The Jimmy's and Joes sometimes overcome the Xs and Os. Recruits with stars have them for a reason. That being said, all of CUSA is same boat.

(09-24-2016 11:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think there is a lot that can be done with development.

here is some data.

1. We have more Owls in NFL today than at any time in history. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/schools/rice/

2. We have 7 established Owls in the NFL--Callahan, Gaines, Covington, Boswell, McDonald, Willson, Sendejo. I say established because I believe that barring injury each is 80%+ likely to have a job next year. Jordan Taylor is the 8th Owl but not yet established.

3. 7 of the 8 were recruited by Bailiff, and 5 of the 7 were drafted into the NFL

4. Those 7 were all on the roster and played in games for the 2012 season, which was 7-6. It ended nicely with a win over Air Force, but included some low points as well (e.g., being down three scores to both UCLA and La Tech before we crossed midfield, home loss to 5-7 Marshall, road loss to Memphis, nearly blowing a 28-10 lead at 2-10 Tulane.

5. From our G5 losses that year, La Tech had 5 guys eventually drafted, UH had 1, Memphis had 2, Tulsa had 0, and Marshall had 1.

6. From P5 academic schools, here are the draft totals for 2013-2015
Vandy-4; Stanford-11; Notre Dame-13; Northwestern--4

That is the data. What is the interpretation?

Well, you play with 22 (really 35-40) guys, not just your best 5. so this data doesn't speak to depth. But it would be difficult to assert that the G5 teams that beat us in 2012 had better rosters than we did. But if someone wants to make the case, it needs to be heard.

Our aspiration is to beat teams with superior talent, the way Navy regularly does. I think the record shows that Bailiff is more likely to lose to teams with inferior talent than to beat teams with superior talent.

Regarding player development, one could take this bulge of NFL players, most of whom didn't turn down UT or A&M or LSU, and say that Bailiff is coaching them up. And maybe he is, but if it doesn't translate into winning games, does it matter?

It certainly doesn't seem to have inspired a bunch of more highly regarded recruits to come to South Main on the basis of knowing they can make the NFL from Rice just as easily as from Northwestern or Stanford.

Rice is now 143 in Sagarin. 126 in Massey (third from the bottom and ahead of fellow CUSA teams FIU and Charlotte)

(09-25-2016 08:50 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 11:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think there is a lot that can be done with development.

here is some data.

1. We have more Owls in NFL today than at any time in history. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/schools/rice/

2. We have 7 established Owls in the NFL--Callahan, Gaines, Covington, Boswell, McDonald, Willson, Sendejo. I say established because I believe that barring injury each is 80%+ likely to have a job next year. Jordan Taylor is the 8th Owl but not yet established.

3. 7 of the 8 were recruited by Bailiff, and 5 of the 7 were drafted into the NFL

4. Those 7 were all on the roster and played in games for the 2012 season, which was 7-6. It ended nicely with a win over Air Force, but included some low points as well (e.g., being down three scores to both UCLA and La Tech before we crossed midfield, home loss to 5-7 Marshall, road loss to Memphis, nearly blowing a 28-10 lead at 2-10 Tulane.

5. From our G5 losses that year, La Tech had 5 guys eventually drafted, UH had 1, Memphis had 2, Tulsa had 0, and Marshall had 1.

6. From P5 academic schools, here are the draft totals for 2013-2015
Vandy-4; Stanford-11; Notre Dame-13; Northwestern--4

That is the data. What is the interpretation?

Well, you play with 22 (really 35-40) guys, not just your best 5. so this data doesn't speak to depth. But it would be difficult to assert that the G5 teams that beat us in 2012 had better rosters than we did. But if someone wants to make the case, it needs to be heard.

Our aspiration is to beat teams with superior talent, the way Navy regularly does. I think the record shows that Bailiff is more likely to lose to teams with inferior talent than to beat teams with superior talent.

Regarding player development, one could take this bulge of NFL players, most of whom didn't turn down UT or A&M or LSU, and say that Bailiff is coaching them up. And maybe he is, but if it doesn't translate into winning games, does it matter?

It certainly doesn't seem to have inspired a bunch of more highly regarded recruits to come to South Main on the basis of knowing they can make the NFL from Rice just as easily as from Northwestern or Stanford.

I think Rice has to commit one way or the other to D1 football. Rice needs a sustained cash input into the program that likely takes it further into the red before it goes into the black. You need 20,000 season ticket holders and a significant number donors into the program to legitimately compete at the higher levels when you don't get crazy TV $$$. Obviously Rice has the $$$ in its endowment to jump start CPR if it chooses. It appears as an outsider that Rice has no intention of doing that which I totally understand.

