(09-11-2021 11:37 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(09-11-2021 11:21 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(09-11-2021 11:18 PM)seniorowl Wrote:  This Stanford hatred stuff really needs to stop. We are above this.

Why?

Everything he brings from Stanford sucks, coach, playbook or player is below replacement level.

One thing for sure: it's a lie that Bloomgren runs some kind of "Stanford offense". Through 1½ games, Stanford has 41 passes and 36 rushing attempts. Bloomgren is much more conservative (stupid). Rice has 54 passes and 75 rushes in 2 full games.

2020 Stanford 37 passes/game 32.8 rushes
2020 Rice 26.6 passes/game 43.2 rushes

2019 Stanford 37 passes/game 28.8 rushes
2019 Rice 26.6 passes/game 35.9 rushes

2018 Stanford 32.5 passes/game 29.5 rushes
2018 Rice 28.3 passes/game 37.7 rushes

To build on this, we're so run heavy on first down it's absurd. Overall for the game, we ran 19 times on first down, and passed 6. 11/5 in the first half, 8/1 in the second half. We averaged 4.7 ypc on those, but that's a little skewed by the last drive of the game. If you exclude the last drive, we averaged 3.2 ypc

Of the 19 first down runs, 12 gained 3 yards or less. If you exclude the last drive of the game, 75% of our first down runs gained 3 yards or less, and 56% (9/16) gained 2 yards or less.

I suppose our first down passing wasn't much better. Our six first down passes for the game went INT/15 yards/INT/DPI/11 yards/INC.

Maybe the reality is our offense is just bad. Might not really matter much whether we run or pass. I will say, though, that this is a miserable offense to watch as a fan. If we were averaging 4.7 ypc, it might be entertaining, but right now it's painful to watch.

(09-11-2021 11:20 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Bloomgren is now 7-25 (.219)

In Rice's history, only 2 coaches who have had at least 3 seasons have worse records:

Ray Alborn 13-53 (.197)
Jerry Berndt 6-27 (.182)

They both coached in the Southwest Conference.

i was among the suffering servants of Jerry..... please, please...I beg all who have any influence... fire this moron Bloom!!!!

(09-11-2021 08:55 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Just a poorly played game in every facet. No pass rush whatsoever. How do you put no pressure on the opposing QB on back-to-back 3rd & 19 and 3rd and 17 on the same drive?

I actually thought Rice and Coach Smith made some nice adjustments to get more pressure on Tune after the 1st quarter. It worked plenty of times which is how UH ended up in so many 3rd-and-long situations. But when the blitzes were picked up, Tune and UH made some plays.

Defense was disappointing, but they looked kind of “meh” whereas the offense looked like hot puke.

(09-11-2021 09:32 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  I would have booed him in Mandarin.

I think we all get that you are virulently anti-Chinese, bordering on racist and/or xenophobic. No need to shove it down our throats in almost every thread. Rooting for Rice football is tough enough…

(09-12-2021 01:18 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I think we all get that you are virulently anti-Chinese, bordering on racist and/or xenophobic. No need to shove it down our throats in almost every thread. Rooting for Rice football is tough enough…

Only a fool would not see the danger poised by the PRC. I would welcome all students from Taiwan. If you don't understand the difference, you are one of those fools.

The defense can do only so much when the offense is barely on the field, and totally uninspiring. How can anyone on the defensive side of the ball have any confidence that the offense will do anything? Houston's defense will struggle all year, except, of course, for this game.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter who the "Offensive Coordinator" happens to be; as long as Bloomgren is the head coach, we're still going to have 60% running plays that will almost never reach a 4 yard average (maybe not even 3).

It's time to move on. Texas will crush Rice, and after that game would be the best time to let Bloomgren go. That way, the interim coach would have a clean slate before the TSU game.

I don't have a problem with 60% running per se but the scheme and play calling of such? Double tight end and I formation hand off into the line? Bo Hagan ran that offense in 1968

(09-11-2021 10:51 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Sadly, I think this all starts with the offensive scheme and the play calling. At least that ridiculous turn and pitch wasn't called. This looks like 09-11, early 12 and 15-17. Or Jerry Berndt or Bob Polk, the ultimate insult.

