Rick Gerlach
Heisman
Posts: 5,529
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 70
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: How does it help Rice to schedule these games?
(09-28-2015 03:48 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (09-28-2015 03:36 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote: (09-28-2015 11:29 AM)mrbig Wrote: (09-28-2015 08:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Did I suggest one way or the other? If you can point out where I did, I'll give you a prize and tell you which other accounts I use on The Parliament! Hehe.
RiceLad15, you and I are sharing a brain lately and this post made me laugh because I was literally about to compliment one of your posts and joke that people were about to start accusing us of being the same person.
(09-28-2015 08:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Once again, since I hate hollow talking points and very vague statements, I took a look at the box score. Turns out, a lot of these questions we raise can be answered if we just dig a little bit.
Lamar competed in the first half better because of 3 Baylor TOs in the first half (2 INTs and 1 fumble) and none for Lamar. But Baylor still scored 35 pts to Lamar's 21.
Following the first half, Baylor threw one more INT, but Lamar turned it over twice and the game ended 66-31.
And SMU did well in the first half because they were able to move the ball and grind down the clock while scoring. SMU had two drives that totaled about 12 minutes and both esulted in TDs. Their other drives were 8 secs (TD), 2:46 (punt), 3:40 (Int) and 2:38 (end of half). There were INTs by both teams in the first half.
After the first half, while SMU still held onto the ball, they failed to score and had 5 punts in a row followed by an INT.
It seems like in the SMU game, Baylor was able to adjust to SMU's strategy and demolish them in the second half.
Now, this has nothing to do with our performance, but it helps shed a little light into how SMU and Lamar were able to keep things close in the first half.
Yes to this. Baylor played their best game of the season (so far). Their coaching staff is much better and their players are much more athletic. That doesn't excuse Rice's performance, but its silly to pretend like Baylor performed the exact same in all three of their games and the only variable that changed was their opponent.
(09-28-2015 10:38 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote: Geez, you're making it sound like Bailiff is some great coach. He is anything but. He's a very high character guy and strong recruiter...but he's a lousy football coach. Yes, below average. I have a little more faith in JK that he'll hire a capable and promising replacement should he decide to do so. Given our weak conference, I have a very hard time seeing us returning to 1-11, 2-10 type seasons at any point in the future.
(09-28-2015 10:46 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Walt, maybe when you and I were disagreeing earlier about the quality of Bailiff as a coach, we were disagreeing because of what each of us defined as a coach. When I hear coach, I think of it very holistically, like he is the CEO of the team. He is responsible for player personnel, coaching personnel, team moral, team outreach, player retention/graduation, in-game decisions, preparation, etc. So when I look at Bailiff holistically, as in, when I look at his as a coach, I think he is average at worst.
It seems like your view of the word coach is much narrower and only entails the in-game decisions/preparation. If so, I don't know if I call him lousy, but I wouldn't argue that he is below average. I feel like there are plenty of other coaches who could get more out of his players than Bailiff does. But this one knock doesn't make me think he is a below average coach because he has such significant strengths in other areas.
Walt, I repeat a question I asked in the Baylor post-game thread:
(09-27-2015 03:55 PM)mrbig Wrote: For the people calling for Bailiff's head, what percentile do you rank him in terms of FBS coaches? What percentile do you rank the resources he has at his disposal (including academics limiting recruiting)? Honest questions.
I am honestly curious. Do you believe Bailiff has below-average resources by FBS standards? Do you believe he is getting average results? If yes to both of those, then how is Coach Bailiff a "lousy football coach"? I think the answer to both of those is yes, and I do not understand how someone as smart as you can believe a lousy coach who turns below-average resources into average results is "lousy." I don't think he's a great football coach. But lousy? He looked lousy in 2007, 2009, and 2010. Maybe even up through the 2012 Memphis game. But the results since then have been pretty average, relative to all of FBS.
Another way to get to the same point. How many G5 football teams would trade their results the last 4 years for Rice's results? I would bet more than half.
And how many of those same G5 football teams were once (and for most of it's history) in a P5 conference, and has serious aspirations to return? A good coach can get his players and team to overachieve relative to talent and resources. Look what The Toad did in 2006? And Bailiff has far more resources now-- and dramatically superior talent-- than Graham had back then. And we played a much tougher schedule.
How would you define much tougher? Again, I hate having nothing but empty talking points to discuss, cus it is all just hand waving that may or may not be right.
I already looked at who The Toad played and their end of year rankings (http://csnbbs.com/thread-750732-post-124...12434890).
Looking at average rankings between '06 and '15 (removing the best and worst) The Toad's average was 80 (st. dev of 28). Currently, ours is 117 (st. dev of 45).
So at the moment, I'd say that the Toad's was obviously tougher, but still nothing to write home about. His hardest team was ranked 19, while our current schedule's is 3. Now his worst was 122, while ours is currently 234, and we have 5 teams (UNT, FAU, Army, UTSA, and Charlotte) ranked below the worst team The Toad faced. These rankings will obviously change, so it will be interesting to see where things end up at the end of the season.
Given that we played Wagner not by choice, but because of a last minute cancellation, I think it's unfair to have that game averaged in. I understand that they're on our schedule, but it's not really anyone at Rice's fault that happened.
|
|