(11-26-2022 11:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Bowl or no bowl, the record is 5-7.

It seems to me that the relevant question is whether 5-7 is improvement on the way to bigger and better things in the future, or is the high water mark for Bloomgren, particularly considering the coming conference upgrade. If the latter, then Bloomgren needs to go. I don't really see any indication the it is the former.

To clarify, 5-7 with the last 5 games going 1-4..... wrong trajectory.

(11-27-2022 02:12 AM)Owlman49 Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 11:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Bowl or no bowl, the record is 5-7.

It seems to me that the relevant question is whether 5-7 is improvement on the way to bigger and better things in the future, or is the high water mark for Bloomgren, particularly considering the coming conference upgrade. If the latter, then Bloomgren needs to go. I don't really see any indication the it is the former.

To clarify, 5-7 with the last 5 games going 1-4..... wrong trajectory.

And outscored 193-94 (38.6-18.8) in those 5 games.

I can't remember ever seeing offensive holding called on a FG attempt.

(11-27-2022 08:18 AM)DFW Owl Wrote:  I can't remember ever seeing offensive holding called on a FG attempt.

...or a run up the middle from inside the 5 yard line.

Yes, they say you can call hold on virtually every play, but only they usually only call it when it has an impact on plays (e.g., a passing play or a run off-tackle or around the edge).

(11-26-2022 10:25 PM)Owlman49 Wrote:  I say again... send emails to DesRoches and JK advocating for change, the noise needs to be overwhelming if it is to be heard at all.

Emails need to be overwhelming. I've already sent mine to DesRoches and Rob Ladd. No point in sending to JK. But remember that Rice is Rice, so you probably aren't going to move the needle without writing a check. No reason not to send an email, just don't be disappointed.

Actually, we may catch a break. David Shaw just resigned at Stanford. That program went downhill fast after Bloomgren left, so there may be people there who think Bloomgren was the reason they succeeded, and who would bring him back for that reason.

(11-26-2022 09:09 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 08:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 08:25 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 08:18 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 07:04 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I told you last week I liked this QB better, and he was better than the others, so far, but pretty good for a Freshman. I don't blame the players here, I squarely blame the head coach, the AD and the previous president. I think Key's a pretty good coach, but he doesn't have a full-time job so there's that... (here, I liked Goldsmith, Hat for awhile, though his offense was kinda boring at times and hard to overcome larger deficits, and Coach Graham in his one year here, though not thrilled with how he left...but looking back at the Rice clownshow since, can't blame him as much for wanting to leave, just how he chose to do it. And yes, it is true I liked Coach Neely for what he accomplished with all the winning and accolades throughout his time both here, at Clemson and at Vandy...didn't know that was such a crime (and you forgot about '53, som there's that). Then again, I liked Coach Graham a lot, but all he did was bring us a National Championship (and the respect and notereity in the normal public square that went along with it) so of course our AD dumped him for someone "better", so really not sure what your point is.

“ Most all will rise to cheer the bowl game and the newfound "success" this season.”

With that statement you are dissing the Rice faithful, the fans, the people who donate to athletics. Yet I know of nobody who is proud of 5-7, or who considers it success. Put away that broad brush.

Some, like me, think that if we earn a bowl, whether with wins or APR, we should go. I think I am a minority here.

Read this thread, with so many calling for Bloom-and JK to be fired Immediately, and tell me which ones are among the “most all” cheering the success.

Neely was 20 games above .500 for his 26(?) year career here. Would that satisfy you? Less than a perennial 7-5. All the others were under .500, except Todd “lucky” Graham, who I didn’t like from the git-go. Not a one would meet your standard. We would have to go back to Bear Bryant to make you happy.

I know of at least 2 who seem to: JK and NapoleCaoch Bloom...Tell you what; I'll settle for Tulane's season this year...westside?

(11-26-2022 07:12 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  Sh!t forget Ga Tech, Tulane of all teams is ranked in the top 25 at 10-3 and, if they win the AAC championship next weekend, are going to a NY6 Bowl. But, yes, it’s too hard to win at a G5 academic school

happy Pappy?