The Berndt reference is interesting. Jerry's problem was that he had better athletes at Rice than he had at Penn, so he couldn't understand why he couldn't get the same results he got at Penn. His mind never quite worked out how much better TexasU and Pardee's UH and Hatfield's Arkansas and Sherrill's aTm were than Harvard and Yale and Dartmouth and Brown.

I think Bloomgren may be having a similar experience. He saw this stuff work at Stanford with 12 NFL draft selections and 11 All-Americans, and can't quite wrap his head around the fact that it's not working at Rice with considerably different (and lesser) talent. He's not a bad coach with the right talent to make his system work, but my worry from the start has been that he's not going to get that talent at Rice.

My criticism of the play calling is really a criticism of the scheme. We run plays, not a coordinated offense. Hatfield ran the fullback up the middle a lot, but it set up the QB keep and the pitch and the other dimensions of the option. And when he threw it was usually deep, to keep the safety from jumping the option. I don't see the same kinds of complementary relationships in Bloomgren's scheme. When you out-athlete the other team, you can just line up and run plays, but when you don't, you need a method to your scheming, and I don't see it here.

I don't think it's any coincidence that the most impressive single game result in Bloomgren's time at Rice came in a game where injuries at the QB position forced him to get away from his basic scheme.

By the way, as an aside related to Berndt, many of us were highly impressed with his offensive coordinator, Don Dobes. Don is now back in the Ivy League, as defensive coordinator at Dartmouth.

(09-12-2021 07:27 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-11-2021 10:51 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Sadly, I think this all starts with the offensive scheme and the play calling. At least that ridiculous turn and pitch wasn't called. This looks like 09-11, early 12 and 15-17. Or Jerry Berndt or Bob Polk, the ultimate insult.

The Berndt reference is interesting. Jerry's problem was that he had better athletes at Rice than he had at Penn, so he couldn't understand why he couldn't get the same results he got at Penn. His mind never quite worked out how much better TexasU and Pardee's UH and Hatfield's Arkansas and Sherrill's aTm were than Harvard and Yale and Dartmouth and Brown.

I think Bloomgren may be having a similar experience. He saw this stuff work at Stanford with 12 NFL draft selections and 11 All-Americans, and can't quite wrap his head around the fact that it's not working at Rice with considerably different (and lesser) talent. He's not a bad coach with the right talent to make his system work, but my worry from the start has been that he's not going to get that talent at Rice.

My criticism of the play calling is really a criticism of the scheme. We run plays, not a coordinated offense. Hatfield ran the fullback up the middle a lot, but it set up the QB keep and the pitch and the other dimensions of the option. And when he threw it was usually deep, to keep the safety from jumping the option. I don't see the same kinds of complementary relationships in Bloomgren's scheme. When you out-athlete the other team, you can just line up and run plays, but when you don't, you need a method to your scheming, and I don't see it here.

I don't think it's any coincidence that the most impressive single game result in Bloomgren's time at Rice came in a game where injuries at the QB position forced him to get away from his basic scheme.

By the way, as an aside related to Berndt, many of us were highly impressed with his offensive coordinator, Don Dobes. Don is now back in the Ivy League, as defensive coordinator at Dartmouth.

If you have elite level players, winning becomes easy, no matter the “system.” For an NFL example look at Adam Gase. Tremendous success with Peyton Manning and a super talented team in Denver. He had 1 scheme that he never wavered from. Did not work anywhere else. In fact in Miami and New York as head coach, he was thought of as possibly the worst coach in league.

Good coaches get the most out of their players and taylor things to their strengths. They find ways to put players in positions to succeed and ultimately find ways to win games. Bloomgren does none of that. His body of work over 4 years is frighteningly bad. At this point, it is fair to say HE IS A TERRIBLE COACH.

(09-12-2021 06:30 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(09-12-2021 01:18 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I think we all get that you are virulently anti-Chinese, bordering on racist and/or xenophobic. No need to shove it down our throats in almost every thread. Rooting for Rice football is tough enough…

Only a fool would not see the danger poised by the PRC. I would welcome all students from Taiwan. If you don't understand the difference, you are one of those fools.

