So, this year's schedule is the weakest of the last decade, but not drastically so. If you want to go back to SWC SOS, more power to you, but I'm not sure how comparing now to 1988 (or 1958, for that matter) helps the conversation.

Running a simple linear regression on this, the trend is a drop of 1.8 SOS spots per year; however, the (r^2) value of this trend is ~0.11, suggesting that the trend here is very, very weak.

This analysis needs to look at a couple of items differently:
1. What is the quality of teams that we actually defeated in those years?
2. You need to pull out the OOC body bag games to get a clearer picture of our SoS, since those are considered 'preseason' games by the coaching staff. Having a very strong A&M team, Notre Dame, and Baylor over the last few seasons is making the SoS look better, but the reality is we played a few impossibly hard games and then had a long run against some of America's worst teams.

But did we have a long run against some of America's worst teams? This year we sure did, but what about the last few years? You're not really providing anything to back up your assertion except for your own gut feeling. It would make a much more compelling argument with some data on the ratings of the teams in CUSA that we have played the last few years.

The reason I ask is this year's SOS actually bears out that we player one of the worst schedules in the country for an FBS school. Even playing Baylor and a few other teams ranked in the Top 60 couldn't pull it out of the garbage. But last year's was almost 50 spots better when we only played an 8-5 Notre Dame and an 8-5 A&M. I can't imagine two games accounting for such a dramatic increase. But perhaps playing a team like Wagner this year accounted for such a drastic decrease.

Also, who we defeat has nothing to do with SOS, which was your original claim - that all we are doing is playing bad schools. We've been down this road, the last two years we haven't beaten anyone in the top 3 quantiles of FBS, while in 2012 and 2013 we did.

I would expect this to be the case, based on the additional point that the next-worst year was 2007, when we had Nicholls State on the schedule.

I'd guess that the low SOS in 2012 was primarily due to Memphis (little), Kansas (less), and Southern Miss (more).

(11-29-2015 07:32 PM)Minnewaska Owl Wrote:  Agreed. In fact, I see a lot of growing personal attacks in these Bailiff threads - especially from the anti-Bailiff crowd. I also feel we're to the point where a coaching change needs to be made, but I'm really turned off at the vitriol coming from many of the anti-Bailiff guys.

Trust me, you are not the only one. I'm not really sure some of them realize how off-putting and unhinged they've sounded. (Not all, of course.) I would have liked to see a change after this season, so it's not like I disagree with most of the substantive criticisms, but man, you'd think Bailiff goes around intentionally running over puppies.

I wonder whether people understand the value of something like this not only to the reputation of the school, but to the recruiting process itself. Parents are going to look at this and want their son to come to play football here. No, not a parent of a kid who holds scholarship offers from UT, and who thinks their kid has a shot at playing in the pros. But for the hundreds of other parents who do not have 4 and 5 star athletes and want their kids who have a good college football experience, this means a whole lot (and it means a lot more than a 7-5 season vs. a 5-7 season).

(11-30-2015 12:42 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(11-29-2015 07:32 PM)Minnewaska Owl Wrote:  Agreed. In fact, I see a lot of growing personal attacks in these Bailiff threads - especially from the anti-Bailiff crowd. I also feel we're to the point where a coaching change needs to be made, but I'm really turned off at the vitriol coming from many of the anti-Bailiff guys.

Trust me, you are not the only one. I'm not really sure some of them realize how off-putting and unhinged they've sounded. (Not all, of course.) I would have liked to see a change after this season, so it's not like I disagree with most of the substantive criticisms, but man, you'd think Bailiff goes around intentionally running over puppies.

I agree with both of the above - it is one thing to want a new coach and cite substantive reasons why, but too many of the posts are over the top. Suggesting that Bailiff played Bob as much as he did so he would be asked to speak at the post game press conference, knowing he would respond like this - I mean come on, that's more twisted than a lot of the who killed JFK theories.

Can't we just enjoy this for what it is - a player speaking from the heart about what his Rice experience has meant to him. It can only enhance the university's reputation.

