(01-19-2016 04:46 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Again, in this conference with a senior QB and 9 years into a program, 5 wins is not a down year, it's a train wreck.

Tomato, tomato - and I certainly was not arguing that the 2015 results were not a down year, train wreck, abomination, etc.

However, had this down year come after three years of C-USA championships in a row and some big wins, we would either be having that kind of a year because of a new coach or we wouldn't be as angry about DB not being fired.

This down year was bad because of the context surrounding it - some of which you mentioned.

(01-19-2016 12:36 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Spending by the BOT is going to be an iterative process, if it comes at all. Build the EZF, see what that does, if it brings us along, then maybe invest a bit in the next step. That's actually pretty prudent, considering that the ROI for a lot of major programs is pretty dismal.

Would it be prudent for a doctor treating a patient with a massively bleeding wound to put in one stitch, see what that does, then maybe put in a second one?

I honestly would like to know at just what level of decline, both athletic and academic, the BOT might finally bestir themselves to declare that Rice's predicament might call for more than pussyfooting incremental measures. Your description of their strategy (if it can be called that) suggests that they are willing to abide this situation getting plenty worse than it is.

And yes, I realize that incremental pussyfooting is actually an improvement over previous administrations' records. Big deal.

(01-19-2016 04:00 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 03:10 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  I think at Rice they realize that there will always be "down" years. It's inevitable.

Why?

In this conference against this level of competition, a down year at worst should be 7-8 wins vs. 9-10 or more.

At Rice there are far more obstacles to athletics success, especially in football, than at any other university. We've listed them all before. Rice will never be a "reload" kind of football program. And CUSA may not be the most competitive conference in the nation, but it is filled with public schools who spend a lot of money on athletics and who can admit almost any athlete that graduates from high school. There's an enormous divide between what Rice can do and what it's competitors can do. That fact isn't lost among the people who run the university. I feel like the university did the right thing by David Bailiff. Overall, he has done a good job, and I can see why another university is interested in his services.

(01-19-2016 04:53 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 12:36 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Spending by the BOT is going to be an iterative process, if it comes at all. Build the EZF, see what that does, if it brings us along, then maybe invest a bit in the next step. That's actually pretty prudent, considering that the ROI for a lot of major programs is pretty dismal.

Would it be prudent for a doctor treating a patient with a massively bleeding wound to put in one stitch, see what that does, then maybe put in a second one?
I honestly would like to know at just what level of decline, both athletic and academic, the BOT might finally bestir themselves to declare that Rice's predicament might call for more than pussyfooting incremental measures. Your description of their strategy (if it can be called that) suggests that they are willing to abide this situation getting plenty worse than it is.
And yes, I realize that incremental pussyfooting is actually an improvement over previous administrations' records. Big deal.

The problem is demonstrating the ROI. Do they get a greater return by investing in athletics or spending elsewhere? That's how they make decisions. And how they should.

I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

(01-19-2016 05:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

I'm shocked that there still is an argument.

(01-19-2016 05:19 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

I'm shocked that there still is an argument.

I am not shocked. Bailiff has won 10 games twice and gone to 4 bowl games with mediocre (at best) institutional support and resources. If one doesn't look too closely at the details, doesn't have ambitions for Rice to make it back to the P-5, or is just so happy that Rice is no longer performing at the 1970's/1980's nadir, then one can make an argument that he is a perfectly acceptable coach for Rice. Obviously a bunch of us don't view Rice athletics or Rice football through those prisms. But I at least understand the point those folks make.

What baffles me were the people defending Bailiff in mid-2012. At that point, he had 1 good season surrounded by 4.5 bad seasons. That he had people in his corner at that point still mystifies me. That he was even retained after 2011 or after the UH/Memphis losses mystifies me. At least now he has something to hang his hat on.

(01-19-2016 06:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:19 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

I'm shocked that there still is an argument.

I am not shocked. Bailiff has won 10 games twice and gone to 4 bowl games with mediocre (at best) institutional support and resources. If one doesn't look too closely at the details, doesn't have ambitions for Rice to make it back to the P-5, or is just so happy that Rice is no longer performing at the 1970's/1980's nadir, then one can make an argument that he is a perfectly acceptable coach for Rice. Obviously a bunch of us don't view Rice athletics or Rice football through those prisms. But I at least understand the point those folks make.

What baffles me were the people defending Bailiff in mid-2012. At that point, he had 1 good season surrounded by 4.5 bad seasons. That he had people in his corner at that point still mystifies me. That he was even retained after 2011 or after the UH/Memphis losses mystifies me. At least now he has something to hang his hat on.

Hey Big, no empathy around here!

(01-19-2016 05:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

I try to please.

I do not think the 1970s/80s records are comparable to the present records. We were in the SWC then which was a top level conference and now we are in a second level conference. My fear is that if we do not improve we will be stuck forever in football Palookaville obscurity.

(01-19-2016 06:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:19 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

I'm shocked that there still is an argument.

I am not shocked. Bailiff has won 10 games twice and gone to 4 bowl games with mediocre (at best) institutional support and resources. If one doesn't look too closely at the details, doesn't have ambitions for Rice to make it back to the P-5, or is just so happy that Rice is no longer performing at the 1970's/1980's nadir, then one can make an argument that he is a perfectly acceptable coach for Rice. Obviously a bunch of us don't view Rice athletics or Rice football through those prisms. But I at least understand the point those folks make.

What baffles me were the people defending Bailiff in mid-2012. At that point, he had 1 good season surrounded by 4.5 bad seasons. That he had people in his corner at that point still mystifies me. That he was even retained after 2011 or after the UH/Memphis losses mystifies me. At least now he has something to hang his hat on.