I don’t see what either answer has to do with you dissing the Rice fan base. Just give me a list of fans within your “most all”.

You don't see because you deleted much of the explanatory from your reply? Okay, here it is again if you'd like to read:

(11-26-2022 08:25 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  happy Pappy?

Historically, this board has seemed at times the king of rationalizations when it comes to athletics (not all but most). The average Rice "fan", the few we seem to have comparatively, is initially hopeful and idea-filled, but falls for the rationalizations time and time again...until some reach a point where they realize that playing counterRiceculture is the only realistic means to a more truthful view of success. Many don't bother, having never been fans while they were here, or just leaving and forgetting Rice altogether, adopting other schools for various reasons (kids, proximity, or just plain winning). Those who support this level of chicanery, well, what does that say? I suppose if one classifies their support as christian charity, one might make sense of the rationalization; yet, ironically, the ethos cultivated at Rice is godless at least, redistributive at worst.

So...we sit here and wait to see how others may lose so that we may "win" our prize? We didn't 'win' anything. When my kid's hockey team had to play the championship game 5 on 9 (meaning no shifts since they had no subs due to some teammates being on a retreat that weekend) and got shut out 4-0, I told them that if they wanted to win they'd have to earn it despite the handicap...no mulligans, just straight up. Not to quit, but to try and play their very best, but they also had to play smart, and they had to play different from how the other team played to have a chance, due to the severe advantage the other team had. It was tough to watch, certainly, but a good life lesson, and character-builder. When they didn't get a trophy, no one thought it wasn't fair. It just was. None of mine complained. And next season came back and kicked more a$$ on the rink.

Again, one really has to smile at the juxtaposition of the predominant philosophical views on campus and the attitude towards athletics. I mean, who needs to win? Why can't everyone get a participation trophy (or bowl game) to tout about on their car bumper stickers ('My Kid backed into a lowest-tier bowl game after 5 years at Rice football!!')

It's the same philosophy ruining our country. Girls can be boys, boys can get pregnant, 5-7 teams can now back into bowl games after 3 straight losses and cheer about it. Yay!!! If some people want to make fun of Bear Bryant, Patton, Washington and men like them, well, that's their problem. They might at least be grateful and acknowledge their debt to those very kind of men, warts and all, God Bless Them, who built our country into one where they could, for a time anyway, be free to have those attitudes if they wished.

You lose, you go home, you lick your wounds and figure out why, and make changes and come back and kick the other guy's a$$ in next time. Someone's gonna get left behind, and that's okay...don't let it be you. Or rather, don't be like Rice. See we do provide valuable instruction here after all. My God, it's full of stars!

A true Rice fan might want what is best for the University and its athletics and want them put in a good light...seeing that 5-7 in the record that will be posted in the bowl schedule simply reinforces that Rice is a place for losers to go. Now THAT is unfair to the players on the team, because they deserve better than that, because they ARE better than that...at least some think so, and that is why they deserve a better coach. But lie to them, give them some presents and trophies and tell them that winning doesn't matter. Tell them they had a good time...but 'You better put some ice on that.'

I read it before deleting. I just read it again. Still irrelevant.

Would being 6-6 be better? Or even 7-5. All mediocre. All losers.

What it does reinforce is that Rice is on the list of bowl-goers, not on the list of stay at homers. We made the cutoff. Lots of other didn’t.

Going to a bowl is better for the University than not going, for many reasons beyond impressing 17 year olds. In any case, we are in by the rules, not some loophole. We may not have done much, but we did enough. What do they call the guy who graduates last in his medical school class?

I know of nobody standing to cheer. Apparently you do.

I know of nobody who thinks this accomplishment means we should extend Bloom. Apparently you do.

I look at this thread and see nobody praising Bloom. Apparently you do.

Point them out. List them. The alumni seem pretty solidly against Bloom, and against losing.

(11-27-2022 09:20 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 10:25 PM)Owlman49 Wrote:  I say again... send emails to DesRoches and JK advocating for change, the noise needs to be overwhelming if it is to be heard at all.

