Rice would have to do what UH is currently doing. It'll never do that. Period.

(05-23-2016 11:28 AM)Middle Ages Wrote:  Agree. Along with a firm commitment to spend a minimum amount of money on the program- up front as well as annually- to hit whatever threshold the conference needs.

And I would hammer home the positive attention angle. With Baylor's current reputation and the legal/PR issues OU and Texas have had in the not-too-distant past showing their institutional willingness to push the envelope on character- it would seem to me that a squeaky clean, top-20 academic school would be great for league PR. Again, assuming we met their commitment threshold and weren't a laughingstock competitively.

I am just sort of tired of saying the same old things. This discussion could be from 1991, 1996, 1999, 2005, and 2013.

As I said above- I have basically reached the conclusion that if anything was really going to change about our real level of commitment it already would have. Changing AD's and coaches is largely irrelevant unless we were somehow to catch lighting in a bottle like a Harbaugh or something, but even then my suspicion is that we would have short term success, he would leave for greener pastures, and we would go back to the relative level of the last 40 years. The change we need has to come from the president and BOT. It has to be significant, visible, and trumpeted via PR campaign. If the BOT continues waiting for "the athletic department to give them a plan they can approve (which would seem to include reducing or eliminating the deficit in an environment that makes that pretty much impossible), then they will preside over the demise of Rice in D1A.

Actions speak much louder than words. And our actions for 40 years have said the same thing- we don't really care all that much.

All of this. YES.

My question regarding significant, visible, etc. Suppose that a member of the BOT or the President of Rice has personally met with the president of Baylor, UT, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and TCU and that the AD has also met with say, the AD at UT, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Suppose each has outlined a plan for Rice's investment and support of D-1 athletics and for membership of a different conference.

Suppose that has happened and it hasn't been publicized. What would the reaction to those facts be?

To me, our situation relative to the rest of the football landscape has deteriorated so greatly, that a sense of urgency really doesn't matter anymore. Where once we could have potentially bridged the $ difference between us and the power conferences through institutional support and an "athletics moon shot", the exponential growth in TV and other revenues going to the P5 has assured that will never happen. The university already incurs a > $20M deficit with athletics to produce football and MBB programs near the bottom 10% competitively and in front of some of the smallest actual crowds in FBS/D1. No steward of the university and endowment is going to loosen the purse strings given the size of the $ gap with other schools, what little we have to show for the significant $ we do spend, and the far from certain returns on future expense. Particularly because it's not like we just need a little investment to tap into our potential. The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with. It will take huge investment just to build potential.

Even the hope that we could bring in a hot up-and-coming coach to galvanize such a movement, which has been a significant base of the criticism for our coaches over the last 15 years among some, has eroded. The finalists for the opening when Graham departed were pretty underwhelming, which is certainly understandable given the difficult circumstances with the job. That's only going to be worse for us now, when P5 assistant coaches make more than G5 head coaches, and when we're in a league with such negligible visibility.

The key to it is whether we could increase revenues more than we increase costs to upgrade. A P5 berth would bring in more TV revenue from the conference and increased attendance especially if from the SEC or Big 12 if we could get the invitation. But spending extra money would just increase the deficit if we stay in CUSA because the conference teams do not bring many fans to watch them in HRS ,there is almost no television money and it does not get good bowl berths anymore. Sam Houston is getting more publicity now than Rice because the pre-season football magazines are picking them to win the FCS championship this year.

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  To me, our situation relative to the rest of the football landscape has deteriorated so greatly, that a sense of urgency really doesn't matter anymore. Where once we could have potentially bridged the $ difference between us and the power conferences through institutional support and an "athletics moon shot", the exponential growth in TV and other revenues going to the P5 has assured that will never happen. The university already incurs a > $20M deficit with athletics to produce football and MBB programs near the bottom 10% competitively and in front of some of the smallest actual crowds in FBS/D1. No steward of the university and endowment is going to loosen the purse strings given the size of the $ gap with other schools, what little we have to show for the significant $ we do spend, and the far from certain returns on future expense. Particularly because it's not like we just need a little investment to tap into our potential. The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with. It will take huge investment just to build potential.

Even the hope that we could bring in a hot up-and-coming coach to galvanize such a movement, which has been a significant base of the criticism for our coaches over the last 15 years among some, has eroded. The finalists for the opening when Graham departed were pretty underwhelming, which is certainly understandable given the difficult circumstances with the job. That's only going to be worse for us now, when P5 assistant coaches make more than G5 head coaches, and when we're in a league with such negligible visibility.

