(05-29-2018 09:56 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Cryptic twitter message to me from Kendall after I responded to a tweet in which he mentioned Coach Pierce and Herman Coachman...

Quote:Kendall Rogers
@KendallRogers
1m1 minute ago
More Kendall Rogers Retweeted Walter Greenberg
Okay, I’ll give you good news, Walt. Good news is headed @RiceBaseball’s direction soon … maybe in about a week.

One can only hope. I know Kendall is a huge Saarloos supporter, but considers Dreggs ahead of Riser on the potential candidates list. Not sure who he's talking to as I don't believe he has a relationship with JK.

I responded, "I'm hoping you're right, K. I want either Saarloos or Riser"...to which he just responded...

Quote:Kendall Rogers
‏@KendallRogers
2m2 minutes ago
Funny you mention that …… coming shortly.

Also, just posted...

Quote:Mark Berman
@MarkBermanFox26
4m4 minutes ago
College baseball sources: Rice received permission from TCU to interview Horned Frogs pitching coach Kirk Saarloos as the Owls search for a new coach for @RiceBaseball. Saarloos has been TCU's pitching coach since 2012. Played 7 years in the Big Leagues. With the #Astros 2002-03

Quote:Kendall Rogers
(@KendallRogers)
I would caution @RiceBaseball fans not to get too excited here. JIm Schlossnagle remains a very very strong candidate for the @HailStateBB job. Should Schloss go to MSU, Saarloos is fully expected to get the #TCU job. Stay tuned.

Reading between the lines of many of these tweets I’d expect Saarloos to be our next head coach unless (and it’s a big ?) Schlossnagle leaves the TCU job.

(05-29-2018 10:26 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Reading between the lines of many of these tweets I’d expect Saarloos to be our next head coach unless (and it’s a big ?) Schlossnagle leaves the TCU job.

Schloss is the leader for the MSU job. Not a shoe-in, but far better than 50/50.

(05-29-2018 10:42 PM)AggieOwl01 Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 10:26 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Reading between the lines of many of these tweets I’d expect Saarloos to be our next head coach unless (and it’s a big ?) Schlossnagle leaves the TCU job.

Schloss is the leader for the MSU job. Not a shoe-in, but far better than 50/50.

Yes, he's the leading candidate (along with McDonnell), and I'm sure MSU will make him a lucrative offer, but it's not as if TCU doesn't have the resources to match, if not beat, MSU's offer...and it's not at all inconceivable that Schloss is playing this out to get the big pay raise out of TCU. Can't blame him for doing so.

(05-29-2018 09:22 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I'm scratching my head with your comment that Saarloos is simply potential and unproven. He's widely considered among the Top 3 assistant coaches in all of college baseball. And I wouldn't call him the #3 guy at TCU. No, he's not the Assistant Head Coach, but he's the pitching coach (and, unlike The OG, Schloz leaves the pitching to his pitching coach) and head recruiter, which are arguably the two most important coaching jobs in college baseball besides the head coaching job itself. You get what you pay for. Of all the potential candidates out there, no one comes close on the risk factor scale to Berkman, who is totally unproven as a D-1 college coach.

Well he's not the head coach, nor the assistant head coach... so I don't see calling him the number 3 as being somehow inappropriate. If you want to call him 2a, okay.

I also fail to understand how saying he is 'potential' is in any way inaccurate, given that he's never been a head coach on ANY level.

That doesn't mean that he isn't as highly regarded as you think, nor does it mean he won't be successful wherever he goes....
but as I said, after growing up in California and playing college there, plus about half of his pro career there... he turned down Stanford, whom I suspect has as much or more to pay him and has a similar profile to ours... so in order to get him, I believe we're going to have to pay close to 7 figures... and more significantly, if he IS successful, will we be able to pay even more to keep him, or will we (as in football and basketball) simply be looking to replace them every few years?

There are a variety of ways to assess/evaluate risk... and 'price' is one of them... as is stability... and another is what resources have to be taken from one sport in order to live up to the promises of another.

(05-29-2018 09:16 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:53 AM)HooCares Wrote:  Not good enough for me. Since HC's wear the university's uniform, they need to project the right image, including being judicious about voicing personal political views. I'm not sure he knows when to shut his mouth. Who one wants to hire a PR headache?

