(09-18-2021 10:22 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  

(09-18-2021 10:14 PM)gsloth Wrote:  

(09-18-2021 08:55 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  Lol we can’t even afford to bring the MOB

MOB chose to not go. See the post on Facebook if you want more details why.

I only saw a video for the UT game. We can’t drive a band 2.5 hours for an away game against the only team in the state our students care about because we don’t care about athletics.

I thought it was on that post, but it must have been in the private group. A COVID-based decision.

Grungy:

Every one of those reasons sounds extremely reasonable. Y’all made the right decision.

I posted this 3 years ago just after a blowout in 2018. Has anything changed except a further lack of care by the fan base?

(10-07-2018 09:10 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  My oldest son, now 25 and a teacher in a town north of Austin, made his first appearance at a Rice event in 1993, was frequently a towel boy during the Michael Harris years, got to meet and know Austin and Chris during their years, was ecstatic in Omaha in 2003, cried after the TAMU loss in 2004, wore a James Casey jersey at Texans games and was part of our gang at the sad Liberty Bowl. Grew up Rice, but being out of town for college and now work has not experienced as much in the recent years (lucky him). He was in town for the Astros and the Dallas-Texans game, went to his first Rice FB game last night since early in the season two years ago. We were talking about what a mess it has become and he observed, without my prompt, what I have been saying for years and what must be intently obvious to the casual observer, that being that Rice is just not making an effort. I tried to counter a bit, very little, but he noted "isn't it obvious"?

I'd like to thank the BOT and Leebron for all this and wish them further success on convincing more donors to build more facilities that are barely utilized (see house, opera) or ultimately won't be used (see Center, Patterson)and at the same time require tuition/fee increases since the donations for those facilities are inadequate to finish or pay for maintenance and operational expenses, but it looks good on your resume (all that income looked good for Enron, but don't worry, cash flow is just not important any more). Remember death by neglect is still death but the great thing about that approach is you have plausible deniability and but unlike death by sword, there is no blood on your hands. I gave them all the support they needed, I just don't understand what happened.

The first lines at a future press conference: "Despite a terrific effort over time by our coaches. student-athletes, and administration, it has become obvious that the Rice community will be better served to move to Division III. We thank Southwestern and Trinity for sponsoring our admittance to their conference. The return to playing Rice Football at the historical corner of South Main and University will commence next season after expansion of the stands to accommodate 10,000 fans. Sadly, that portion of the campus held by Rice Stadium is too valuable to accommodate the two-three high school games that outdrew Rice in the last few years. Accordingly, it will leveled and replaced with a below ground parking garage and a facility for the English and French departments as well as and more importantly all of the key administrative staff whose necessary and justifiable growth of more than 25%/year over the last 20 years has outpaced the ability to provide them the luxurious offices that are needed so that Rice can recruit the top talent needed in those positions."

Glad I went to the Astros and didn't travel to Austin to watch yet another S*** Show. On the other hand, i was bonkers after the 2012 UH game at Reliant and McHargue turned it around the next 2 years. Not sure I can see that.

(09-18-2021 10:33 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I'm glad they weren't there. The MOB is an embarrassment. Hide them in Rice stadium.

I don’t know if I got the quote captured accurately, but my first exposure to the MOB was similar to this statement. Over the last 49 years that I have followed the Owls, there have been a handful of specially appropriate and well thought out and executed MOB performances, in my opinion. But most have had the atmosphere and “gravitas” of a junior high level skit with an adult theme. I get it that most of those years, Rivpce University never provided the budget to field a reasonably sized band, and so they had to make do with what hip they had. I guess that’s sort of the situation for the rest of the athletics teams as well. I find myself wondering how coach Bailiff managed to field those handful of bowl teams, which far exceeds even what coach Hatfield was even able to field.

(09-19-2021 06:57 AM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  I find myself wondering how coach Bailiff managed to field those handful of bowl teams, which far exceeds even what coach Hatfield was even able to field.

1) Proliferation of bowls
2) Chase Clement
3) Taylor McHargue

Sounds like I got lucky by going to a family event in Tennessee. The game sounds as much fun as a super-spreader event.

Sent from my SM-A600A using Tapatalk

We were traveling and I intended to catch the second half once I got home. Seeing 44-0 was the halftime score I figured my time was better spent watching the latest installment of Ted Lasso.

(09-19-2021 07:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-19-2021 06:57 AM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  I find myself wondering how coach Bailiff managed to field those handful of bowl teams, which far exceeds even what coach Hatfield was even able to field.

