CSNbbs

RPI remains at #15 through Oct. 20 games.

Lennon received her sixth Offensive Player of the Week award and senior Lee Ann Cunningham earned her first Defensive Player of the Week nod of the season.

Rice remains at #19 in the Coaches' Poll with 466 points (433 last week). WKU moves up a spot to #23.

Oregon finally disappears from the "others receiving votes" list.

(10-21-2019 03:39 PM)billstudabaker Wrote: [ -> ]Oregon finally disappears from the "others receiving votes" list.

Lora Sarich of Manhattan still has Oregon at #24. Probably the only reason that Oregon didn't show up in the the list was because you need at least two coaches to list the school in their ballot. Jozef Forman has had Oregon highly ranked every week but failed to submit his poll this week.

(10-21-2019 11:14 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 09:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-20-2019 11:59 PM)OldOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Thank God for Women sports this fall. Keeps me from going into depression watching Rice football.

Does anybody know why our AD is so good with women's sports and so bad with men's sports?

Rice should be good with women's sports regardless of the AD because of the reality that there are very few professional sports opportunities for women compared to men, so the quality of the education should theoretically be more important for women athletes versus male athletes.

+1

The only coach who didn't have us in the top 25 this week was the Purdue coach (I think he just forgot - he's had us in there before and he had Western Kentucky 25th this week).

I think another reason Rice is so good in women's volleyball and basketball is Houston is such a hotbed for those two sports (especially volleyball). #1 Baylor for example has five players from the Houston area, including their best player (Presley).

(10-21-2019 11:14 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 09:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-20-2019 11:59 PM)OldOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Thank God for Women sports this fall. Keeps me from going into depression watching Rice football.

Does anybody know why our AD is so good with women's sports and so bad with men's sports?

Rice should be good with women's sports regardless of the AD because of the reality that there are very few professional sports opportunities for women compared to men, so the quality of the education should theoretically be more important for women athletes versus male athletes.

Correct - football and men's basketball players are thinking about those seven-figure contracts they'd get in the NFL or NBA, thus they go to schools where they think they'll get a leg up toward that goal, even if statistically it's unlikely they'll make it. Other sports have very few opportunities like that, so Rice's quality education is a bigger selling point. I don't think that it's a co-incidence that, once NFL and NBA salaries began to soar, Rice football and men's basketball began to slip.

(10-21-2019 01:47 PM)dragon2owl Wrote: [ -> ]Rice remains at #19 in the Coaches' Poll with 466 points (433 last week). WKU moves up a spot to #23.

The #13 through #20 teams remained the same as last week.

(10-21-2019 10:55 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 11:14 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 09:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-20-2019 11:59 PM)OldOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Thank God for Women sports this fall. Keeps me from going into depression watching Rice football.

Does anybody know why our AD is so good with women's sports and so bad with men's sports?

Rice should be good with women's sports regardless of the AD because of the reality that there are very few professional sports opportunities for women compared to men, so the quality of the education should theoretically be more important for women athletes versus male athletes.

Correct - football and men's basketball players are thinking about those seven-figure contracts they'd get in the NFL or NBA, thus they go to schools where they think they'll get a leg up toward that goal, even if statistically it's unlikely they'll make it. Other sports have very few opportunities like that, so Rice's quality education is a bigger selling point. I don't think that it's a co-incidence that, once NFL and NBA salaries began to soar, Rice football and men's basketball began to slip.

It is hard to put a specific year on when pro salaries took off, but mid 1970s to mid 1980s seems reasonable. Rice football and basketball have been bad since the 1960s and 1950s, respectively. Rice baseball was successful in the 2000s.

I don't think that the money available in pro sports is the most important factor for which sports Rice has the greatest potential for success. The direct fan interest and dollars at the college level seems clearly more important. It is much easier for Rice to compete in sports where the typical level of fan support and associated money is lower. Rice will never have 100,000 fans at a football game and will never have P5 level of booster revenue for football. It is much easier to have average or above average fan support for WBB, volleyball, and soccer (and baseball).

Here, I think that the AD staff deserves some credit. They have done a great job in the last few years of promoting the womens sports to both Rice students and outside groups. They have helped to pull in big crowds (relatively speaking) for key match ups such as Rice v Texas volleyball but also for soccer this year to support the new coach. This creates a good game atmosphere and has positive impacts on recruiting and retaining both players and coaches.