He has said he really wants to be a preacher. Why doesn't he just go do that?

Are you now introducing a political test for the head baseball coaching role? If so, that's absurd and very intolerant of you.

Triggered.

(05-29-2018 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 04:42 PM)Rice81 Wrote:  Rice has the prestige and name recognition in baseball. We need to definitely leverage of that and hire a suitable coach that will take us to a top 10 finish regularly. We can't guess and hope that some one from a lesser conference and status may grow as a coach and take us to where we have been in the recent past. We are in the same spot as when Jess Neely left. After Neely left, it only took 10 years for Rice to become irrelevant in college football. Let's not blow this.

To do that will be a very expensive coach.

I think that one of the root problems with Rice Athletics overall is money -- both spent and revenues.

So, from a business perspective (from which it is at Karlgaard's level) how much revenue can you pull out of NCAA baseball, and how much do you need to spend to do that?

I dont think baseball ever will be a 'money sport' for anyone except the top P5 programs, maybe even not for them. So why would you commit large op-ex to a low margin business unit with zero to no prospect for revenue growth? Makes zero sense.

Trust me, I would love to see a restoration of the Rice grandeur in baseball. But a large investment in it at this time with *no* appreciable revenues from *anywhere* else make no sense in the slightest.

Karlgaard probably has the ability to throw one set of dice -- that is all he has the money for. I think Karlgaard lined up his bets on FB and that is where the op-ex is going to be sent.

Without a large private-side push and with no appreciable revenues, all the monies to uplift Rice sports in toto are budgeted by the administration through Karlgaard. Where do you think the limited resources should be expended to benefit Rice athletics as a whole?

The tea leaves tell me that question was decided, probably at the end of last year's BB season, where Karlgaard knew that he *had* to perform emergency surgery on FB, and wasnt prepared to try to resuscitate men's BB with the Rhoades/starters leaving en masse debacle that happened in parallel.

edited to add: Again, no inside information here in the slightest. Bloviating and sheer speculation abound aplenty in the above.....

You may be right in the sense that money is the limiting factor. Yet baseball may be the only reason at this moment as to why we are in Div 1 sports. This alone may trump everything else. Yes, getting a coach that we all like may cost money as opposed to throwing a dice and hoping for the best.

It is easy to speculate without having all the facts before us and I guess that is what we are all doing.

Berkman or bust

(05-30-2018 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:16 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:53 AM)HooCares Wrote:  Not good enough for me. Since HC's wear the university's uniform, they need to project the right image, including being judicious about voicing personal political views. I'm not sure he knows when to shut his mouth. Who one wants to hire a PR headache?

He has said he really wants to be a preacher. Why doesn't he just go do that?

Are you now introducing a political test for the head baseball coaching role? If so, that's absurd and very intolerant of you.

Triggered.

More a test of judgement. Personally, if I harbored ambitions of being a college HC, I don't see myself using my standing in the community to slap my face on a bathroom bill or any divisive political issue like that. I'd think twice then not do it.

(05-30-2018 10:29 AM)HooCares Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:16 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:53 AM)HooCares Wrote:  Not good enough for me. Since HC's wear the university's uniform, they need to project the right image, including being judicious about voicing personal political views. I'm not sure he knows when to shut his mouth. Who one wants to hire a PR headache?

He has said he really wants to be a preacher. Why doesn't he just go do that?

Are you now introducing a political test for the head baseball coaching role? If so, that's absurd and very intolerant of you.

Triggered.

More a test of judgement. Personally, if I harbored ambitions of being a college HC, I don't see myself using my standing in the community to slap my face on a bathroom bill or any divisive political issue like that. I'd think twice then not do it.

Yup. It's really a no-brainer (no pun intended...)

(05-30-2018 10:36 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 10:29 AM)HooCares Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:16 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:53 AM)HooCares Wrote:  Not good enough for me. Since HC's wear the university's uniform, they need to project the right image, including being judicious about voicing personal political views. I'm not sure he knows when to shut his mouth. Who one wants to hire a PR headache?

He has said he really wants to be a preacher. Why doesn't he just go do that?

Are you now introducing a political test for the head baseball coaching role? If so, that's absurd and very intolerant of you.

Triggered.

More a test of judgement. Personally, if I harbored ambitions of being a college HC, I don't see myself using my standing in the community to slap my face on a bathroom bill or any divisive political issue like that. I'd think twice then not do it.