1) Proliferation of bowls
2) Chase Clement
3) Taylor McHargue

The 97 team IMHO is probably the best team of the post nearly era.

I really don't enjoy the personal attacks on Mike Bloomgren. We sometimes forget that coaches are people, too, and they have lives, and families, and friends, and feelings, too. I thought of that a lot last week when Navy fired Ivin Jasper as OC. I thought that was especially harsh because he has a son with a debilitating disease, and as long as he was on the staff at Navy, he had free access to Walter Reed. Losing that job was going to impose a significant financial hardship on him and his family, beyond the loss of a paycheck. I was very pleased when Ken Niumatololo re-hired him as QB coach. I've been fortunate to have seen that side of the lives of many coaches over the years, and so I don't like personal attacks directed at them.

But let's look at Bloomgren without the ad hominems. I think he is a decent guy, a very decent guy, who has had enough success as a football coach to indicate that he is a decent football coach as well. He is very much tied to a scheme that has worked well for him at other places. But it's not working at Rice because:

1) He has not had the big, strong offensive linemen needed to pancake defensive linemen and create gaping holes through which to "pound the rock"
2) He has not had the strong and accurate armed drop-back quarterback required to stand in the pocket and pick a defense apart on third and long.
3) He is unlikely to be able to recruit either one winning 1, 2, or 3 games a year

If it is not going to work, then Rice would seem to have three options:

1) Ride a coach with a system that can't work down to the ground,
2) Convince that coach to change to a system more aligned with the personnel that he can recruit to Rice,
3) Change coaches.

I would prefer option 2), just as I would have with David Bailiff, because I think both Bailiff and Bloomgren are basically good guys. But I am losing any belief that it can happen.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting the results to change. The high point of the Bloomgren era to date came last year against Marshall, when injuries to QBs forced him out of his regular offensive plan. That should tell him something.

(09-18-2021 10:09 PM)Barney Wrote:  

(09-18-2021 09:47 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(09-18-2021 09:33 PM)Barney Wrote:  I'm no Bloomgren apologist, but this would be alot better discussion if not for the never-ending "fire the coach" posts. Getting really,really dull.
This is painful, but you all seem to think we should be competing well against all 4 and 5 star players -- you can see with your own eyes how much faster they are. And we're currently down at least 7 starters.

What a load of crap. There are lower recruited players all over the place who do well for other schools. That's such a loser mentality to say "waaaah they're too big and too fast." You design a system that places your players in the best possible position to succeed.

This clown tries to upgrade the talent, then jams the players into a system that cannot work at Rice. The 58 is bad - the 0 is on the head coach, and there's NO EXCUSE any more in Year 4 with a huge salary and big recruiting budget.

And you think that all Rice has to do is hire one more new coach again, and it'll be magic this time?
I still think we'll win 6 games, better than last year.
And better than the years before that. Call me a loser, but I'm satisfied with continuing improvement, if we get it.

12 QBs, improvement…delusional

(09-19-2021 08:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't enjoy the personal attacks on Mike Bloomgren. We sometimes forget that coaches are people, too, and they have lives, and families, and friends, and feelings, too. I thought of that a lot last week when Navy fired Ivin Jasper as OC. I thought that was especially harsh because he has a son with a debilitating disease, and as long as he was on the staff at Navy, he had free access to Walter Reed. Losing that job was going to impose a significant financial hardship on him and his family, beyond the loss of a paycheck. I was very pleased when Ken Niumatololo re-hired him as QB coach. I've been fortunate to have seen that side of the lives of many coaches over the years, and so I don't like personal attacks directed at them.

But let's look at Bloomgren without the ad hominems. I think he is a decent guy, a very decent guy, who has had enough success as a football coach to indicate that he is a decent football coach as well. He is very much tied to a scheme that has worked well for him at other places. But it's not working at Rice because:

1) He has not had the big, strong offensive linemen needed to pancake defensive linemen and create gaping holes through which to "pound the rock"
2) He has not had the strong and accurate armed drop-back quarterback required to stand in the pocket and pick a defense apart on third and long.
3) He is unlikely to be able to recruit either one winning 1, 2, or 3 games a year

If it is not going to work, then Rice would seem to have three options:

1) Ride a coach with a system that can't work down to the ground,
2) Convince that coach to change to a system more aligned with the personnel that he can recruit to Rice,
3) Change coaches.

I would prefer option 2), just as I would have with David Bailiff, because I think both Bailiff and Bloomgren are basically nice guys. But I am losing any belief that it can happen.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting the results to change. The high point of the Bloomgren era to date came last year against Marshall, when injuries to QBs forced him out of his regular offensive plan. That should tell him something.