I have seen you write and insinuate many negative things about human beings born in China, descendants of humans born in China, and humans you perceive to be from China. I have seen you write and insinuate far less about the government of China. Ergo my comment. Feel free to provide insightful comments on geo politics in threads where it is relevant. Being snide about Rice students, faculty, administrators, or spouses of those categories in a football thread just really isn’t the place (especially over and over again).

(09-11-2021 06:13 PM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  

(09-11-2021 06:11 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(09-11-2021 06:10 PM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  Rice NEVER has the speed to compete with Houston, or just about anyone else. Can that ever change?

You give any QB that kind of time and the slowest receivers can get open.

Might need Sandra Bullock to come out on the field and remind them of their assignments.

That comment was worth reading this entire thread!

(09-11-2021 06:13 PM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  Might need Sandra Bullock to come out on the field and remind them of their assignments.

There is a guy who used to post on the Memphis board that was a neighbor of the Tuohys in Memphis. He said that Sandra Bullock's portrayal of Leigh Ann Roberts Tuohy was so realistic that he had a hard time not believing it was not actually Leigh Ann when he watched it.

I think where I have a problem with some of the comments on this thread is that we have gone to trashing an entire group of people (either from a country or a university). Generalizing or stereotyping an entire group of people is why we are such a divided country right now. Everyone is so wound up in making the opposing group of people the enemy. If you have issues with a certain person, state it, don’t group an entire people together.

(09-12-2021 07:47 AM)jowls13 Wrote:  If you have elite level players, winning becomes easy, no matter the “system.” For an NFL example look at Adam Gase. Tremendous success with Peyton Manning and a super talented team in Denver. He had 1 scheme that he never wavered from. Did not work anywhere else. In fact in Miami and New York as head coach, he was thought of as possibly the worst coach in league.
Good coaches get the most out of their players and taylor things to their strengths. They find ways to put players in positions to succeed and ultimately find ways to win games. Bloomgren does none of that. His body of work over 4 years is frighteningly bad. At this point, it is fair to say HE IS A TERRIBLE COACH.

I don't think he is universally a terrible coach. Obviously he was anything but a terrible coach as the O-line/Co-OC at Stanford. But his system is ill-suited to the athletes that he is apt to recruit at Rice. It is the same square pegs into round holes situation that I often criticized with Bailiff, and that concerned me from day one of "pound the rock." Bailiff caught lightning in a bottle twice, with CC and TMcH as QBs (although his first year with CC was pretty dreadful). Bloomgren hasn't had that happen yet, probably because his round holes are harder to force Rice athletes into than Bailiff's were.

Look at the philosophies of the coaches who have had some success here in the last 50 years:

Fred Goldsmith--sound defense, win the kicking game, and have a QB
Ken Hatfield--do something different on offense (his teams were better early, when he had better defenses; his offenses continued to score, but his defenses declined)
Al Conover--big emphasis on special teams (his teams also played good defense, with the likes of Cornelius Walker)

And look at the ones who have failed:

Bo Hagan--fair offense, godawful defense
Homer Rice--offensive genius, godawful defense
Ray Alborn--had some success, but recruited too many bad actors who didn't pan out
Watson Brown--offensive genius, bad defense
Jerry Berndt--decent offense, terrible defense
Mike Bloomgren--improved defense and special teams, offense totally ill-suited to personnel

I'd put David Bailiff in the middle, some success and some failure but no consistency, and I'd put Bill Peterson and Todd Graham in the too small a sample size category.

Trying to come up with "best practices" from that sample, I would opt for a combination of Fred's and Ken's philosophies:

Play sound defense, win the kicking game, and do something different on offense.

The something different on offense would depend on your talent. It could be anything from Ruowls' passing game to Ken's option, or what I have liked since seeing Erk Russell and Paul Johnson run it with Tracy Ham at Georgia Southern (and Johnson later at Hawaii with Garrett Gabriel) 30+ years ago--a combination of the two--the option running game with the West Coast passing game, adding some run-and-shoot and air raid principles (basically West Coast for quick passing game, air raid for drop-back passes, and run-and-shoot for play action passes). It's supposedly hard to teach, but there are only about 35-40 plays (10 runs, 10ish West Coast because of the way the nomenclature works, 6 run-and-shoot, 7 air raid, and 4-5 screens and draws), so it's not a big playbook. If Georgia Southern's and Hawaii's athletes were smart enough to master it, ours should be able to. McCaffrey probably throws the ball as well as Gabriel, if not Ham, so he could probably execute it. It would be oriented more toward the run with JJ and probably the pass with Green. But the run scheme (and related personnel requirement) is totally different from "pound the rock." The o-line is more quick than big, and you don't need a pure pocket passer. Our running backs would be fine.