Yup. It's really a no-brainer (no pun intended...)

Lance shouldn't be on the short list for HC because of baseball reasons.

Bending yourself into a mental pretzel because he is infrequently politically active (I think bathroom bill is the only time he has stuck his head out) seems extremely petty and smacks of close mindedness on your part.

As I am a libertarian and otherwise conservative person, if we hired a Bernie Bro who also advocated for the promulgation of the incongruity between phenotype and genotype and was a Karl Marx fanatic, I would not really give a damn if he simply could get back on the super regional train. Who really cares what the political persuasion is...he is a baseball coach not a supreme court justice.

If for some reason Lance gets the job AND he becomes overtly political AND it appears to besmirch the university or be a component of on-field failure, then I would agree with you. He literally made a few public statements and allowed his likeness to be used for one political issue that was important to him. And it was a 50/50 political issue based on his religious beliefs, not something crazy or fringe based. So if you want to discriminate on someone because of their religious beliefs because they supported a 50/50 issue, then that is all on you not on Lance. Also, please list all religious activities which would preclude someone from coaching the team along with any other beliefs, hobbies, etc. which you don't agree with personally. I am sure all of that is really important and applicable to recruiting and coaching baseball players from the heartland who know what SLG and WHIP are all about and could not give a damn about XX and XY.

If we base our hire on whether or not somebody came out in support or against a damn bathroom bill a few years ago then we’re truly stupid.

I don’t give a crap what side of the bathroom bill Lance is on or if he spoke out about it well before he had ambitions of becoming the HC at Rice. If he’s the right guy to get this program back on track, then HIRE HIM.

Kids these days know who Lance Berkman is...and they damn sure know Andy Pettitte....if that helps land bigger fish great! What exactly do we have to lose? The program declines? Seriously? Let’s go for it!

(05-30-2018 11:18 AM)Owl1998 Wrote:  If we base our hire on whether or not somebody came out in support or against a damn bathroom bill a few years ago then we’re truly stupid.

I don’t give a crap what side of the bathroom bill Lance is on or if he spoke out about it well before he had ambitions of becoming the HC at Rice. If he’s the right guy to get this program back on track, then HIRE HIM.

Kids these days know who Lance Berkman is...and they damn sure know Andy Pettitte....if that helps land bigger fish great! What exactly do we have to lose? The program declines? Seriously? Let’s go for it!

Lance and Andy would probably be great recruiters. Neither has an impressive track record as a coach. Coaching still matters. Hiring Lance would be an error.

(05-30-2018 11:30 AM)ranfin Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 11:18 AM)Owl1998 Wrote:  If we base our hire on whether or not somebody came out in support or against a damn bathroom bill a few years ago then we’re truly stupid.

I don’t give a crap what side of the bathroom bill Lance is on or if he spoke out about it well before he had ambitions of becoming the HC at Rice. If he’s the right guy to get this program back on track, then HIRE HIM.

Kids these days know who Lance Berkman is...and they damn sure know Andy Pettitte....if that helps land bigger fish great! What exactly do we have to lose? The program declines? Seriously? Let’s go for it!

Lance and Andy would probably be great recruiters. Neither has an impressive track record as a coach. Coaching still matters. Hiring Lance would be an error.

Hiring Lance as the head coach would be a mistake.

Maybe he is the next great head coach in college baseball, but I think the risk is too great at this junction, given that he has pretty much no track record to fall back on.

Just addressing the topic... not endorsing nor refuting...

but if Lance would be the recruiter we want and Pettit the pitching coach, and say Pope (or someone like him) the nuts and bolts guy... why wouldn't that work?

The Astros once won a pennant iirc with a broadcaster as manager and while I certainly understand the game is different, so were the stakes. Why does the head coach need to be the guy who decides when to pull pitchers or not, or when to hit and run or to work with admissions or academic counseling or whatever. I understand that's the traditional role, but so what?

We've been talking about TCU coaches and they have a head coach, an assistant head coach and a pitching coach, whom most people seem to think would/could be as good or better than either of them. Other than the familiarity with the names, this isn't substantially different from what I pitched for football as a way to get more bang for the buck than following the traditional path.