(05-23-2016 01:39 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  My question regarding significant, visible, etc. Suppose that a member of the BOT or the President of Rice has personally met with the president of Baylor, UT, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and TCU and that the AD has also met with say, the AD at UT, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Suppose each has outlined a plan for Rice's investment and support of D-1 athletics and for membership of a different conference.

Suppose that has happened and it hasn't been publicized. What would the reaction to those facts be?

I would be ridiculously happy at how far we've come in the last 3 years. And I wouldn't care if it was being kept quiet because the publicity of trying to get in isn't what matters.

I believe some or all of that has actually happened. I don't know what the possibility of success might be but there are actions being taken.

If the SWC had held together, we could be in the same position that Vanderbilt does in the SWC. It is unlikely they would ever get the football championship but they can win championships in the other sports. Another possibility is that if we were better in the mid 1990s we would not have been left out of the Big 12. An even better possibility would have been that we could have probably got into the SEC in 1990 if we were willing to spend $50 million in facility improvements. We have foregone many times that amount in the last 25 years by not doing it.

Another pitch is that we are an American Association of Universities member as one of only about 60 top research universities.

(05-23-2016 09:49 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Does the fact that as power consolidates, so too does the probability of 'upset', especially given the meat-grinder that many schools must endure simply to win their division, much less their conference... throw in an OOC or made-for-tv rivalry and schools might actually VALUE what they might see as a 'week off'... especially if they didn't have to pay for it... work for us at all?

Let's be honest... if we had played our cards right in the old SWC (assuming the disconnect between the haves and have nots that exists today) we could have been undefeated out of conference and winning 1-3 conference games against schools in our conference rebuilding that year would have meant playing a school like 'Rice' in the Liberty Bowl or the Texas Bowl or any of these bowls that we now so covet. No, we probably wouldn't have any 10-3 seasons if we played it that way, but we'd have MILLIONS more to ensure that we had better basketball, baseball, soccer, tennis, track, swimming etc etc etc... and likely half a dozen more sports... thereby potentially changing the landscape of 'fandom' at Rice... AND if we chose to do so, we could hire the latest and greatest coach and maybe we DO get a 10-3, only this time 10-3 would mean top 25 and a prime bowl with millions of TV sets watching.

IOW, our pitch should be
a) we don't generally recruit the same athlete you do, thus we aren't as big a threat to the top programs as say UH would be.
b) (whether we'd like to admit this or not I think it's true) we aren't committed to winning at all costs like some other schools are, willing to sacrifice (at least in a small way) their mission... thus while we certainly would prefer not to be at the bottom of the conference in football, we aren't going to 'outspend' you to be at the top. Think of it like Hillary if she didn't have to spend money and effort defeating Bernie (or attracting his supporters) and could instead focus solely on beating Trump. We will be competitive with our salaries, but we aren't going to push the envelope like UH might (they're doing it right now)
c) because of the above, we not only don't threaten YOUR position, but while we may regularly beat top 50 teams, we aren't likely to be as much of a threat to your top 10 teams as say UH (if given equal access and resources to you).

we would bring positive attention, not a drain on RPI and certainly breadth of sports connections without being a regular threat to the top of the football pyramid.

That'd certainly be MY pitch

(05-23-2016 01:39 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  My question regarding significant, visible, etc. Suppose that a member of the BOT or the President of Rice has personally met with the president of Baylor, UT, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and TCU and that the AD has also met with say, the AD at UT, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Suppose each has outlined a plan for Rice's investment and support of D-1 athletics and for membership of a different conference.

Suppose that has happened and it hasn't been publicized. What would the reaction to those facts be?

I'd be thrilled to learn that. I think much of what's left of our fan base is looking for something positive or encouraging to grab onto. If it has happened, however, all parties involved have done a masterful job of keeping it quiet.

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

(05-23-2016 01:39 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  My question regarding significant, visible, etc. Suppose that a member of the BOT or the President of Rice has personally met with the president of Baylor, UT, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and TCU and that the AD has also met with say, the AD at UT, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Suppose each has outlined a plan for Rice's investment and support of D-1 athletics and for membership of a different conference.

Suppose that has happened and it hasn't been publicized. What would the reaction to those facts be?

(05-23-2016 02:09 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  I believe some or all of that has actually happened. I don't know what the possibility of success might be but there are actions being taken.

My reaction to those facts...

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Very true. When we played UT at reliant when I was on campus student tickets were very quick to go. And when we played A&M or UT on the road there was always a group about as large as a home student section that made the trips.

If HoustonOwl is right about these meetings I am thrilled. That's about all I could ask for with this round of realignment potentially about to happen.

