(10-11-2023 06:30 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Since the mid-80’s Rice has tried following coaching models in its search process

FCS/Lower Level successful coaches- Berndt, Bailiff

DC/OC ‘up and comers’- Goldsmith, Toad, Bloom

Established coaching brands but on backside of coaching career looking to ride into sunset- Hat

The one model for football that has not been used is the former alum coming back. Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not…but the argument for this model should not be tongue-in-cheek stuff about any posters on Parliament for the job but rather about someone who truly understands Rice (which is different from understanding academics, understanding Texas, or potentially a radical idea like limited coaching experience). That ‘gets Rice’ model has not been attempted in Football and given the unique circumstances of this job compared to a vanilla G5 job at directional U, there are arguments to consider such an approach given other models have not worked. The con of the 'gets Rice' model for football would be that it has been tried in in MBB and now trying it Baseball without results to show for it. But I would argue Football is a different animal than those sports.

Look earlier than the mid-80s...

Ray Alborn (Rice defensive tackle '59-'61) fits not only the one of our own coming back model, but also the assistant rising to the top job.
Assistant '72-'77
HC '78-'83
As much as I enjoyed watching him at spring games that I attended, his time was anything but successful as HC.
13-53 overall and 8-40 in the SWC, including 3 seasons with a total of 2 wins.

Watson Brown right after, '84-'85 - lateral move from Cincinnati -> Rice (and he was AD) -> Vandy, with a record of 4-18.

Fred had two winning seasons, both 6-5.

Hat had three winning seasons, two up front at 7-4, and one 8-4.
Hat also had a losing record in '04 (3-8) with the statistical #1 rushing offense in the country.

(10-11-2023 08:18 PM)Grungy Wrote:  Ray Alborn (Rice defensive tackle '59-'61) fits not only the one of our own coming back model, but also the assistant rising to the top job.
Assistant '72-'77
HC '78-'83
As much as I enjoyed watching him at spring games that I attended, his time was anything but successful as HC.
13-53 overall and 8-40 in the SWC, including 3 seasons with a total of 2 wins.

And the 2nd best mayor that Ruidoso, NM ever had. Just after Lloyd Davis.

(10-11-2023 07:01 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 06:30 PM)owl40 Wrote:  The con of the 'gets Rice' model for football would be that it has been tried in in MBB and now trying it Baseball without results to show for it.

It takes more than “Rice gets it”. Willis was never given the resources to win. Time will tell with Cheito.

That was my issue with Willis, and also with football though not as individually egregious.

It seems that we don't want to put resources into play until we have run the program into the dirt... and THEN we fire the guy we didn't give resources to (who had SOME measure of success) and then give those resources to the new, unproven guy who is now starting with a mostly bare cupboard and no momentum.

I find it highly telling about Hatfield that although he failed in his last years, (mostly) his recruits had immediate success under a different scheme. I don't remember any other coach in any sport doing that. While of course somewhat a testament to Graham's ability to allocate and coach up the resources he has, it is also more a testament to Hat's ability to still get players, even though his unwillingness to adapt his schemes was perhaps his downfall. His wishbone did not adapt in the way I've seen (especially, though not exclusively) Navy's.

Bailiff (IMO) couldn't repeatedly get it done with the resources we gave him... but obviously he had some ability to get it done.... so we either needed to decide to give him the resources, or we needed to find someone we thought COULD get it done with those resources.... This was the primary reason anyone even talked about hiring anyone outside of the mainstream of coaching.... because the mainstream approach with our resources had ZERO chance to work consistently. You can't demand meaningfully more of your recruits and players and then not spend meaningfully more.... and not just on personnel.

Instead we routinely hire people who insist on (and get) more resources than the guy they replace, and then they similarly fail to get it done with any consistency with those resource. We're simply continuing a failed policy at an increasingly higher cost... which is a recipe for disaster.... and we keep cooking it.