Imo, it similarly has the upside that if Berkman and/or Pettit don't really want to do this for 5-10-20 years, that you can elevate someone like Pope (not saying him necessarily, but the experienced worker behind the success) who would have the respect of the players and then hire others like Janish or Cruz or Rendon after their careers are over to continue with the name recognition and the connection to younger players and top recruits with sites on the majors.

(05-30-2018 11:17 AM)flash3200 Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 10:36 AM)Intellectual_Brutality Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 10:29 AM)HooCares Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:16 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  Are you now introducing a political test for the head baseball coaching role? If so, that's absurd and very intolerant of you.

Triggered.

More a test of judgement. Personally, if I harbored ambitions of being a college HC, I don't see myself using my standing in the community to slap my face on a bathroom bill or any divisive political issue like that. I'd think twice then not do it.

Yup. It's really a no-brainer (no pun intended...)

Lance shouldn't be on the short list for HC because of baseball reasons.

Bending yourself into a mental pretzel because he is infrequently politically active (I think bathroom bill is the only time he has stuck his head out) seems extremely petty and smacks of close mindedness on your part.

As I am a libertarian and otherwise conservative person, if we hired a Bernie Bro who also advocated for the promulgation of the incongruity between phenotype and genotype and was a Karl Marx fanatic, I would not really give a damn if he simply could get back on the super regional train. Who really cares what the political persuasion is...he is a baseball coach not a supreme court justice.

If for some reason Lance gets the job AND he becomes overtly political AND it appears to besmirch the university or be a component of on-field failure, then I would agree with you. He literally made a few public statements and allowed his likeness to be used for one political issue that was important to him. And it was a 50/50 political issue based on his religious beliefs, not something crazy or fringe based. So if you want to discriminate on someone because of their religious beliefs because they supported a 50/50 issue, then that is all on you not on Lance. Also, please list all religious activities which would preclude someone from coaching the team along with any other beliefs, hobbies, etc. which you don't agree with personally. I am sure all of that is really important and applicable to recruiting and coaching baseball players from the heartland who know what SLG and WHIP are all about and could not give a damn about XX and XY.

You miss my point.

(05-29-2018 11:32 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:22 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I'm scratching my head with your comment that Saarloos is simply potential and unproven. He's widely considered among the Top 3 assistant coaches in all of college baseball. And I wouldn't call him the #3 guy at TCU. No, he's not the Assistant Head Coach, but he's the pitching coach (and, unlike The OG, Schloz leaves the pitching to his pitching coach) and head recruiter, which are arguably the two most important coaching jobs in college baseball besides the head coaching job itself. You get what you pay for. Of all the potential candidates out there, no one comes close on the risk factor scale to Berkman, who is totally unproven as a D-1 college coach.

Well he's not the head coach, nor the assistant head coach... so I don't see calling him the number 3 as being somehow inappropriate. If you want to call him 2a, okay.

I also fail to understand how saying he is 'potential' is in any way inaccurate, given that he's never been a head coach on ANY level.

That doesn't mean that he isn't as highly regarded as you think, nor does it mean he won't be successful wherever he goes....
but as I said, after growing up in California and playing college there, plus about half of his pro career there... he turned down Stanford, whom I suspect has as much or more to pay him and has a similar profile to ours... so in order to get him, I believe we're going to have to pay close to 7 figures... and more significantly, if he IS successful, will we be able to pay even more to keep him, or will we (as in football and basketball) simply be looking to replace them every few years?

There are a variety of ways to assess/evaluate risk... and 'price' is one of them... as is stability... and another is what resources have to be taken from one sport in order to live up to the promises of another.

Ham

Mahalo for stating the obvious( seriously, not being derogatory)
The guy is an assistant, so has potential, but NO track record as the head man.
There has been a lot of talk on this board re $$$ being taken from bb as part of a plan to get rid of WG. ( It wasn't long ago that the posters on this board were saying $$ was being taken from FB to build up other sports. No one asserted that was an effort to undermine DB, IIRC). I dont see how the new renovations, and now, reportedly, talking to a potential hire, likely to make at least 750K , accomplishes that goal. I do think that if JK felt WG was no longer producing at the level his salary commands, that is a potential issue. Perhaps WG was just too influential for JK , although I would hope there is no petty politics going on that fuels these sorts of decisions. Just my random thoughts

(05-30-2018 12:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Just addressing the topic... not endorsing nor refuting...

but if Lance would be the recruiter we want and Pettit the pitching coach, and say Pope (or someone like him) the nuts and bolts guy... why wouldn't that work?