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:21 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:21 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

(11-30-2015 02:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:21 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

I have always liked your 'no excuses' attitude, but this is just disrespectful. That video was more than 'feel-good fluff'. Give me 22 Luke Turners and I'll take my chances against anyone. That kid is a winner a great representative of Rice Football. You can't conjure those emotions, and it's hard to imagine them coming from just getting a scholarship to get a Rice degree. He loves playing football, and he just played his last game. Don't disrespect that.

We want to spend D1 money on being a D3 team. Absolutely baffling.

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:21 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

I have always liked your 'no excuses' attitude, but this is just disrespectful. That video was more than 'feel-good fluff'. Give me 22 Luke Turners and I'll take my chances against anyone. That kid is a winner a great representative of Rice Football. You can't conjure those emotions, and it's hard to imagine them coming from just getting a scholarship to get a Rice degree. He loves playing football, and he just played his last game. Don't disrespect that.

MA - I don't have anything but respect for Bob. My comment was directed to the article

What I challenged was the article that said Rice was never going to be able to challenge top teams and this makes it worth it.

Bob is commendable, but this does not excuse Bailff or our performances. It simply doesn't

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Antarius Wrote:  We want to spend D1 money on being a D3 team. Absolutely baffling.

Dude, even at Division 1, there is more than just winning.

A significant part of a coaches responsibility is developing players and molding young men. These aren't professional athletes and the athletic departments are not NFL front offices.

Winning is tantamount to having a successful D1 program, but so is doing it cleanly. See: SMU.

(11-30-2015 02:57 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Antarius Wrote:  We want to spend D1 money on being a D3 team. Absolutely baffling.

Dude, even at Division 1, there is more than just winning.

A significant part of a coaches responsibility is developing players and molding young men. These aren't professional athletes and the athletic departments are not NFL front offices.

Winning is tantamount to having a successful D1 program, but so is doing it cleanly. See: SMU.

Come on. No one has ever said we should go the SMU route.

Winning and graduating good young Men is not mutually exclusive. However if we decide that the latter is the focus and the former isn't crucial, that's what Div 3 is for.

It's nice that Bob feels that way about his coach. It's even better that he feels that way about Rice. At the same time, we pay 800 grand to Bailiff and he needs to do a whole lot more than what he has so far. Stanford does it - why can't we? Instead we look at videos like this as a justification for being bad at football as opposed to a ONE of the benefits of Rice football.

(11-30-2015 02:57 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

I have always liked your 'no excuses' attitude, but this is just disrespectful. That video was more than 'feel-good fluff'. Give me 22 Luke Turners and I'll take my chances against anyone. That kid is a winner a great representative of Rice Football. You can't conjure those emotions, and it's hard to imagine them coming from just getting a scholarship to get a Rice degree. He loves playing football, and he just played his last game. Don't disrespect that.

MA - I don't have anything but respect for Bob.

What I challenged was the article that said Rice was never going to be able to challenge top teams and this makes it worth it.

Bob is commendable, but this does not excuse Bailff or our performances. It simply doesn't

This I can agree with, and isn't what I got from your first few responses.

I too did not like that part of the article.

(11-30-2015 02:57 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

I have always liked your 'no excuses' attitude, but this is just disrespectful. That video was more than 'feel-good fluff'. Give me 22 Luke Turners and I'll take my chances against anyone. That kid is a winner a great representative of Rice Football. You can't conjure those emotions, and it's hard to imagine them coming from just getting a scholarship to get a Rice degree. He loves playing football, and he just played his last game. Don't disrespect that.

MA - I don't have anything but respect for Bob.

What I challenged was the article that said Rice was never going to be able to challenge top teams and this makes it worth it.

Bob is commendable, but this does not excuse Bailff or our performances. It simply doesn't

I wasn't saying anything about excusing poor performance, and I did not like the tone running through that article either that implied that Rice shouldn't really expect more than we've gotten the last several years. I'd just like to separate that point from Bob's comments. Nothing about what he said fit that narrative. I want guys on my team that get that emotional about the game.