Emails need to be overwhelming. I've already sent mine. But remember that Rice is Rice, so you probably aren't going to move the needle without writing a check. No reason not to send an email, just don't be disappointed.

Actually, we may catch a break. David Shaw just resigned at Stanford. That program went downhill fast after Bloomgren left, so there may be people there who think Bloomgren was the reason they succeeded, and who would bring him back for that reason.

If Rice was going to fire him, he’d be gone by this morning.

(11-27-2022 10:49 AM)WIowl Wrote:  

(11-27-2022 09:20 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 10:25 PM)Owlman49 Wrote:  I say again... send emails to DesRoches and JK advocating for change, the noise needs to be overwhelming if it is to be heard at all.

Emails need to be overwhelming. I've already sent mine. But remember that Rice is Rice, so you probably aren't going to move the needle without writing a check. No reason not to send an email, just don't be disappointed.

Actually, we may catch a break. David Shaw just resigned at Stanford. That program went downhill fast after Bloomgren left, so there may be people there who think Bloomgren was the reason they succeeded, and who would bring him back for that reason.

If Rice was going to fire him, he’d be gone by this morning.

Yeah. I think this is correct. There’s a real chance we could get a bowl invite, but it seems like if we do it’ll be after next week’s games. Plus, as has been discussed, firing your HC a couple of weeks before some very important recruiting windows probably invites a bigger immediate problem than the season we’ve just endured.

I know that at least one recruit (Peyton Farmer) is enrolling at Rice in January. Which is a change from past years, and an area in which we're trying to catch up to other schools. I would think he's enrolling in January regardless of the coach, but I don't know how many other players are doing the same, and whether their status would change if there was a coaching change.

(11-27-2022 10:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 08:18 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  “ Most all will rise to cheer the bowl game and the newfound "success" this season.”

I read it before deleting. I just read it again. Still irrelevant.

Would being 6-6 be better? Or even 7-5. All mediocre. All losers.

What it does reinforce is that Rice is on the list of bowl-goers, not on the list of stay at homers. We made the cutoff. Lots of other didn’t.

Going to a bowl is better for the University than not going, for many reasons beyond impressing 17 year olds. In any case, we are in by the rules, not some loophole. We may not have done much, but we did enough. What do they call the guy who graduates last in his medical school class?

I know of nobody standing to cheer. Apparently you do.

I know of nobody who thinks this accomplishment means we should extend Bloom. Apparently you do.

I look at this thread and see nobody praising Bloom. Apparently you do.

Point them out. List them. The alumni seem pretty solidly against Bloom, and against losing.

You have your opinion and I have mine. We apparently disagree on this more than we agree. No problem.

The search function works well if you wish to find the many examples of posters over the years on the various threads who have supported and even maybe adamantly defended the mediocrity and substandard coaches with rationalizations over the years. You are welcome to answer your own impositions in that regard if you wish. You might begin in the Transformation and the Plateau threads, for starters, but there are many, many more examples for you to while away the hours if you please.

I do not limit my scope to just this one thread, but from your reply above it seems that you do. Not sure where you got that idea, but it is appears to be your straw man. Further, it appears you have misread "will rise" as "are now rising." Another misread, whether intentional or not, I can not say. Since this is a future event, I am no 100% sure it will happen, but I have my suspicions based on the past cheering of mediocrity.

The one who appears to be "dissing the fan base" seems to be you. If I didn't believe in the Rice fan base (or those who are here or come here to keep up on the U) then I myself wouldn't be here. I certainly wouldn't demand better from the Admin or athletic dept. I'd cheer the continuing inflation and concomitant reduction in meaningfulness of results as progress, when it is anything but. I'd say things are getting better even as people suffer and things are actually worse in real terms. (How you can defend those ideas when they seem to directly contrast with your more enlightened posts on other, more important matters, I fail to understand. perhaps you don;t see the connection? It is an enigma.) Indeed, I appear to hold the fan base in much higher esteem than you seem to, for I believe they ultimately want and are looking for ways to describe how we can be much better than we are or have been.