+1 to everything on this post. This reminds me of BOB, who was not a great coach. At the same time, having a child that faces serious medical challenges makes losing a job that more serious. As someone in healthcare, I have seen how change/loss of insurance can be a debilitating blow to any family.

(09-19-2021 08:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't enjoy the personal attacks on Mike Bloomgren. We sometimes forget that coaches are people, too, and they have lives, and families, and friends, and feelings, too. I thought of that a lot last week when Navy fired Ivin Jasper as OC. I thought that was especially harsh because he has a son with a debilitating disease, and as long as he was on the staff at Navy, he had free access to Walter Reed. Losing that job was going to impose a significant financial hardship on him and his family, beyond the loss of a paycheck. I was very pleased when Ken Niumatololo re-hired him as QB coach. I've been fortunate to have seen that side of the lives of many coaches over the years, and so I don't like personal attacks directed at them.

But let's look at Bloomgren without the ad hominems. I think he is a decent guy, a very decent guy, who has had enough success as a football coach to indicate that he is a decent football coach as well. He is very much tied to a scheme that has worked well for him at other places. But it's not working at Rice because:

1) He has not had the big, strong offensive linemen needed to pancake defensive linemen and create gaping holes through which to "pound the rock"
2) He has not had the strong and accurate armed drop-back quarterback required to stand in the pocket and pick a defense apart on third and long.
3) He is unlikely to be able to recruit either one winning 1, 2, or 3 games a year

If it is not going to work, then Rice would seem to have three options:

1) Ride a coach with a system that can't work down to the ground,
2) Convince that coach to change to a system more aligned with the personnel that he can recruit to Rice,
3) Change coaches.

I would prefer option 2), just as I would have with David Bailiff, because I think both Bailiff and Bloomgren are basically nice guys. But I am losing any belief that it can happen.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting the results to change. The high point of the Bloomgren era to date came last year against Marshall, when injuries to QBs forced him out of his regular offensive plan. That should tell him something.

#s, I would beg to differ on one aspect.

Being good a swinging the hammer in one way, and only in one way makes one only 'good' at swinging the hammer in that one way.

The core definition of a coach, above and beyond the definition in the name (i.e. teach and impart basics, and make those skills better), is the ability to use the 'stuff that you have' in a way that is better than expected.

As an example Belichek --- he has continually had to find new modes to win, and new modes of doing the best with pieces he has. His teams have not been static, neither in personnel nor philosophy, over the span of success he has shown, Heck, change that to even cross the different organizations and titles (scope) since his first assistant days.

Turning that *requirement* to Bloomgren, Bloomgren is by definition not a success. At best, Bloomgren has been successful at one job in one organization. Showing a success in position at one organization shows only him being decent at --- well --- one organization and doing things in one manner.

The utter failure to adapt is, in my opinion, very good evidence of the opposite stance. I cannot call Bloomgren a 'decent coach' when he apparently lacks in a fundamental manner the ability to adapt to circumstances.

Perhaps the difference in the 'adaptation' angle between you in me is how to integrate the 'adaptation' aspect into the final determination. To me, a decent coach *must* have not just the ability *to* adapt, but can in fact show that they *can* adapt. That shows that they are a student and adherent of the game itself.

I dont subscribe to the apparent definitional approach by you where the 'adapatation' issue is a 'paid extra bell and whistle' --- akin to (20 years ago) power windows and a stereo in a car were such 'extras'. The person who leads a football program, and leads it by simply doing one thing ad infinitum, is 'decent' only when the description is limited to 'successful at that one thing'. But, even then, given Bloom's utter failure at doing even that 'one thing' at Rice, I would be hard pressed to assess Bloom of even being 'decent' at the limited scope of 'coaching one thing', and by definition, falls even further short of being a 'decent coach' at the level of being a student and adherent of the game itself.

At the most, Bloom is 'decent' only in the scope of: a) pounding the rock killing the clock, but then *only* when possessing some of the best or better personnel to implement that.

(09-19-2021 08:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I really don't enjoy the personal attacks on Mike Bloomgren. We sometimes forget that coaches are people, too, and they have lives, and families, and friends, and feelings, too. I thought of that a lot last week when Navy fired Ivin Jasper as OC. I thought that was especially harsh because he has a son with a debilitating disease, and as long as he was on the staff at Navy, he had free access to Walter Reed. Losing that job was going to impose a significant financial hardship on him and his family, beyond the loss of a paycheck. I was very pleased when Ken Niumatololo re-hired him as QB coach. I've been fortunate to have seen that side of the lives of many coaches over the years, and so I don't like personal attacks directed at them.

