Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What should we do?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,839
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 385
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #11
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 08:34 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-10-2017 11:48 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Of course you play all games to win. But we had this debate many times on other threads but IMO, a respectable performance of competitive game against a top P5 opponent > C-USA win(s) later in season.

When on national stage, more people are judging your program quality. I'd rather go 4-8 and beat a Stanford/lose a nail biter in 4Q compared to a 6-6 season that includes getting blown-out badly against Stanford but get a trip to whocares.com bowl game to play a MAC team.

This game matters even more than other early season body bag games as we will have national stage to ourselves and our brand/quality of play is being judged more than all the other games combined. Outside of Parliament, getting blown-out 56-17 or something to that effect make national/casual audience check-out for rest of season with 'same old Rice' takeaway. However, a 24-21 like game gets people to pay attention to Rice Football and bring hope back to a better lot in life.

We have shown ability to beat bad/mediocre FB teams. Have not shown ability to be even competitive against top competition. That matters more right now. Throw the kitchen sink at a W. Love to see all the tricks, gadgets, unconventional wisdom that we have at this game.....

Correction-- we have not shown the ability to be even competitive against any team ranked within the Top 75 (Top 60 percentile) of D1. It's not only top teams; it's any team with even a steady heart rate.

so back to my question - if we have no shot against a top 75 team, why show all our cards in a vain attempt to slay a dragon? why not save a surprise or two for the opponents in the bottom 40%? What is your opinion on how we should approach this Stanford game? Should we play the back ups as soon as we fall 14 behind?

Not saying this is my opinion. Just asking.

maybe somebody can ask the coach at the Caravan when is the right time to give up.
07-11-2017 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,545
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 130
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #12
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 09:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 08:34 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-10-2017 11:48 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Of course you play all games to win. But we had this debate many times on other threads but IMO, a respectable performance of competitive game against a top P5 opponent > C-USA win(s) later in season.

When on national stage, more people are judging your program quality. I'd rather go 4-8 and beat a Stanford/lose a nail biter in 4Q compared to a 6-6 season that includes getting blown-out badly against Stanford but get a trip to whocares.com bowl game to play a MAC team.

This game matters even more than other early season body bag games as we will have national stage to ourselves and our brand/quality of play is being judged more than all the other games combined. Outside of Parliament, getting blown-out 56-17 or something to that effect make national/casual audience check-out for rest of season with 'same old Rice' takeaway. However, a 24-21 like game gets people to pay attention to Rice Football and bring hope back to a better lot in life.

We have shown ability to beat bad/mediocre FB teams. Have not shown ability to be even competitive against top competition. That matters more right now. Throw the kitchen sink at a W. Love to see all the tricks, gadgets, unconventional wisdom that we have at this game.....

Correction-- we have not shown the ability to be even competitive against any team ranked within the Top 75 (Top 60 percentile) of D1. It's not only top teams; it's any team with even a steady heart rate.

so back to my question - if we have no shot against a top 75 team, why show all our cards in a vain attempt to slay a dragon? why not save a surprise or two for the opponents in the bottom 40%? What is your opinion on how we should approach this Stanford game? Should we play the back ups as soon as we fall 14 behind?

Not saying this is my opinion. Just asking.

maybe somebody can ask the coach at the Caravan when is the right time to give up.

Starters should play at least the entire first half and into the 3Q regardless to the score. They need the early game competition. As for "surprises", since when has a Bailiff-coached team included surprises or innovative plays in their playbook?
07-11-2017 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Buho00 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,955
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 23
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #13
RE: What should we do?
Stanford is not a team we should be afraid of. It's not a terrible match up for Rice. And I rather play them the first game of the year, in an unusual setting.