Quite frankly, I would never have believed that we could improve our defense as much as we have under Bloomgren and Smith and not get a lot better overall, but our offensive disaster has exceeded anything that I would ever have expected. If Bloomgren keeps trying to pound square pegs into round holes, he will (or at least should be) gone at the end of the year.

Where I have a problem is that dissatisfaction with the football program is manifested as dissatisfaction with the entire University. I am as guilty as any.

(09-12-2021 10:42 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Where I have a problem is that dissatisfaction with the football program is manifested as dissatisfaction with the entire University. I am as guilty as any.

They are connected.

(09-12-2021 10:45 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(09-12-2021 10:42 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Where I have a problem is that dissatisfaction with the football program is manifested as dissatisfaction with the entire University. I am as guilty as any.

They are connected.

My dissatisfaction with the University outside of sports is that the average person, even in Houston is pretty much unaware of Rice in their own city. I don't know what else the University can do to raise their brand awareness but I do know that having a good football or basketball team will raise that exposure exponentially. We're still in the top 20/25 of schools but how long can that last when nobody knows your name?

(09-12-2021 07:27 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-11-2021 10:51 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Sadly, I think this all starts with the offensive scheme and the play calling. At least that ridiculous turn and pitch wasn't called. This looks like 09-11, early 12 and 15-17. Or Jerry Berndt or Bob Polk, the ultimate insult.

...

I think Bloomgren may be having a similar experience. He saw this stuff work at Stanford with 12 NFL draft selections and 11 All-Americans, and can't quite wrap his head around the fact that it's not working at Rice with considerably different (and lesser) talent. He's not a bad coach with the right talent to make his system work, but my worry from the start has been that he's not going to get that talent at Rice.

My criticism of the play calling is really a criticism of the scheme. We run plays, not a coordinated offense. Hatfield ran the fullback up the middle a lot, but it set up the QB keep and the pitch and the other dimensions of the option. And when he threw it was usually deep, to keep the safety from jumping the option. I don't see the same kinds of complementary relationships in Bloomgren's scheme. When you out-athlete the other team, you can just line up and run plays, but when you don't, you need a method to your scheming, and I don't see it here.

I don't think it's any coincidence that the most impressive single game result in Bloomgren's time at Rice came in a game where injuries at the QB position forced him to get away from his basic scheme.

...

I watched the Stanford v USC game last night and it was interesting to see how Shaw has had to open up the offense to succeed with his current team. They are running more spread formations due to talent, and it succeeded wildly last night. They won big over the USC and looked great doing it. Hopefully Shaw is sharing what he's learned over the past couple of years as Stanford struggled. Until the offense adapts, we're doomed to continue with the same losing ways.

(09-12-2021 10:45 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(09-12-2021 10:42 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Where I have a problem is that dissatisfaction with the football program is manifested as dissatisfaction with the entire University. I am as guilty as any.

They are connected.

Historically, for the past 60+ years our Admin has not thought so. Hence the recurring problems continue, and we only "re-align" downwards. That is what seems to have hurt the school the most.

(09-12-2021 10:41 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-12-2021 07:47 AM)jowls13 Wrote:  If you have elite level players, winning becomes easy, no matter the “system.” For an NFL example look at Adam Gase. Tremendous success with Peyton Manning and a super talented team in Denver. He had 1 scheme that he never wavered from. Did not work anywhere else. In fact in Miami and New York as head coach, he was thought of as possibly the worst coach in league.
Good coaches get the most out of their players and taylor things to their strengths. They find ways to put players in positions to succeed and ultimately find ways to win games. Bloomgren does none of that. His body of work over 4 years is frighteningly bad. At this point, it is fair to say HE IS A TERRIBLE COACH.