I was in the hospital this weekend for the birth of my 2nd son and walked down to Rice village and the campus. Rice is easily one of the 10 most beautiful campuses and vibrant areas I have seen. It would be a shame to white flag the football program given the history, but it's clearly put up or shut up time from The University President on down.

(09-25-2016 09:28 AM)Antarius Wrote:  Rice is now 143 in Sagarin. 126 in Massey (third from the bottom and ahead of fellow CUSA teams FIU and Charlotte)

CUSA is once again dead last in terms of conference ratings

(09-25-2016 10:24 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 09:28 AM)Antarius Wrote:  Rice is now 143 in Sagarin. 126 in Massey (third from the bottom and ahead of fellow CUSA teams FIU and Charlotte)

CUSA is once again dead last in terms of conference ratings

So we are just about the worst team in the worst conference, and we are recognized as near or at the top of the Bottom 10. Doesn't sound to me like "an unprecedented level of success."

I'm amused by how much everyone on here seems to worship JK and all his Stanford wisdom, yet feels the need to email him to tell him how to do his job.
I have a feeling this Saturday at USM will be Bailiff's final one on the sidelines. Then you can start emailing JK with all your hot coaching hire tips.

I live 1.5 - 2 hours from Hattiesburg. I will probably go if Bailiff is gone, probably not if he is still on the sidelines. Not worth using a huge chunk of next Saturday to watch this team with this coach get crushed.

(09-25-2016 08:18 AM)owl40 Wrote:  Apologies as 'tenured' was not the proper choice of words. It is not uncommon for Universities to find homes for ex-coaches/players that brought something to the University. He may not want one but I do think he has earned a home.

It is unfair and wrong to make the attacks personal on DB. We all may not like the results on-the-field over past couple years but I do think he is a great man. Unfortunately, he is just not the right person for the next chapter/level for Rice Football that align with the goals of Rice Athletics. He did stabilize a situation and there are many facts/accomplishments on his watch (e.g., nominated for a Bear Bryant Award, Bowl Appearances, Conference Championship, no monkey business, etc, etc.).

On the field last night, it was maddening once again to see us come out for the fourth straight game solid for the first part of the game then to see a bad football team make adjustments and we did not adjust to their adjustments.

In all four games this year, we have come out of the tunnel in the first quarter ready-to-play with a gameplan that had initial success. For those on Parliament that like to blame 'preparation' as the issue, i would disagree that has been the problem this year. However, that initial success has quickly faded in all games and our in-game coaching adjustments are not there and then the basic fundamentals of throwing, running right angles, catching, and tackling disappear. It can get masked for a period of time given how hard the kids play, but eventually gets exposed/gashed for big plays. If NT were not a bad football team and did not have their own penalties/gifts and poor execution it would have been a 3 TD loss after coming out strong 17-0.

What also appears to have really regressed and lag effect now showing on-the-field is the recruiting. All of the NFL guys of years past plus solid All-CUSA guys like McH, CC, Bradshaw, Raines, etc. could make plays. We don't have those guys on-the-field anymore and now talent level is being exposed even in the depths of C-USA.

That is what made me start the initial post game post on the thread....lack of hope. If we lose to NT b/c of young guys who are really talented and you see glimpses of the talent but they just need the seasoning, then you can be patient and have some hope. That was last year as we rationalized all the young guys playing and EZF creating some hope this year for a 7-win season and competitive in the other games. Now a year later, it just looks like we are out-coached with in-game adjustments, out-talented/no playmakers, and other teams have better fundamentals of blocking, tackling, throwing, etc..

Maybe the ghost/legend of Philip Gaines in Memphis can come back and lead us to 7 W's but not betting on that...hope has faded and other than a leadership change, not sure where hope is going to come from...

From my perspective from far off in the pacific, hard to assess whether DB is a "great man". He certainly was smart enough to recognize that interacting w the international students, running a clean shop, etc would earn him more red here , while at most places, winning is essentially everything( Does anybody think that Strong will keep his job if UY does not start winning soon?)
I believe in the value of relationships, but DB was hired, and paid well, to do a certain job. Not all his fault, but he has failed at the most important aspect, which is to make the program relevant and viable. All the rest is window dressing.Certainly not all on him, but we don't owe him anything but whatever his contract states.

Here is the thing.... and I really mean this.... I hope people will read it all before starting to respond...