Final score last season was 41-17, but other than unacceptable tackling on a first drive 60 yard QB scramble, they had 2 guys who hurt us - their RB's. One of them was possibly the best player in college football and he's gone to the NFL, the other I'm guessing will be heavily featured and has incredible speed. Our front 7 could be our strength, so not as bad a match up as some of the spread offenses we'll face in CUSA. Their passing game was nothing special, the real weapons there seem to be TE's. It's not crazy to imagine a good defensive effort by Rice keeping the game low scoring. We're a good QB away from making it a competitive game.
07-11-2017 10:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
franklyconfused Online
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 131
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 2
I Root For: Rice
Location: Bay Area
Post: #14
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 10:04 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 09:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 08:34 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-10-2017 11:48 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Of course you play all games to win. But we had this debate many times on other threads but IMO, a respectable performance of competitive game against a top P5 opponent > C-USA win(s) later in season.

When on national stage, more people are judging your program quality. I'd rather go 4-8 and beat a Stanford/lose a nail biter in 4Q compared to a 6-6 season that includes getting blown-out badly against Stanford but get a trip to whocares.com bowl game to play a MAC team.

This game matters even more than other early season body bag games as we will have national stage to ourselves and our brand/quality of play is being judged more than all the other games combined. Outside of Parliament, getting blown-out 56-17 or something to that effect make national/casual audience check-out for rest of season with 'same old Rice' takeaway. However, a 24-21 like game gets people to pay attention to Rice Football and bring hope back to a better lot in life.

We have shown ability to beat bad/mediocre FB teams. Have not shown ability to be even competitive against top competition. That matters more right now. Throw the kitchen sink at a W. Love to see all the tricks, gadgets, unconventional wisdom that we have at this game.....

Correction-- we have not shown the ability to be even competitive against any team ranked within the Top 75 (Top 60 percentile) of D1. It's not only top teams; it's any team with even a steady heart rate.

so back to my question - if we have no shot against a top 75 team, why show all our cards in a vain attempt to slay a dragon? why not save a surprise or two for the opponents in the bottom 40%? What is your opinion on how we should approach this Stanford game? Should we play the back ups as soon as we fall 14 behind?

Not saying this is my opinion. Just asking.

maybe somebody can ask the coach at the Caravan when is the right time to give up.

Starters should play at least the entire first half and into the 3Q regardless to the score. They need the early game competition. As for "surprises", since when has a Bailiff-coached team included surprises or innovative plays in their playbook?

We did run that double-trips formation with a tackle split out wide to great success against New Mexico State in 2013. I think we ran it one other time that year for two points.
07-11-2017 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,839
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 385
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #15
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 10:13 AM)franklyconfused Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 10:04 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 09:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 08:34 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-10-2017 11:48 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Of course you play all games to win. But we had this debate many times on other threads but IMO, a respectable performance of competitive game against a top P5 opponent > C-USA win(s) later in season.

When on national stage, more people are judging your program quality. I'd rather go 4-8 and beat a Stanford/lose a nail biter in 4Q compared to a 6-6 season that includes getting blown-out badly against Stanford but get a trip to whocares.com bowl game to play a MAC team.

This game matters even more than other early season body bag games as we will have national stage to ourselves and our brand/quality of play is being judged more than all the other games combined. Outside of Parliament, getting blown-out 56-17 or something to that effect make national/casual audience check-out for rest of season with 'same old Rice' takeaway. However, a 24-21 like game gets people to pay attention to Rice Football and bring hope back to a better lot in life.

We have shown ability to beat bad/mediocre FB teams. Have not shown ability to be even competitive against top competition. That matters more right now. Throw the kitchen sink at a W. Love to see all the tricks, gadgets, unconventional wisdom that we have at this game.....

Correction-- we have not shown the ability to be even competitive against any team ranked within the Top 75 (Top 60 percentile) of D1. It's not only top teams; it's any team with even a steady heart rate.

so back to my question - if we have no shot against a top 75 team, why show all our cards in a vain attempt to slay a dragon? why not save a surprise or two for the opponents in the bottom 40%? What is your opinion on how we should approach this Stanford game? Should we play the back ups as soon as we fall 14 behind?