As you have stated, you will cheer no matter what. But while I might very much love my child, I would not hesitate to chastise him when I deem it necessary. No, I do not ascribe to cheering mediocrity. I have a particular experience in that area beyond the U, and have seen the damage that reinforcing a difficult child into further rain man mode has done. I subscribe to neuro-plasticity, where intense and repeated improvement is demanded for growth in under-performing areas. It is a science that is now well-established and runs directly counter to the previous (and I might add provably erroneous) indoctrination of familiar routines and set levels of acceptance of mediocrity, thus permanently establishing and limiting the potential by means of closing the ceiling down below where it might be if it were allowed to aspire to reach higher.

That being said, I understand that your apparent approach of "good job no matter what" (you stated you'd cheer no matter what) contrasts strongly with my range of "well, nice try, but I believe you can do much better and here's what I believe you might want to work on" and, if no improvement "hey, get your head in the game, son, because I won't let you settle and you would do well to learn that you don't have to let yourself settle either" and finally, "nope, not good enough, try again, and this time look to do something different."

If your child is at bat and he swings and misses consistently without making contact, you do him no help after a point by continuing to blindly cheer him to continue the same pattern. Better, you examine is he even looking at the ball or just blindly swinging hoping to Rick Camp it one time? If so, how is he doing that? What are his expectations, and what are his reasons for them, or is he even aware he should have any expectations? Does he have physical flaws that can be worked on? Does he have mechanical flaws that need to be addressed? Is his coaching helping or hurting him, reinforcing his present mistakes and making them into bad habits he will find harder to undo the longer he reinforces them or finding flaws and pointing them out again and again and working on them again and again until he is both aware of, willing to, and does finally address those flaws and thus improve and break out of his lane to a higher one?

Yes, it is true "good job" helps at the very beginning, when he is at first too shy or introverted to even step up to the plate. That's tee-ball level success. Once he has had a couple of chances at that first stepping stone, to succeed he needs to progress beyond good job just for being there to hey, we're here for a reason (which some of us believe is to compete and try to do so at our very highest level), and hey, look at what you're doing and work to fix it and improve if it's not working. And sometimes, even if it is: Tony Gwynn, all-star and league-leading batter practiced his hitting every day, always trying to improve. When asked why he did so much extra practicing, even though he already had won so many batting titles, responded that even with all his innate talent, if he didn't try to improve he would have a chance at being his best and maybe making the Hall of fame. Now not everyone will make the Hall of fame, no doubt. But we can all aspire to be our best by not imposing low ceilings on ourselves and those we care about.

(11-27-2022 10:49 AM)WIowl Wrote:  If Rice was going to fire him, he’d be gone by this morning.

Of course. With Rice's winning 5 games and going to a bowl, how likely is it that the AD's personal choice for head coach will be fired?

(11-27-2022 11:44 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(11-27-2022 10:49 AM)WIowl Wrote:  If Rice was going to fire him, he’d be gone by this morning.

Of course. With Rice's winning 5 games and going to a bowl, how likely is it that the AD's personal choice for head coach will be fired?

He won't. We get your point. Bloomgren is coming back. He won't fire his hand-picked choice for coach. Karlgaard would rather be fired himself than do what's right for the program. Going to a damn bowl at 5-7 has ruined everything.

(11-27-2022 09:20 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 10:25 PM)Owlman49 Wrote:  I say again... send emails to DesRoches and JK advocating for change, the noise needs to be overwhelming if it is to be heard at all.

Emails need to be overwhelming. I've already sent mine. But remember that Rice is Rice, so you probably aren't going to move the needle without writing a check. No reason not to send an email, just don't be disappointed.

Actually, we may catch a break. David Shaw just resigned at Stanford. That program went downhill fast after Bloomgren left, so there may be people there who think Bloomgren was the reason they succeeded, and who would bring him back for that reason.

I just sent mine. It won't do any good, but they've been sent. I didn't pull any punches with Karlgaard, but I was respectful with the president.

Speaking of progress, here are three fun facts!