I don't think he is universally a terrible coach. Obviously he was anything but a terrible coach as the O-line/Co-OC at Stanford. But his system is ill-suited to the athletes that he is apt to recruit at Rice. It is the same square pegs into round holes situation that I often criticized with Bailiff, and that concerned me from day one of "pound the rock." Bailiff caught lightning in a bottle twice, with CC and TMcH as QBs (although his first year with CC was pretty dreadful). Bloomgren hasn't had that happen yet, probably because his round holes are harder to force Rice athletes into than Bailiff's were.

Look at the philosophies of the coaches who have had some success here in the last 50 years:

Fred Goldsmith--sound defense, win the kicking game, and have a QB
Ken Hatfield--do something different on offense (his teams were better early, when he had better defenses; his offenses continued to score, but his defenses declined)
Al Conover--big emphasis on special teams (his teams also played good defense, with the likes of Cornelius Walker)

And look at the ones who have failed:

Bo Hagan--fair offense, godawful defense
Homer Rice--offensive genius, godawful defense
Ray Alborn--had some success, but recruited too many bad actors who didn't pan out
Watson Brown--offensive genius, bad defense
Jerry Berndt--decent offense, terrible defense
Mike Bloomgren--improved defense and special teams, offense totally ill-suited to personnel

I'd put David Bailiff in the middle, some success and some failure but no consistency, and I'd put Bill Peterson and Todd Graham in the too small a sample size category.

Trying to come up with "best practices" from that sample, I would opt for a combination of Fred's and Ken's philosophies:

Play sound defense, win the kicking game, and do something different on offense.

The something different on offense would depend on your talent. It could be anything from Ruowls' passing game to Ken's option, or what I have liked since seeing Erk Russell and Paul Johnson run it with Tracy Ham at Georgia Southern (and Johnson later at Hawaii with Garrett Gabriel) 30+ years ago--a combination of the two--the option running game with the West Coast passing game, adding some run-and-shoot and air raid principles (basically West Coast for quick passing game, air raid for drop-back passes, and run-and-shoot for play action passes). It's supposedly hard to teach, but there are only about 35-40 plays (10 runs, 10ish West Coast because of the way the nomenclature works, 6 run-and-shoot, 7 air raid, and 4-5 screens and draws), so it's not a big playbook. If Georgia Southern's and Hawaii's athletes were smart enough to master it, ours should be able to. McCaffrey probably throws the ball as well as Gabriel, if not Ham, so he could probably execute it. It would be oriented more toward the run with JJ and probably the pass with Green. But the run scheme (and related personnel requirement) is totally different from "pound the rock." The o-line is more quick than big, and you don't need a pure pocket passer. Our running backs would be fine.

Quite frankly, I would never have believed that we could improve our defense as much as we have under Bloomgren and Smith and not get a lot better overall, but our offensive disaster has exceeded anything that I would ever have expected. If Bloomgren keeps trying to pound square pegs into round holes, he will (or at least should be) gone at the end of the year.

You must have a carbon-copy of this post saved and just paste it over and over, we've seen it so many times. And it remains pretty spot-on. Wish that someone in the Athletic Dept. would read it at least once, but I don't think they have the acumen to understand it. Bloom will be extended, not fired. See: Way, the Rice.

(09-12-2021 11:08 AM)owl95 Wrote:  I don't know what else the University can do to raise their brand awareness ...

Something.

As opposed to nothing, which is what Rice has done about that ever since my association with the university began in the mid-1960s.

(09-12-2021 11:08 AM)owl95 Wrote:  My dissatisfaction with the University outside of sports is that the average person, even in Houston is pretty much unaware of Rice in their own city. I don't know what else the University can do to raise their brand awareness but I do know that having a good football or basketball team will raise that exposure exponentially. We're still in the top 20/25 of schools but how long can that last when nobody knows your name?

I disagree somewhat in that many people seem to be aware of Rice and that it sucks. And this is largely attributable to our willful failures in big sports athletics. The University has the resources to fix it, but, as I posted a copy of another poster's comments about Ivy League schools in the realignment thread, the U just doesn't care. Apathy seems to be one of the school's core values.