(09-18-2016 02:43 AM)GoodOwl Wrote: The thing I'll find hard to stomach is that next week, this board will be filled with positive spins on Bailiff's postgame comments after that game that: 'See, we're improving...we've got a great football team after all, etc.. etc...' Look, I WANT Rice to improve.
Do I have this straight? You want us to win. You want us to improve. But you don't want anybody to mention it if we do?
We have nowhere to go but up. If we do go up, I would expect people to say something. if we don't, I still expect them to say something.
I have to disagree here. This can get worse, even while playing C-USA 3.0 teams. Just remember how Hatfield went from 4-7 (2002) to 5-7 (2003) to 3-8 (2004 - and they started that season 2-1) to 1-10 (2005). This can still fall off a cliff.
It WAS a cliff. We actually started 2004 at 3-2, so we proceeded to go 1-16. Heck, with the 3-2 start, combined with the 4-2 end to 2003 after Kyle Herm returned from an injury, we actually had completed a 7-4 run when the bottom dropped out.
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
Stop trying to use logic here. Ant is so convinced he's right that he's made himself willfully blind to anything that isn't a direct, scathing indictment of this team and coaching staff. That's why he's always reframing arguments so he can strawman them away or shouting down anyone that's not 100% in lockstep with his opinion.
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
Stop trying to use logic here. Ant is so convinced he's right that he's made himself willfully blind to anything that isn't a direct, scathing indictment of this team and coaching staff. That's why he's always reframing arguments so he can strawman them away or shouting down anyone that's not 100% in lockstep with his opinion.
Better just to ignore.
Suit yourself.
There are those who have been wrong about greenspan, Braun and Bailiff. Wrongness unchecked breeds failure.
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
Stop trying to use logic here. Ant is so convinced he's right that he's made himself willfully blind to anything that isn't a direct, scathing indictment of this team and coaching staff. That's why he's always reframing arguments so he can strawman them away or shouting down anyone that's not 100% in lockstep with his opinion.
Better just to ignore.
Suit yourself.
There are those who have been wrong about greenspan, Braun and Bailiff. Wrongness unchecked breeds failure.
and as we've established recently, you can't distinguish between who was 'wrong' about whom . . . . . . . .
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
I'm going to agree with your point here, Rick. The thing I think seems increasingly frustrating to some is that they feel the seemingly large-to-Rice positives you refer to are not equally viewed as so incredible to outsiders (and some on this board.) It can appear sometimes the molehills we climb become Everests touted to justify where we are and the slow rate things are going, when they move forward at all.
Two years ago, there was heated discussion about whether we were still moving upwards, on a plateau, or worse. All three viewpoints had at least some justification. Today, it increasingly appears we are no longer moving forward as far as on-field accomplishments (we definitely improved in the facilities/television appearance area after the Baylor game showed of the new EZF and a decent crowd on TV for a change--more work to do there, but real progress, which is good.) One thing I think many remember is that this was a year supposedly to be impacted by the Conference Championship in 2013, as far as improved recruiting and better results because of that. But we seem to be clearly be in regression, and picking up steam. We haven't looked very competitive in our losses, and it is painful to some to see that we are looking forward to playing an apparently as bad or worse North Texas so we can show improvement. There's optimism and then there's fools gold.
It seems the season will be played out with Coach Bailiff no matter what happens, and that just stinks. Reading commentary from RUOwls, Owl69 and others and the things they see could be done with these players and opponents is frustrating, because they appear to be able to see things the coaches can't or won't. Could someone like RUOwls or another coach teach these players better and get better performances/results? We are still denied the opportunity to find out in season 10. So we vent. Okay, we got over the speed bumps you referred to. Is that all?
Artist: U2
Album: October
Cut: "Is That All?"
12 October 1981 Island Records
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
Stop trying to use logic here. Ant is so convinced he's right that he's made himself willfully blind to anything that isn't a direct, scathing indictment of this team and coaching staff. That's why he's always reframing arguments so he can strawman them away or shouting down anyone that's not 100% in lockstep with his opinion.
Better just to ignore.
Suit yourself.
There are those who have been wrong about greenspan, Braun and Bailiff. Wrongness unchecked breeds failure.
You know, you might even be tolerable if you ever stopped acting like you're infallible, but I guess that's too much to ask.
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
Stop trying to use logic here. Ant is so convinced he's right that he's made himself willfully blind to anything that isn't a direct, scathing indictment of this team and coaching staff. That's why he's always reframing arguments so he can strawman them away or shouting down anyone that's not 100% in lockstep with his opinion.
Better just to ignore.
Suit yourself.
There are those who have been wrong about greenspan, Braun and Bailiff. Wrongness unchecked breeds failure.
You know, you might even be tolerable if you ever stopped acting like you're infallible, but I guess that's too much to ask.
Again, you don't win internet arguments by giving credence to your opponents' point of views.
(09-18-2016 08:03 PM)Antarius Wrote: This is entirely a construct of your mind. Empirically you are unable to provide any evidence to support the position. Rice is still aww-that's-cute when it comes to football and no, your beloved bowls haven't changed that.
So you disagree with the point I was actually making:
il.e. it still is a positive overall to the Rice brand outside of the people on the Parliament who claim it's meaningless splitting of hairs.
A heckuva lot better than the old acknowledgment that "Rice hasn't had a winning season in 29 years", or "Rice has not been to a bowl in over 40 years", or "Rice hasn't won an outright conference championship (when the best team wasn't on probation) in over 55 years)."
Stop trying to use logic here. Ant is so convinced he's right that he's made himself willfully blind to anything that isn't a direct, scathing indictment of this team and coaching staff. That's why he's always reframing arguments so he can strawman them away or shouting down anyone that's not 100% in lockstep with his opinion.
Better just to ignore.
Suit yourself.
There are those who have been wrong about greenspan, Braun and Bailiff. Wrongness unchecked breeds failure.
You know, you might even be tolerable if you ever stopped acting like you're infallible, but I guess that's too much to ask.
No it isn't. Ive made my support of several hires and coaches known and if I'm wrong, i'll admit it or if not, feel free to call me out. I'm certainly not infallible, just vocal.
That said, Rick brings up points that he cannot empirically justify to justify a position that I believe is wrong. And as a result, I push back.
That said, if you choose to ignore, that's certainly your prerogative.