(11-30-2015 02:59 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:57 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Antarius Wrote:  We want to spend D1 money on being a D3 team. Absolutely baffling.

Dude, even at Division 1, there is more than just winning.

A significant part of a coaches responsibility is developing players and molding young men. These aren't professional athletes and the athletic departments are not NFL front offices.

Winning is tantamount to having a successful D1 program, but so is doing it cleanly. See: SMU.

Come on. No one has ever said we should go the SMU route.

Winning and graduating good young Men is not mutually exclusive. However if we decide that the latter is the focus and the former isn't crucial, that's what Div 3 is for.

It's nice that Bob feels that way about his coach. It's even better that he feels that way about Rice. At the same time, we pay 800 grand to Bailiff and he needs to do a whole lot more than what he has so far. Stanford does it - why can't we? Instead we look at videos like this as a justification for being bad at football as opposed to a ONE of the benefits of Rice football.

I don't think any, or at least a lot, of people on this board feel this way. I don't think that running a clean program is a justification for losing, I just think we should also recognize that we are exceeding admirably at that part of the program's mission, and a number of comments on this thread seem to try and either minimize or trivialize that very important part of the mission.

(11-30-2015 03:03 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:57 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

I have always liked your 'no excuses' attitude, but this is just disrespectful. That video was more than 'feel-good fluff'. Give me 22 Luke Turners and I'll take my chances against anyone. That kid is a winner a great representative of Rice Football. You can't conjure those emotions, and it's hard to imagine them coming from just getting a scholarship to get a Rice degree. He loves playing football, and he just played his last game. Don't disrespect that.

MA - I don't have anything but respect for Bob.

What I challenged was the article that said Rice was never going to be able to challenge top teams and this makes it worth it.

Bob is commendable, but this does not excuse Bailff or our performances. It simply doesn't

This I can agree with, and isn't what I got from your first few responses.

I too did not like that part of the article.

Yeah. All I am saying is - the video is commendable. I respect that we have students who are students first and also athletes.

At the same time, this video cannot and should not be used as a justification or an excuse. And this article and several posts here are doing just that. Hence my argument that if this is where we want Rice Football to be and we want student athletes who graduate and are good citizens and we aren't concerned about winning, then Division 3 is an easier, cheaper and better option.

(11-30-2015 02:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 02:36 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:54 AM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(11-30-2015 10:21 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Not every player in in Bailiff's corner, but when comparing pros and cons, relations with players is a positive based on what I've seen and heard. James Casey is another example, there are many more. Nobody is saying it's enough to keep him around, but it's part of his strengths as a coach and receuiter. Herman and Beaty consider him a mentor, makes sense. Other coaches respect him. I think we knew all or most of this already. It's not the most important thing but it's important.

Take a look at the Facebook/ESPN/reddit comments to get an idea of what the non-parliament view on Bailiff is. I don't think he's going anywhere but hopefully we get some staff changes after this disappointing season.

http://www.houstonpress.com/news/rice-ow...sm-7963400

More perspective, and this from someone who was very critical of Bailiff over the year.

Perfect case for why we should be Division 3. At this stage, it's likely the best spot for Rice and everyone here.

That is, if feel good fluff and stuff is all we want. Kennedy must be turning in his grave.

What is "wining"? Is that what couches do? What atrocious grammar in this article.

Just another piece that patronizes Rice's football program - just pat us on the head whenever we have a lousy season, explaining it away with how we graduate students and have a very high character head coach who impacts young men's lives enough to make them have great outbursts of gratitude like this. Newsflash, John Royal: it's possible for college football programs to not ever finish as low as 100th in the nation AND have these exact feel-good moments as well.

You apparently know very little about D3 football.

(11-30-2015 02:55 PM)Antarius Wrote:  We want to spend D1 money on being a D3 team. Absolutely baffling.

Compare the $$$ we spend to the teams he says we won't compete with. You still think we spend D1 money?