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Pretty much every G5 program could honestly say the same thing (even without our history), and in addition have larger student bodies and alumni bases to boot.

(05-23-2016 02:33 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:39 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  My question regarding significant, visible, etc. Suppose that a member of the BOT or the President of Rice has personally met with the president of Baylor, UT, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and TCU and that the AD has also met with say, the AD at UT, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Suppose each has outlined a plan for Rice's investment and support of D-1 athletics and for membership of a different conference.

Suppose that has happened and it hasn't been publicized. What would the reaction to those facts be?

(05-23-2016 02:09 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  I believe some or all of that has actually happened. I don't know what the possibility of success might be but there are actions being taken.

My reaction to those facts...

(05-23-2016 02:37 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Pretty much every G5 program could honestly say the same thing (even without our history), and in addition have larger student bodies and alumni bases to boot.

Very few G5 programs sit in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country along with tens of thousands of fans of the schools listed.

(05-23-2016 02:43 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:37 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Pretty much every G5 program could honestly say the same thing (even without our history), and in addition have larger student bodies and alumni bases to boot.

Very few G5 programs sit in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country along with tens of thousands of fans of the schools listed.

Very few G5 programs used to be in a conference with all the schools that they would be playing again as well. Why does UCF or Uconn care about Texas Tech? Still think we are a huge long shot but I'm just glad we are apparently trying.

(05-23-2016 02:43 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:37 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Pretty much every G5 program could honestly say the same thing (even without our history), and in addition have larger student bodies and alumni bases to boot.

Very few G5 programs sit in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country along with tens of thousands of fans of the schools listed.

While you're right that we almost corner the marked on the size of our metro area, Tulane, UCF, Fresno St, FIU, UTSA, UNT, and UH immediately come to mind as G5 schools in/very near to large urban areas with large alumni bases for at least 1 major P-5 university.

(05-23-2016 02:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:43 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:37 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 01:44 PM)At Ease Wrote:  The size of our fan and alumni bases, our history of on field success, our lack of visibility in our own hometown (please let the #'s for our new CUSA TV deal dispel the 'we bring the Houston market' talk) -- none of these profile well compared to the schools we were once associated with.

Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Pretty much every G5 program could honestly say the same thing (even without our history), and in addition have larger student bodies and alumni bases to boot.

Very few G5 programs sit in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country along with tens of thousands of fans of the schools listed.

While you're right that we almost corner the marked on the size of our metro area, Tulane, UCF, Fresno St, FIU, UTSA, UNT, and UH immediately come to mind as G5 schools in/very near to large urban areas with large alumni bases for at least 1 major P-5 university.

My point is Houston has large alumni bases for several of the P5s I mentioned.

(05-23-2016 03:01 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:43 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:37 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(05-23-2016 02:21 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Lack of visibility, fan base, etc., is due in significant part to the fact no one cares about the teams we're playing. All of these "lacks" would increase dramatically if the Owls were playing some combination of UT, TCU, Baylor, OU, OSU, etc., at HRS each year. Even if the Rice fan base was greatly outnumbered by the opposing team's fan base at home games, IMO attendance and interest would still far exceed the current situation.

Pretty much every G5 program could honestly say the same thing (even without our history), and in addition have larger student bodies and alumni bases to boot.

Very few G5 programs sit in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country along with tens of thousands of fans of the schools listed.

While you're right that we almost corner the marked on the size of our metro area, Tulane, UCF, Fresno St, FIU, UTSA, UNT, and UH immediately come to mind as G5 schools in/very near to large urban areas with large alumni bases for at least 1 major P-5 university.

My point is Houston has large alumni bases for several of the P5s I mentioned.

So do UTSA, UNT, and UH. All three of those G-5s are in large metropolitan areas that have large alumni populations from Texas/Oklahoma schools.

I threw in a few other G5 schools that have non-Texas/Oklahoma heavy alumni to further demonstrate that our situation in this regard is not that unique.

I think the thing that makes us unique, with the exception of maybe Tulane, is that generally, we would not be able to recruit all of the players other schools in that conference could/would.

(05-23-2016 01:39 PM)Houston Owl Wrote:  My question regarding significant, visible, etc. Suppose that a member of the BOT or the President of Rice has personally met with the president of Baylor, UT, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and TCU and that the AD has also met with say, the AD at UT, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma. Suppose each has outlined a plan for Rice's investment and support of D-1 athletics and for membership of a different conference.

Suppose that has happened and it hasn't been publicized. What would the reaction to those facts be?

You mean be proactive with regards to realignment??? I doubt Leebron wouldn't even think of doing this.