(10-22-2019 07:34 AM)temchugh Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 10:55 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 11:14 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-21-2019 09:26 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-20-2019 11:59 PM)OldOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Thank God for Women sports this fall. Keeps me from going into depression watching Rice football.

Does anybody know why our AD is so good with women's sports and so bad with men's sports?

Rice should be good with women's sports regardless of the AD because of the reality that there are very few professional sports opportunities for women compared to men, so the quality of the education should theoretically be more important for women athletes versus male athletes.

Correct - football and men's basketball players are thinking about those seven-figure contracts they'd get in the NFL or NBA, thus they go to schools where they think they'll get a leg up toward that goal, even if statistically it's unlikely they'll make it. Other sports have very few opportunities like that, so Rice's quality education is a bigger selling point. I don't think that it's a co-incidence that, once NFL and NBA salaries began to soar, Rice football and men's basketball began to slip.

It is hard to put a specific year on when pro salaries took off, but mid 1970s to mid 1980s seems reasonable. Rice football and basketball have been bad since the 1960s and 1950s, respectively. Rice baseball was successful in the 2000s.

I don't think that the money available in pro sports is the most important factor for which sports Rice has the greatest potential for success. The direct fan interest and dollars at the college level seems clearly more important. It is much easier for Rice to compete in sports where the typical level of fan support and associated money is lower. Rice will never have 100,000 fans at a football game and will never have P5 level of booster revenue for football. It is much easier to have average or above average fan support for WBB, volleyball, and soccer (and baseball).

Here, I think that the AD staff deserves some credit. They have done a great job in the last few years of promoting the womens sports to both Rice students and outside groups. They have helped to pull in big crowds (relatively speaking) for key match ups such as Rice v Texas volleyball but also for soccer this year to support the new coach. This creates a good game atmosphere and has positive impacts on recruiting and retaining both players and coaches.

The futility started in football started in 1962. We went to bowls after the '60 and '61 seasons. I remember Namath getting his (then) whopping $400K signing bonus in the early-mid sixties, maybe 1964.

But yes, when the best players wanted to go pro instead of to law school, that was a turning point for us. In the fifties, lots of pro players needed off season jobs to get by.

(10-22-2019 08:57 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]The futility started in football started in 1962. We went to bowls after the '60 and '61 seasons. I remember Namath getting his (then) whopping $400K signing bonus in the early-mid sixties, maybe 1964.
But yes, when the best players wanted to go pro instead of to law school, that was a turning point for us. In the fifties, lots of pro players needed off season jobs to get by.

Namath's signing bonus was after the 1964 NCAA season, and he was a rookie in the 1965 AFL season. His first pro regular season game, ironically enough, was at Rice Stadium, Jets against the Oilers. He did not play a down in that game, but went on to bigger and better things in future years.

Come on, guys-- is it really asking too much to keep other sports and the history of Rice athletic futility out of a thread about our current volleyball team?

(10-22-2019 04:42 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote: [ -> ]Come on, guys-- is it really asking too much to keep other sports and the history of Rice athletic futility out of a thread about our current volleyball team?

apparently it is

(10-22-2019 04:42 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote: [ -> ]Come on, guys-- is it really asking too much to keep other sports and the history of Rice athletic futility out of a thread about our current volleyball team?

+1!

Plenty of other places for that mess.

Texas sweeps Baylor, 25-19, 25-10, 25-19.

Wow, not even close too. That should help our RPI (and Texas' as well).

(10-23-2019 08:57 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, not even close too. That should help our RPI (and Texas' as well).

Beat me to it. Should push UT back into the Top 3, and will definitely help our RPI.

I believe there are 8 teams now in the country with 1 loss, and two of them are from CUSA (we're the only conference in the country that can make that claim). Unless I'm missing someone, the eight are Rice, Western Kentucky, Baylor, Pittsburgh, California, SFA, South Dakota and Colorado State.

Illinois lost again last night (in 5 at Penn State). They have had a super hard schedule, but they are now 4-5 in the Big 10 and have 9 losses overall. I just don't know how teams can justify putting them over Rice in the rankings anymore. Then again, I keep saying that about Illinois and Utah both to no avail.