Rice is not a traditional coaches dream job. Wouldn't be even if we were p5. Never will be. To think that we can hire a traditional coach and keep him long enough to matter is a pipe dream.

Our options are
1) an unproven traditional head coach at a lower level.... but if we DO this, we have to hold him to high standards and be just as prepared to fire him the moment he fails to reach them... see UH. He will get hired away or fired within 3-4 years and we will be replacing him. Probably costs us 500-800 to start, and 800-1.1 to keep a good one. This is what we've tried to do, but we've done it without holding them to the high standards (in part for reasonable reasons... but things now have to be different)

2) a retread of sorts. Someone with a tarnished image (in some way, doesn't have to be serious) or who 'failed' at a program with tremendously higher standards and might thrive with ours (Hatfield). This person costs us 800+ and has risks... See Braun. You're hiring someone in a very specific situation, based only SOMEWHAT on their coaching or recruiting skills or how they fit Rice. I'm not convinced we find another Hatfield situation... his scheme and the small number of teams interested in it was unique.

3) an unproven talent... someone with a ton of upside but its a huge bet... Someone almost nobody else would hire as head coach.... Whether it be Drew Mehringer or Applewhite or RU. The problem with Mehringer and Applewhite is that they would now cost us as much as one of the above.... because 'the big boys' also want these people as OC or DC paying at least as much as we would for a head, BUT if we spend all our money on them, we don't have the money to provide them with the support that they might need to overcome the areas where they lack specific experience...

One of the many reasons why someone like RU is so interesting to me. Give him the sort of contract you'd give any other unproven traditional coach... and let him use his other skills to raise revenue and tie his financial success to that as well. Pay up a bit for assistants again, filling the space between WINNING SCHOOL p5 coordinator and losing p5 school head coach or g5 head coach. What I mean is, if a guy is destined to be a high dollar p5 coordinator, if that is his goal, he may not want to be an HC at Kansas or Tulsa. Become a destination for Coordinators whose next step is coordinator at winning p5. Compete for THAT guy and THOSE assistants... not compete for assistants whose options are to be on the same level at another g5 school.

I'm not saying that part well, but I hope it's clear... Be a destination by paying up for assistants and have turnover there. Keep stability at HC. Less of a recruiting issue.

I'm thinking Dr K will hire somebody like he did with both basketball HCs. Young. From solid, well known programs. Good coaching experience. But no HC experience. Counting on them to turn it around. Modernize. Get some national attention... Then move on. Then do it again with somebody else. Achieve even more success. Eventually improve the program's profile that it can attract a HC with a proven track record.

(09-25-2016 09:29 AM)Mademen Wrote:  I think Rice has to commit one way or the other to D1 football. Rice needs a sustained cash input into the program that likely takes it further into the red before it goes into the black. You need 20,000 season ticket holders and a significant number donors into the program to legitimately compete at the higher levels when you don't get crazy TV $$$. Obviously Rice has the $$$ in its endowment to jump start CPR if it chooses. It appears as an outsider that Rice has no intention of doing that which I totally understand.

This is my issue with Leebron and the BOT. It is not clear that the commitment is there................

(09-25-2016 02:54 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 09:29 AM)Mademen Wrote:  I think Rice has to commit one way or the other to D1 football. Rice needs a sustained cash input into the program that likely takes it further into the red before it goes into the black. You need 20,000 season ticket holders and a significant number donors into the program to legitimately compete at the higher levels when you don't get crazy TV $$$. Obviously Rice has the $$$ in its endowment to jump start CPR if it chooses. It appears as an outsider that Rice has no intention of doing that which I totally understand.

This is my issue with Leebron and the BOT. It is not clear that the commitment is there................

Totally agree. And could you imagine the outrage if Rice forked out 2 million for a coach?
Also it does not seem to matter to students that we have a team. So if football is part of campus life and students are interested, why play or pay?

(09-25-2016 03:25 PM)ETx Owl Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 02:54 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 09:29 AM)Mademen Wrote:  I think Rice has to commit one way or the other to D1 football. Rice needs a sustained cash input into the program that likely takes it further into the red before it goes into the black. You need 20,000 season ticket holders and a significant number donors into the program to legitimately compete at the higher levels when you don't get crazy TV $$$. Obviously Rice has the $$$ in its endowment to jump start CPR if it chooses. It appears as an outsider that Rice has no intention of doing that which I totally understand.

This is my issue with Leebron and the BOT. It is not clear that the commitment is there................