The Astros once won a pennant iirc with a broadcaster as manager and while I certainly understand the game is different, so were the stakes. Why does the head coach need to be the guy who decides when to pull pitchers or not, or when to hit and run or to work with admissions or academic counseling or whatever. I understand that's the traditional role, but so what?

We've been talking about TCU coaches and they have a head coach, an assistant head coach and a pitching coach, whom most people seem to think would/could be as good or better than either of them. Other than the familiarity with the names, this isn't substantially different from what I pitched for football as a way to get more bang for the buck than following the traditional path.

Imo, it similarly has the upside that if Berkman and/or Pettit don't really want to do this for 5-10-20 years, that you can elevate someone like Pope (not saying him necessarily, but the experienced worker behind the success) who would have the respect of the players and then hire others like Janish or Cruz or Rendon after their careers are over to continue with the name recognition and the connection to younger players and top recruits with sites on the majors.

Why would Pope be the nuts and bolts guy? Our pitching staff has done nothing the last two years to make me think that Pope is a great college coach.

(05-30-2018 12:46 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 12:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Just addressing the topic... not endorsing nor refuting...

but if Lance would be the recruiter we want and Pettit the pitching coach, and say Pope (or someone like him) the nuts and bolts guy... why wouldn't that work?

The Astros once won a pennant iirc with a broadcaster as manager and while I certainly understand the game is different, so were the stakes. Why does the head coach need to be the guy who decides when to pull pitchers or not, or when to hit and run or to work with admissions or academic counseling or whatever. I understand that's the traditional role, but so what?

We've been talking about TCU coaches and they have a head coach, an assistant head coach and a pitching coach, whom most people seem to think would/could be as good or better than either of them. Other than the familiarity with the names, this isn't substantially different from what I pitched for football as a way to get more bang for the buck than following the traditional path.

Imo, it similarly has the upside that if Berkman and/or Pettit don't really want to do this for 5-10-20 years, that you can elevate someone like Pope (not saying him necessarily, but the experienced worker behind the success) who would have the respect of the players and then hire others like Janish or Cruz or Rendon after their careers are over to continue with the name recognition and the connection to younger players and top recruits with sites on the majors.

Why would Pope be the nuts and bolts guy? Our pitching staff has done nothing the last two years to make me think that Pope is a great college coach.

It wouldn't need to be Pope, just someone experienced with the day-to-day on-field operations of a successful college baseball program

(05-30-2018 01:12 PM)BSWBRice Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 12:46 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 12:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Just addressing the topic... not endorsing nor refuting...

but if Lance would be the recruiter we want and Pettit the pitching coach, and say Pope (or someone like him) the nuts and bolts guy... why wouldn't that work?

The Astros once won a pennant iirc with a broadcaster as manager and while I certainly understand the game is different, so were the stakes. Why does the head coach need to be the guy who decides when to pull pitchers or not, or when to hit and run or to work with admissions or academic counseling or whatever. I understand that's the traditional role, but so what?

We've been talking about TCU coaches and they have a head coach, an assistant head coach and a pitching coach, whom most people seem to think would/could be as good or better than either of them. Other than the familiarity with the names, this isn't substantially different from what I pitched for football as a way to get more bang for the buck than following the traditional path.

Imo, it similarly has the upside that if Berkman and/or Pettit don't really want to do this for 5-10-20 years, that you can elevate someone like Pope (not saying him necessarily, but the experienced worker behind the success) who would have the respect of the players and then hire others like Janish or Cruz or Rendon after their careers are over to continue with the name recognition and the connection to younger players and top recruits with sites on the majors.

Why would Pope be the nuts and bolts guy? Our pitching staff has done nothing the last two years to make me think that Pope is a great college coach.

It wouldn't need to be Pope, just someone experienced with the day-to-day on-field operations of a successful college baseball program

right... that's why I said someone like him... a former head coach with some college and recruiting experience who now perhaps doesn't need to be a great pitching coach because of Pettit

By nuts and bolts I meant things OTHER than hitting and pitching which you'd think Berkman and Pettit would be superior to most in terms of at least attracting, if not developing great pitching and hitting