None of it is particularly groundbreaking, but interesting that this gets leaked now.

https://www.ricethresher.org/article/202...ocker-room

Pretty much what people here have been saying.

Glad we kept the guy around for another season. And refreshing to see that the team (or at least certain players) is also frustrated at his ridiculous run play calls.

One thing that did stand out was the part about injuries. There were tons of questions about the training staff this past season because of the injuries, but this is the first time I've seen the alternative theory that it's Bloomgren's physical practices that are causing issues (apologies if somebody mentioned this is a game thread and I'm forgetting).

Leo Durocher once described the job of a baseball manager thusly, "You have 25 guys. Five love you, five hate you, and 15 are on the fence. Your job is to keep the five who hate you away from the 15 on the fence." Sounds like Bloomgren drove the 15 on the fence over to the side of those who hate him.

I had heard rumors about the "smoking hot wife," et al, comments several years ago. They seemed really weird and inappropriate then, even more so with the additional context.

Bailiff's teams played hard but incredibly sloppy. I have noted before that Bloomgren's teams didn't appear to me to be playing hard. This would support that.

Quote:Bailiff's teams played hard but incredibly sloppy. ...Bloomgren's teams didn't appear to me to be playing hard. This would support that.

Deleted personal references to get to the meat of the matter.

We seem to have jumped out of the frying pan into the fire in our efforts to go to anybody but Bailiff.

Time to jump out of the fire.

Seems the FB team is following our lead in the matter and pretty much every thread touching on Rice FB for the alst two years+ ---

Quote:“Any conversation [about] Rice football turns into a conversation about how much Mike Bloomgren sucks,” Peyton said.

and

Quote:“The inkling of hope [the UAB game] gave his chances to keep his job, I don’t think that sat well with a lot of people,” Eli said.

One implication is that whoever replaces Bloomgren is going to have a helluva selling job on his hands. He is going to have to win back the players, sell them that his schemes will work, and rebuild bridges to the Texas HS coaches.

(04-20-2022 10:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  One implication is that whoever replaces Bloomgren is going to have a helluva selling job on his hands. He is going to have to win back the players, sell them that his schemes will work, and rebuild bridges to the Texas HS coaches.

Let's see? I wonder who we know that could do that?

(04-20-2022 09:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We seem to have jumped out of the frying pan into the fire in our efforts to go to anybody but Bailiff.

I don't think I was ever truly in the "anybody but Bailiff" camp. I thought he did some things well, and e could catch lightning in a bottle, but I thought he had some very specific shortcomings that made him not the right long term answer. I was more in the "somebody who will address the weaknesses of Bailiff" school.

"Played hard but sloppy" and "square pegs into round holes" pretty much defined my issues with Bailiff. I never really understood how he expected a conservative football philosophy to work without being good on defense and special teams. Bloomgren seems even more stubborn about "square pegs into round holes" and he doesn't seem to produce the "played hard" part that Bailiff at least did. I do think we may be at the "anybody but Bloomgren" stage.

What do we want in his place? I think I'd like to see a combination of the best of Fred Goldsmith and the best of Ken Hatfield:
1) A philosophy of play sound defense, win the kicking game, and do something different on offense.
2) Strong Texas recruiting effort based on relations with Texas HS coaches plus at least one major out-of-state source (Fred had Florida, Ken had Arkansas).
3) Gets Rice in the sense that Bailiff did, but also understands that winning at Rice requires much better scheming and execution than David's teams had.

I think this approach requires hiring some Texas HS coaches for your staff, like Matt Rule at Baylor, and also requires hiring some Rice alumni for your staff.

(04-20-2022 10:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  One implication is that whoever replaces Bloomgren is going to have a helluva selling job on his hands. He is going to have to win back the players, sell them that his schemes will work, and rebuild bridges to the Texas HS coaches.

Since you have had quite a bit of exposure with Rice Athletic thinking, how in the world can Rice leadership not see or acknowledge the obvious shortcomings? Seriously, if the Rice athletic Department is aware of the concerns of the players, then why hasn't anything been done to address these issues? Didn't the AD just last year come out and state that he feels the program is moving in the right direction and that Rice was just a couple of plays away from more favorable outcomes and thereby justifying the positive trajectory and acceptable performance of the program. Yet, we see that the players are questioning the direction and leadership of the program? Where is the check to such unfettered power and such an egregious misunderstanding of basic football leadership principles?

(04-20-2022 08:36 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  None of it is particularly groundbreaking, but interesting that this gets leaked now.

https://www.ricethresher.org/article/202...ocker-room

Well, that's inspiring as I sit here trying to decide whether or not to renew my season tickets.

(04-20-2022 10:52 AM)ruowls Wrote:  Since you have had quite a bit of exposure with Rice Athletic thinking,

Rice Athletic "thinking" has never impressed me as having much to do with actual thinking. It's the strangest organization I've ever been around and has been for years. The goal seems to be a constant effort to do something even dumber this week than that thing they did last week that you used to think was the dumbest thing you had ever heard of.

I worked on the stat crews--football and basketball--for years. We'd come to campus roughly once a week, and a standard topic of conversation was something that the athletic leadership had just done that was even dumber than anything they had ever done before. It was like every week they reached a new height of stupidity.

