(12-06-2017 04:19 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Rice wins 8+ in 2018 and 9+ in 2019. As long as he coaches at Rice and Rice is in CUSA, Rice wins at least 6 every year.

He is going to be somewhere between successful and wildly successful.

2018- 7 wins. Team looks competent but we still don’t have the talent to beat better teams.
2019- 7 or 8 wins. In every game. His freshmen get some playing time.
2020- 9 to 10 wins. We look like one of the better G5 programs.

2021 - depends on how much we are willing to pay to keep him.

Our recruiting has been near the bottom of the country for the last 4 years. Defense needs athletes more than anything else. We’re still going to get burned for a year or two because we don’t have the talent. Power football and ball control will help but not solve that.

So who is our QB? If we’re going pro style is it glaesman? Is our line good enough for that with some coaching or do we need a scrambling qb for a few years.

(12-05-2017 08:54 PM)garthmanuel Wrote:  The last two (long-term) coaches, Hatfield and Bailiff, had some real similarities. Both experienced a lot of success relative to Rice's pretty dismal history; however, I think that the HC job at Rice really can beat you down during the down times. That is when support, both from the fans and the administration, pretty much disappears. Then recruiting suffers, effort lags, and optimism goes away. Ultimately both left the program worse off when they inherited it.
So, in the spirit of this thread -- I predict . . . Bloomgren will have a decent first year, followed by two good years, then one really good year and then leave for a better job. If he decides to take our job in the first place.

Well, he did decide on our job. And from his comments at the presser, he may have decided on us before we decided on him.

I still think 8-5 is possible next year, although not certain by any means. I'll update that when I see how they look in the spring.

I like that he was very straightforward about what his approach would be, "Run the rock, burn clock, score touchdowns, and play sound defense." After 11 years, I still don't know what Bailiff's plan was.

My thinking is that there is more talent here than we realized, that 1-11 was mainly due to inept scheming and preparation. I'll be interested to see who he brings in as staff. My general thinking is bring in a coordinator on each side of the ball whom you trust, keep one or two off the old staff for continuity (preferably those with significant recruiting contacts), and fill out the staff with guys who can recruit, recruit, recruit. And then stress execution, execution, execution in practices. I think there are a lot of guys on the existing staff who would have been much better coaches if Bailiff had let them coach. But I wouldn't keep more than one or two. We need a break, but some continuity is not a bad idea.

I called Bloomgren on this board before anyone else and I stuck with that call. Cr11owl asked who the QB is going to be next year... I say it will be Tyner. Of course many will say he had his chance and didn't impress. I say he wins the job. Call it a hunch. But I think he fits the style of play that a Stanford coach will bring to Rice. Just my opinion. Of course it ain't worth much.

Sent from my SM-G935V using CSNbbs mobile app

I need to do more research before I make my analysis, but what I will say is this. Rice for years has been trying to mimic Stanford, has tried to low key get Stanford coaches. We finally got one. Look at it like this..... he knows he could've held out and gone to a p5 school as a head coach, but he came here. I'm going to go on a limb and say they had to have promised him some good stuff to leave Stanford to come to rice. ....... bout to start my research.

So early analysis based off numbers..... Stanford... not in top 50 in total offense.... not in the top five in passing efficiency.... very low 3rd down conversion pct.

These scare me. Offensive line coaches traditionally aren't great offensive coordinators usually speaking. They tend to lack creativity.

I will wait for full eval based off who his coordinators are and asst coaches.... those are just as vital as the head man.

(12-06-2017 08:13 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  So early analysis based off numbers..... Stanford... not in top 50 in total offense.... not in the top five in passing efficiency.... very low 3rd down conversion pct.
These scare me. Offensive line coaches traditionally aren't great offensive coordinators usually speaking. They tend to lack creativity.
I will wait for full eval based off who his coordinators are and asst coaches.... those are just as vital as the head man.

He needs a great OC and DC. More DC than OC, we really need a major transformation there. And a bunch of guys who can recruit, recruit, recruit.

If he brings focus, discipline, and execution, we'll be fine. That's enough to win in CUSA.

First test will be can he move the needle any on this incoming recruiting class.

I like that he has recruiting contacts in Georgia and Florida. I have always thought we ought to recruit the southeast more. Vandy doesn't really recruit to the same profile as we do, so there's really nobody between Duke and here. It's a big area with a lot of speed, and we need to get us some.

(12-06-2017 07:44 PM)NLOWL Wrote:  I called Bloomgren on this board before anyone else and I stuck with that call. Cr11owl asked who the QB is going to be next year... I say it will be Tyner. Of course many will say he had his chance and didn't impress. I say he wins the job. Call it a hunch. But I think he fits the style of play that a Stanford coach will bring to Rice. Just my opinion. Of course it ain't worth much.

Sent from my SM-G935V using CSNbbs mobile app

Say it isn't so . You're proving the ABO

(12-06-2017 08:20 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 08:13 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  So early analysis based off numbers..... Stanford... not in top 50 in total offense.... not in the top five in passing efficiency.... very low 3rd down conversion pct.
These scare me. Offensive line coaches traditionally aren't great offensive coordinators usually speaking. They tend to lack creativity.
I will wait for full eval based off who his coordinators are and asst coaches.... those are just as vital as the head man.

He needs a great OC and DC. More DC than OC, we really need a major transformation there. And a bunch of guys who can recruit, recruit, recruit.