But let's look at Bloomgren without the ad hominems. I think he is a decent guy, a very decent guy, who has had enough success as a football coach to indicate that he is a decent football coach as well. He is very much tied to a scheme that has worked well for him at other places. But it's not working at Rice because:

1) He has not had the big, strong offensive linemen needed to pancake defensive linemen and create gaping holes through which to "pound the rock"
2) He has not had the strong and accurate armed drop-back quarterback required to stand in the pocket and pick a defense apart on third and long.
3) He is unlikely to be able to recruit either one winning 1, 2, or 3 games a year

If it is not going to work, then Rice would seem to have three options:

1) Ride a coach with a system that can't work down to the ground,
2) Convince that coach to change to a system more aligned with the personnel that he can recruit to Rice,
3) Change coaches.

I would prefer option 2), just as I would have with David Bailiff, because I think both Bailiff and Bloomgren are basically good guys. But I am losing any belief that it can happen.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting the results to change. The high point of the Bloomgren era to date came last year against Marshall, when injuries to QBs forced him out of his regular offensive plan. That should tell him something.

Are you a decent football coach if you’re too stubborn to change what isn’t working? We know at this point that it isn’t the OC or QB coach who is stifling our offense. The defense under Brian Smith has actually improved significantly. So if you won’t change your failures in year 4 it’s time to lose your job. I don’t think anyone who is paid $1.5M a year to coach is above that criticism.

I think the only question to be answered is:

Did we upgrade when we replaced Bailiff with Bloomgren?

(09-19-2021 07:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-19-2021 06:57 AM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  I find myself wondering how coach Bailiff managed to field those handful of bowl teams, which far exceeds even what coach Hatfield was even able to field.

1) Proliferation of bowls
2) Chase Clement
3) Taylor McHargue

We still have a proliferation of bowls.

I think some of the QBs Bloom has had could be the equal of those two, if used properly.

(09-19-2021 09:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the only question to be answered is:

Did we upgrade when we replaced Bailiff with Bloomgren?

Of course not. Bloomgren will never coach a bowl game at Rice. Bailiff inherited good players on offense but he had to adjust his offense after struggling the first year. By year 2 he was fielding arguably the greatest offense in Rice history. After a lull he rebuild through solid recruiting and went to 3 more bowl games.

(09-19-2021 07:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-19-2021 06:57 AM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote:  I find myself wondering how coach Bailiff managed to field those handful of bowl teams, which far exceeds even what coach Hatfield was even able to field.

1) Proliferation of bowls
2) Chase Clement
3) Taylor McHargue

And Driphus Jackson who basically won 2 bowl games. I think there's about the same amount of bowl games now and our conference is weaker, we're just not sniffing 6 wins anytime soon. McHargue was pretty good, not Clement level, but his teams were as complete as we've had at Rice. Several future NFL players on both sides and special teams.

(09-19-2021 09:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the only question to be answered is:

Did we upgrade when we replaced Bailiff with Bloomgren?

Or, is it time to pack it up at the FBS level and voluntarily join the WAC in all other sports? David Leebron intends to pass this problem to the next President. Joe Karlgaard has an uninspiring track record in the Bailiff extension and Bloomgren hire with an ugly win-loss record to show. Bloomgren is in year 4 of a 5 year contract.

No one seems likely to take any action in this pond full of lame ducks, which is depressing.

Tanq,

I think those differences are more semantic than real. For the record, Bloomgren has had success at more than one place, and the place where he had the most success hasn't been quite as good since he left, so he pretty clearly brings something to the table.

I think there are two kinds of coaches. One, those who can install a system and then force the talent available to fit it, the "square pegs into round holes" approach. Two, those who adapt the talent, what Bum Phillips called the "he can take his'uns and beat your'uns, or he can take your'uns and beat his'uns." Both can succeed, but not in every place. I think the ceiling is generally higher for the former, but the floor is much, much lower. I think Rice is very much a place for the latter, and I think Bloomgren (and David Bailiff before him) are very much the former.

Alternate history:

Suppose Toad had taken that new DE with him, that Casey guy. Bailiff doesn’t win 10 in 2008, and is fired in 2010.

We would now be on our second coach since Bailiff, and of course we would have hit pay dirt both times and be winning, big and often. We would be a leader in the realignment derby.

Maybe our troubles are due to Toad not recognizing/poaching talent.