Not saying this is my opinion. Just asking.

maybe somebody can ask the coach at the Caravan when is the right time to give up.

Starters should play at least the entire first half and into the 3Q regardless to the score. They need the early game competition. As for "surprises", since when has a Bailiff-coached team included surprises or innovative plays in their playbook?

We did run that double-trips formation with a tackle split out wide to great success against New Mexico State in 2013. I think we ran it one other time that year for two points.

There was some play we ran from a weird formation several times last year. IIRC, three linemen split out very wide right, three split out very wide left, center alone. I remember the commentators speaking of it.
(This post was last modified: 07-11-2017 10:18 AM by OptimisticOwl.)
07-11-2017 10:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceFootball2K5 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 912
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 8
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 10:10 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Stanford is not a team we should be afraid of. It's not a terrible match up for Rice. And I rather play them the first game of the year, in an unusual setting.

Final score last season was 41-17, but other than unacceptable tackling on a first drive 60 yard QB scramble, they had 2 guys who hurt us - their RB's. One of them was possibly the best player in college football and he's gone to the NFL, the other I'm guessing will be heavily featured and has incredible speed. Our front 7 could be our strength, so not as bad a match up as some of the spread offenses we'll face in CUSA. Their passing game was nothing special, the real weapons there seem to be TE's. It's not crazy to imagine a good defensive effort by Rice keeping the game low scoring. We're a good QB away from making it a competitive game.

Agreed. Our Front 7 looks fairly formidable this year (at least if we can stay relatively healthy). Adding Stewart and his more aggressive scheme has me more optimistic about being able to stop the run and step up our pass rush some. But our secondary does not inspire any confidence at all. Our safeties look particularly weak, and they have been pretty bad for most of the Bailiff era. Any team with a good passing game should be able to light us up pretty good. But as you said, Stanford is not one of those teams.
07-11-2017 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,839
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 385
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #17
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 10:32 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 10:10 AM)Buho00 Wrote:  Stanford is not a team we should be afraid of. It's not a terrible match up for Rice. And I rather play them the first game of the year, in an unusual setting.

Final score last season was 41-17, but other than unacceptable tackling on a first drive 60 yard QB scramble, they had 2 guys who hurt us - their RB's. One of them was possibly the best player in college football and he's gone to the NFL, the other I'm guessing will be heavily featured and has incredible speed. Our front 7 could be our strength, so not as bad a match up as some of the spread offenses we'll face in CUSA. Their passing game was nothing special, the real weapons there seem to be TE's. It's not crazy to imagine a good defensive effort by Rice keeping the game low scoring. We're a good QB away from making it a competitive game.

Agreed. Our Front 7 looks fairly formidable this year (at least if we can stay relatively healthy). Adding Stewart and his more aggressive scheme has me more optimistic about being able to stop the run and step up our pass rush some. But our secondary does not inspire any confidence at all. Our safeties look particularly weak, and they have been pretty bad for most of the Bailiff era. Any team with a good passing game should be able to light us up pretty good. But as you said, Stanford is not one of those teams.

Good to hear some optimism. I am completely opposed to giving up on a game before even the coin flip. Whether your chances of winning are 82%, 22% or .2%, you go in trying to win.

Football, being a clock game, sometimes is over before it's over. When the combination of clock and score dictate that it is over, then the considerations go to making the best use of the remainder of the game to prepare for the future. Then, and only then, it is time to put the trick plays/new plays/surprises back into the bag. Then it becomes a matter of who needs some PT. It is not always the reserves. If our starting QB is a freshmen, whether true or RS, probably he could use the entire game. But others could use the PT. A consideration is whether or not a given player is being considered for a redshirt. No need to burn it just to say we played the back ups. So unless the decision is already made that we will use a given player this year, best to keep our options open.

Simple, really. Try to win. If that becomes impossible, do what you can to enhance our chances of winning future games.