Totally agree. And could you imagine the outrage if Rice forked out 2 million for a coach?
Also it does not seem to matter to students that we have a team. So if football is part of campus life and students are interested, why play or pay?

If we have a good team and/or play name opponents, the students will come. See the Baylor game last week. Only a dwindling number of diehard student fans (or fans of any age) will come watch a middling / crappy Rice team play directional schools.

(09-25-2016 03:30 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 03:25 PM)ETx Owl Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 02:54 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 09:29 AM)Mademen Wrote:  I think Rice has to commit one way or the other to D1 football. Rice needs a sustained cash input into the program that likely takes it further into the red before it goes into the black. You need 20,000 season ticket holders and a significant number donors into the program to legitimately compete at the higher levels when you don't get crazy TV $$$. Obviously Rice has the $$$ in its endowment to jump start CPR if it chooses. It appears as an outsider that Rice has no intention of doing that which I totally understand.

This is my issue with Leebron and the BOT. It is not clear that the commitment is there................

Totally agree. And could you imagine the outrage if Rice forked out 2 million for a coach?
Also it does not seem to matter to students that we have a team. So if football is part of campus life and students are interested, why play or pay?

If we have a good team and/or play name opponents, the students will come. See the Baylor game last week. Only a dwindling number of diehard student fans (or fans of any age) will come watch a middling / crappy Rice team play directional schools.

Sub directional talent is what we have become. It is what it is.

LSU just fired Les Miles. Any movement on South Main?

Just please don't hire some executive search firm to find the best "fit".

(09-25-2016 08:18 AM)owl40 Wrote:  It is unfair and wrong to make the attacks personal on DB. We all may not like the results on-the-field over past couple years but I do think he is a great man.

Agree. He's a good man. He's just the wrong head football coach for Rice, now and possibly ever.

(09-25-2016 08:50 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  Our aspiration is to beat teams with superior talent, the way Navy regularly does. I think the record shows that Bailiff is more likely to lose to teams with inferior talent than to beat teams with superior talent.

This cuts to the chase. What we need is somebody who can do this. David Bailiff has given no indication that he can do this. Neither can Les Miles, by the way.

I don't care about offensive scheme, defensive scheme, kicking game scheme, or any of that stuff. What we need is somebody who can take his'uns and beat your'uns, or take your'uns and beat his'uns. Navy does that better than anyone, so I would think Navy would be a place to start looking. Ivin Jasper is probably at the top of my list, but as Hambone suggests in making a generic point elsewhere, Navy is probably paying him more as OC than Rice is paying Bailiff. The stars could align to make Paul Johnson available, and I would jump all over that. Either of them would mean going back to the flexbone, and I'm not suggesting that is the only offense we should run, but I can see several reasons why it's a good scheme for who and where we are. What I do think is that we need offensive and defensive schemes that are at least somewhat contrarian, and therefore difficult to prepare for in a week. It is pretty clear that if you look at the programs that are beating more athletic opponents with any consistency, a disproportionately large number are using contrarian schemes on at least one side of the ball.

To me the bottom line is simple. The challenge at Rice is to beat, with some regularity, teams that are more athletic and talented. Part of that is getting better players, and part is getting the players you have to play better. Therefore we should hire from programs that have success beating more athletic and talented opponents, and we should look specifically for a guy who can both get better players, and get the players he has to play better.

(09-25-2016 06:01 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Ivin Jasper is probably at the top of my list, but as Hambone suggests in making a generic point elsewhere, Navy is probably paying him more as OC than Rice is paying Bailiff.

I would be extremely surprised if Navy's OC is getting paid 800K. Oregon's OC last year (Scott Frost) and Vance Bedford (UT defensive coordinator) were getting paid in that range.

(09-25-2016 06:31 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(09-25-2016 06:01 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Ivin Jasper is probably at the top of my list, but as Hambone suggests in making a generic point elsewhere, Navy is probably paying him more as OC than Rice is paying Bailiff.

I would be extremely surprised if Navy's OC is getting paid 800K. Oregon's OC last year (Scott Frost) and Vance Bedford (UT defensive coordinator) were getting paid in that range.

He was getting $345,00 in 2009 per this http://www.espn.com/blog/ncfnation/post/...tinue-rise

He's probably well above that 7 years later, although as you say, probably not more than double that. We probably can't offer him a blow-your-socks-off raise, and we'd almost certainly have difficulty paying market price for the staff he would likely want to hire. Will try to find something more current.

He did turn down the Georgia Southern job when they hired Willie Fritz, per http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nca.../73200874/