(04-20-2022 10:52 AM)ruowls Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  One implication is that whoever replaces Bloomgren is going to have a helluva selling job on his hands. He is going to have to win back the players, sell them that his schemes will work, and rebuild bridges to the Texas HS coaches.

Since you have had quite a bit of exposure with Rice Athletic thinking, how in the world can Rice leadership not see or acknowledge the obvious shortcomings? Seriously, if the Rice athletic Department is aware of the concerns of the players, then why hasn't anything been done to address these issues? Didn't the AD just last year come out and state that he feels the program is moving in the right direction and that Rice was just a couple of plays away from more favorable outcomes and thereby justifying the positive trajectory and acceptable performance of the program. Yet, we see that the players are questioning the direction and leadership of the program?

$

Quote:Where is the check to such unfettered power and such an egregious misunderstanding of basic football leadership principles?

Someone else's $

Disappointed to see this report. There are always going to be some players who don’t compnnect with the coach. They are there to learn and, be coached. But the coaches need to find ways to motivate them to put effort into the program, just like teachers do.

(04-20-2022 11:18 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 10:52 AM)ruowls Wrote:  Since you have had quite a bit of exposure with Rice Athletic thinking,

Rice Athletic "thinking" has never impressed me as having much to do with actual thinking. It's the strangest organization I've ever been around and has been for years. The goal seems to be a constant effort to do something even dumber this week than that thing they did last week that you used to think was the dumbest thing you had ever heard of.

I worked on the stat crews--football and basketball--for years. We'd come to campus roughly once a week, and a standard topic of conversation was something that the athletic leadership had just done that was even dumber than anything they had ever done before. It was like every week they reached a new height of stupidity.

Chip, when is the last time you've actually attended a game or spoken to anyone within the Athletic Department?

I have no doubt that there is some truth to this article, but I also think the Thresher writer had a POV (like many of us) and found a couple former players (if, in fact, they are real) to fit his narrative. Given they're no longer with the program, why remain anonymous? Also odd that the author didn't bother to seek out comments from either Bloomgren or Karlgaard. I wonder if he even bothered to alert them in advance of this story.

(04-20-2022 11:41 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I have no doubt that there is some truth to this article, but I also think the Thresher writer had a POV (like many of us) and found a couple former players (if, in fact, they are real) to fit his narrative. Given they're no longer with the program, why remain anonymous? Also odd that the author didn't bother to seek out comments from either Bloomgren or Karlgaard. I wonder if he even bothered to alert them in advance of this story.

They did seek out comment from Bloomgren and the athletic department and both provided statements.

(04-20-2022 11:47 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:41 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I have no doubt that there is some truth to this article, but I also think the Thresher writer had a POV (like many of us) and found a couple former players (if, in fact, they are real) to fit his narrative. Given they're no longer with the program, why remain anonymous? Also odd that the author didn't bother to seek out comments from either Bloomgren or Karlgaard. I wonder if he even bothered to alert them in advance of this story.

They did seek out comment from Bloomgren and the athletic department and both provided statements.

I wouldn't call them statements.

(04-20-2022 10:50 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 09:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We seem to have jumped out of the frying pan into the fire in our efforts to go to anybody but Bailiff.

I don't think I was ever truly in the "anybody but Bailiff" camp. I thought he did some things well, and e could catch lightning in a bottle, but I thought he had some very specific shortcomings that made him not the right long term answer. I was more in the "somebody who will address the weaknesses of Bailiff" school.

"Played hard but sloppy" and "square pegs into round holes" pretty much defined my issues with Bailiff. I never really understood how he expected a conservative football philosophy to work without being good on defense and special teams. Bloomgren seems even more stubborn about "square pegs into round holes" and he doesn't seem to produce the "played hard" part that Bailiff at least did. I do think we may be at the "anybody but Bloomgren" stage.

What do we want in his place? I think I'd like to see a combination of the best of Fred Goldsmith and the best of Ken Hatfield:
1) A philosophy of play sound defense, win the kicking game, and do something different on offense.
2) Strong Texas recruiting effort based on relations with Texas HS coaches plus at least one major out-of-state source (Fred had Florida, Ken had Arkansas).
3) Gets Rice in the sense that Bailiff did, but also understands that winning at Rice requires much better scheming and execution than David's teams had.

I think this approach requires hiring some Texas HS coaches for your staff, like Matt Rule at Baylor, and also requires hiring some Rice alumni for your staff.

That's why I took your name off the quote.

I generally agree with the rest of your post.

(04-20-2022 11:48 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:47 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(04-20-2022 11:41 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  I have no doubt that there is some truth to this article, but I also think the Thresher writer had a POV (like many of us) and found a couple former players (if, in fact, they are real) to fit his narrative. Given they're no longer with the program, why remain anonymous? Also odd that the author didn't bother to seek out comments from either Bloomgren or Karlgaard. I wonder if he even bothered to alert them in advance of this story.

They did seek out comment from Bloomgren and the athletic department and both provided statements.

I wouldn't call them statements.

What would you call them?