I am looking forward to watching the Stanford game. maybe, probably, I won't be so excited in the third quarter. But there is a chance I might be super excited. I hope that happens.
07-11-2017 10:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mrbig Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,012
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 72
I Root For: Rice
Location: New Orleans
Post: #18
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 10:32 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  Adding Stewart and his more aggressive scheme has me more optimistic about being able to stop the run and step up our pass rush some. But our secondary does not inspire any confidence at all. Our safeties look particularly weak, and they have been pretty bad for most of the Bailiff era. Any team with a good passing game should be able to light us up pretty good. But as you said, Stanford is not one of those teams.

The good news is that Rice has a new defensive coordinator and CB coach (Stewart), as well as a new safety coach (Vestal). I have always thought (and frequently mentioned in Parliament threads) that to my amateur eyes, our safeties had enough speed and quickness to play better than they actually looked. To me, it always looked like they overplayed the run and were too late getting their momentum changed to follow receivers in coverage. So they would get beat by a step (or more) not because they weren't fast enough, but because they waited a split second too long before really engaging the WR on pass plays. I could always be wrong, but I'm hopeful that I am correct and that this is a focus of the new defensive regime.
07-11-2017 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OldOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,411
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: -1
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #19
RE: What should we do?
How many top 25 teams has Bailiff beat? Now you know why we will loose.
(07-11-2017 11:20 AM)mrbig Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 10:32 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  Adding Stewart and his more aggressive scheme has me more optimistic about being able to stop the run and step up our pass rush some. But our secondary does not inspire any confidence at all. Our safeties look particularly weak, and they have been pretty bad for most of the Bailiff era. Any team with a good passing game should be able to light us up pretty good. But as you said, Stanford is not one of those teams.

The good news is that Rice has a new defensive coordinator and CB coach (Stewart), as well as a new safety coach (Vestal). I have always thought (and frequently mentioned in Parliament threads) that to my amateur eyes, our safeties had enough speed and quickness to play better than they actually looked. To me, it always looked like they overplayed the run and were too late getting their momentum changed to follow receivers in coverage. So they would get beat by a step (or more) not because they weren't fast enough, but because they waited a split second too long before really engaging the WR on pass plays. I could always be wrong, but I'm hopeful that I am correct and that this is a focus of the new defensive regime.
07-11-2017 01:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mrbig Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,012
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 72
I Root For: Rice
Location: New Orleans
Post: #20
RE: What should we do?
(07-11-2017 01:05 PM)OldOwl Wrote:  How many top 25 teams has Bailiff beat? Now you know why we will loose.
(07-11-2017 11:20 AM)mrbig Wrote:  
(07-11-2017 10:32 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  Adding Stewart and his more aggressive scheme has me more optimistic about being able to stop the run and step up our pass rush some. But our secondary does not inspire any confidence at all. Our safeties look particularly weak, and they have been pretty bad for most of the Bailiff era. Any team with a good passing game should be able to light us up pretty good. But as you said, Stanford is not one of those teams.

The good news is that Rice has a new defensive coordinator and CB coach (Stewart), as well as a new safety coach (Vestal). I have always thought (and frequently mentioned in Parliament threads) that to my amateur eyes, our safeties had enough speed and quickness to play better than they actually looked. To me, it always looked like they overplayed the run and were too late getting their momentum changed to follow receivers in coverage. So they would get beat by a step (or more) not because they weren't fast enough, but because they waited a split second too long before really engaging the WR on pass plays. I could always be wrong, but I'm hopeful that I am correct and that this is a focus of the new defensive regime.

I never said I thought Rice would win. I snarkily suggested that Rice might be ahead by a lot in the 2nd half, but I fully expect Rice to be pummeled. This far into Bailiff's tenure (or at least it feels like tenure), I've come to expect the worst so that I can occasionally be happily surprised, rather than almost constantly disappointed.
07-11-2017 03:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.