(01-20-2016 05:40 PM)75src Wrote:  I do not think the 1970s/80s records are comparable to the present records. We were in the SWC then which was a top level conference and now we are in a second level conference. My fear is that if we do not improve we will be stuck forever in football Palookaville obscurity.

(01-19-2016 06:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:19 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(01-19-2016 05:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I'm just happy people are arguing about the same old stuff in a thread that is dedicated to it, rather than bringing it up in basketball or baseball threads!

I'm shocked that there still is an argument.

I am not shocked. Bailiff has won 10 games twice and gone to 4 bowl games with mediocre (at best) institutional support and resources. If one doesn't look too closely at the details, doesn't have ambitions for Rice to make it back to the P-5, or is just so happy that Rice is no longer performing at the 1970's/1980's nadir, then one can make an argument that he is a perfectly acceptable coach for Rice. Obviously a bunch of us don't view Rice athletics or Rice football through those prisms. But I at least understand the point those folks make.

What baffles me were the people defending Bailiff in mid-2012. At that point, he had 1 good season surrounded by 4.5 bad seasons. That he had people in his corner at that point still mystifies me. That he was even retained after 2011 or after the UH/Memphis losses mystifies me. At least now he has something to hang his hat on.

The SWC was a very good conference until the 80's arrived. At that point, UT'S program started nose diving, everyone but Rice was on probation, we lost Arkansas, and A&M became the conference flagship. The SWC was on life support during the last 15 year's of it's existence. It was hard to watch.

Saw the below description and thought of this thread:

Bruce Arians, Arizona: A
His team's NFC championship-game flop notwithstanding, Arians and GM Steve Keim have quickly made the Cardinals relevant.
Arians is a bold play-caller who thinks outside the box and that has factored greatly into Arizona's rise to NFC power.



from the following story in the chronic:

Grading the 2015 NFL head coaches

(02-05-2016 10:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:57 AM)WIowl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 08:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So, let's see here, we have 7 games against teams that failed to make the top 100 last year (per Massey), and we are debating whether we will finish 7-5, 6-6, or 5-7? What's wrong with that picture in year 10 of a coach's tenure?

Some posters are already saying that 7-5 is a significant/huge improvement over the year before.....

Set the bar low, this is what you get.

One poster. One.

Maybe David Bailiff will stop posting as "Afflicted" and just use his real name. Although the use of the term "afflicted" seems oddly appropriate when it comes to this coach in many ways.

(02-05-2016 11:46 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 10:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:57 AM)WIowl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 08:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So, let's see here, we have 7 games against teams that failed to make the top 100 last year (per Massey), and we are debating whether we will finish 7-5, 6-6, or 5-7? What's wrong with that picture in year 10 of a coach's tenure?

Some posters are already saying that 7-5 is a significant/huge improvement over the year before.....

Set the bar low, this is what you get.

One poster. One.

Maybe David Bailiff will stop posting as "Afflicted" and just use his real name. Although the use of the term "afflicted" seems oddly appropriate when it comes to this coach in many ways.

You finally cracked the case, GoodOwl! I can't hide it any longer! This has gone on for far too long! I am David Bailiff!

(02-05-2016 01:09 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 11:46 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 10:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:57 AM)WIowl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 08:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So, let's see here, we have 7 games against teams that failed to make the top 100 last year (per Massey), and we are debating whether we will finish 7-5, 6-6, or 5-7? What's wrong with that picture in year 10 of a coach's tenure?

Some posters are already saying that 7-5 is a significant/huge improvement over the year before.....

Set the bar low, this is what you get.

One poster. One.

Maybe David Bailiff will stop posting as "Afflicted" and just use his real name. Although the use of the term "afflicted" seems oddly appropriate when it comes to this coach in many ways.

You finally cracked the case, GoodOwl! I can't hide it any longer! This has gone on for far too long! I am David Bailiff!

I got a HUGE chuckle out of this. Made me laugh put loud. If only it was true!!

(02-05-2016 01:25 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 01:09 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 11:46 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 10:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 09:57 AM)WIowl Wrote:  Some posters are already saying that 7-5 is a significant/huge improvement over the year before.....

Set the bar low, this is what you get.

One poster. One.

Maybe David Bailiff will stop posting as "Afflicted" and just use his real name. Although the use of the term "afflicted" seems oddly appropriate when it comes to this coach in many ways.

You finally cracked the case, GoodOwl! I can't hide it any longer! This has gone on for far too long! I am David Bailiff!

I got a HUGE chuckle out of this. Made me laugh put loud. If only it was true!!

Why am I thinking of Spartacus?

(02-05-2016 02:07 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 01:25 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 01:09 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 11:46 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 10:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  One poster. One.

Maybe David Bailiff will stop posting as "Afflicted" and just use his real name. Although the use of the term "afflicted" seems oddly appropriate when it comes to this coach in many ways.

You finally cracked the case, GoodOwl! I can't hide it any longer! This has gone on for far too long! I am David Bailiff!

I got a HUGE chuckle out of this. Made me laugh put loud. If only it was true!!

Why am I thinking of Spartacus?

No, I am David Bailiff.

Maybe the homoerotic scene in Spartacus reminds you of the limp play Rice did last football season.

(02-05-2016 02:07 PM)JSA Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 01:25 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 01:09 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 11:46 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 10:36 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  One poster. One.

Maybe David Bailiff will stop posting as "Afflicted" and just use his real name. Although the use of the term "afflicted" seems oddly appropriate when it comes to this coach in many ways.

You finally cracked the case, GoodOwl! I can't hide it any longer! This has gone on for far too long! I am David Bailiff!

I got a HUGE chuckle out of this. Made me laugh put loud. If only it was true!!

Why am I thinking of Spartacus?