If he brings focus, discipline, and execution, we'll be fine. That's enough to win in CUSA.

First test will be can he move the needle any on this incoming recruiting class.

Stewart was interim. Did we fire Lynch though?

Rethinking it, I will re-assess next year when he finishes recruiting. If he can turn a couple of 3*+ in our direction, we just might be on the way to something big.

9 wins is a ridiculous expectation for next season. The reason Kiffin was able to turn things around so quickly is because he brought in half of his recruiting class from the MS JuCos and other questionable backgrounds...

Personally, I'd expect our turnaround to mirror that of UNT or UTSA. 5 or 6 wins next season, followed by a better season in 2019.

We are going to be incredibly thin on defense next year, especially at the linebacker position.

True... and our kids actually go to class and do school work.

Sent from my SM-G935V using CSNbbs mobile app

(12-06-2017 08:48 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  9 wins is a ridiculous expectation for next season. The reason Kiffin was able to turn things around so quickly is because he brought in half of his recruiting class from the MS JuCos and other questionable backgrounds...
Personally, I'd expect our turnaround to mirror that of UNT or UTSA. 5 or 6 wins next season, followed by a better season in 2019.
We are going to be incredibly thin on defense next year, especially at the linebacker position.

Couple of things we don't know--who he might move over there, and who he might recruit. Also, we don't know what impact S&C changes might have on injuries. Keep people healthy and depth is less of a problem. Also keep them fit and they can go longer.

I think Bailiff's teams played hard, but their preparation and execution were horrific. I really don't know how much difference preparation can make, but we just might be about to find out. I kind of feel about the 2017 like I felt about Hat's last team, that they majorly underperformed their talent level. I think we could see the same kind of turnaround next year.

(12-06-2017 09:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 08:48 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  9 wins is a ridiculous expectation for next season. The reason Kiffin was able to turn things around so quickly is because he brought in half of his recruiting class from the MS JuCos and other questionable backgrounds...
Personally, I'd expect our turnaround to mirror that of UNT or UTSA. 5 or 6 wins next season, followed by a better season in 2019.
We are going to be incredibly thin on defense next year, especially at the linebacker position.

Couple of things we don't know--who he might move over there, and who he might recruit. Also, we don't know what impact S&C changes might have on injuries. Keep people healthy and depth is less of a problem. Also keep them fit and they can go longer.

I think Bailiff's teams played hard, but their preparation and execution were horrific. I really don't know how much difference preparation can make, but we just might be about to find out. I kind of feel about the 2017 like I felt about Hat's last team, that they majorly underperformed their talent level. I think we could see the same kind of turnaround next year.

Yeah, exactly. I feel like we could see a turnaround like we saw in '06. About 6 wins.

Some posters in the other thread were suggesting 8-9.

(12-06-2017 09:14 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 09:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 08:48 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  9 wins is a ridiculous expectation for next season. The reason Kiffin was able to turn things around so quickly is because he brought in half of his recruiting class from the MS JuCos and other questionable backgrounds...
Personally, I'd expect our turnaround to mirror that of UNT or UTSA. 5 or 6 wins next season, followed by a better season in 2019.
We are going to be incredibly thin on defense next year, especially at the linebacker position.

Couple of things we don't know--who he might move over there, and who he might recruit. Also, we don't know what impact S&C changes might have on injuries. Keep people healthy and depth is less of a problem. Also keep them fit and they can go longer.
I think Bailiff's teams played hard, but their preparation and execution were horrific. I really don't know how much difference preparation can make, but we just might be about to find out. I kind of feel about the 2017 like I felt about Hat's last team, that they majorly underperformed their talent level. I think we could see the same kind of turnaround next year.

Yeah, exactly. I feel like we could see a turnaround like we saw in '06. About 6 wins.
Some posters in the other thread were suggesting 8-9.

Because CUSA is so week, I think it could be that high.

(12-06-2017 08:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I like that he has recruiting contacts in Georgia and Florida. I have always thought we ought to recruit the southeast more. Vandy doesn't really recruit to the same profile as we do, so there's really nobody between Duke and here. It's a big area with a lot of speed, and we need to get us some.

A certain school in New Orleans might take offense to that comment, but it's still not like the space is crowded.

(12-06-2017 09:32 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  

(12-06-2017 08:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I like that he has recruiting contacts in Georgia and Florida. I have always thought we ought to recruit the southeast more. Vandy doesn't really recruit to the same profile as we do, so there's really nobody between Duke and here. It's a big area with a lot of speed, and we need to get us some.

A certain school in New Orleans might take offense to that comment, but it's still not like the space is crowded.

Yes, but their recruiting profile is more like Vandy's than like ours.

Biggest takeaways I had from it were that in terms of style he sounds an awful lot like what OwlNumbers describes Goldsmith as being like. Focus on sound defense, also the "if I can get Mom on campus, he's coming here" line.

(12-06-2017 09:46 PM)baker-13 Wrote:  Biggest takeaways I had from it were that in terms of style he sounds an awful lot like what OwlNumbers describes Goldsmith as being like. Focus on sound defense, also the "if I can get Mom on campus, he's coming here" line.

I have to agree, he reminds me a lot of Fred. Fred was more glib, with quick one-liners, while Bloomgren seems more deliberate and thoughtful, but I see a lot of similarities.