Bloomgren has won five less games than Bailiff did in his first 54 games - progress!

We scored 178 points and allowed 275 points in conference play across eight games. Last year, we scored 186 points and allowed 260 points in conference play. I’ll let you all do the math on which year was a bigger negative margin.

We lost to UTSA and Charlotte by a combined score of 97-30. We also lost to both last year but by a combined score of 76-24. I’ll let you all do the math on which year was a bigger negative margin.

(11-26-2022 08:08 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(11-26-2022 07:47 PM)That Guy 2012 Wrote:  NMSU vs. SJSU may also get scheduled for next week. That game was postponed earlier in the year. There's been no official word from either camp, but I'd bet that the Aggies push to get their home game back now that they've won three of four since their unplanned week off and now also sit at 5-6. They're independent, so no tie-ins. They may call it if all the slots get filled tonight, but if tonight ends and there's a chance for a win-your-way-to-a-bid next week, I have to think they go for it.

True!

Quote:The Las Cruces Sun-News reported earlier this week that the Aggies were zeroing in on FCS opponent Valparaiso for a Dec. 3 clash at Aggie Memorial Stadium.

Valparaiso must get an NCAA waiver in order to play a 12th game as an FCS team; if they get it, NMSU would have a 12th game of its own.

Source: https://www.ktsm.com/sports/college-spor...-its-mind/

Valpo has a 5-6 record this season. (https://fbschedules.com/2022-valparaiso-...-schedule/)

Looking at the New Mexico State schedule, I see that they already have one FCS victory (over Lamar, 51-14, on Nov. 12). A poster on the Valpo fan board notes that the Aggies would have to get its own NCAA waiver to allow a second FCS victory to count toward its bowl eligibility.

I also thought it odd that NMSU & Valpo would connect under these circumstances. But looking deeper, I see that Jack Jarnigan, the son of Valpo's Executive Associate Athletic Director Liz Jarnigan is a graduate assistant at New Mexico State. Jack was a four-year starter at center for Valparaiso; he graduated in 2019.

I hope that the NCAA will value its APR priority procedure for 5-win bowl aspirants over an appeal that a second FCS win should enable 6-win bowl eligibility.

(11-27-2022 01:04 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  Speaking of progress, here are three fun facts!

Bloomgren has won five less games than Bailiff did in his first 54 games - progress!

Bailiff inherited Chase, Dillard, and Thor. Many people want to minimize his winning with them. Now we have a comparison that maximizes their impact.

Please don’t take this as a defense of Bloom. Fire the SOB. OK with me. Just don’t do the same dance that got him here. I don’t have five years for the next hungry assistant to not work out.

(11-27-2022 01:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(11-27-2022 01:04 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  Speaking of progress, here are three fun facts!

Bloomgren has won five less games than Bailiff did in his first 54 games - progress!

Bailiff inherited Chase, Dillard, and Thor. Many people want to minimize his winning with them. Now we have a comparison that maximizes their impact.

Please don’t take this as a defense of Bloom. Fire the SOB. OK with me. Just don’t do the same dance that got him here. I don’t have five years for the next hungry assistant to not work out.

The bolded is definitely a fair point

A more apt comparison would be to compare Bloomgren's first 54 games with Bailiff's last 54. If we were in a downward trajectory, surely the new coach would lift us back up.

Bailiff's last 54: 21-33
Bloomgren's first 54: 16-38

(11-27-2022 02:43 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  A more apt comparison would be to compare Bloomgren's first 54 games with Bailiff's last 54. If we were in a downward trajectory, surely the new coach would lift us back up.
Bailiff's last 54: 21-33
Bloomgren's first 54: 16-38

Both of which suck.

But why compare to Bailiff? Wasn't the intent to find a better coach than Bailiff? Why not compare to Willie Fritz's first 54 at Tulane 25-29 with 2 bowls, or since he seems to be the poster boy for staying the course, Frank Beamer's first 54 at at VaTech, 22-31-1 (with 2 6-win seasons).

(11-27-2022 02:55 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-27-2022 02:43 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  A more apt comparison would be to compare Bloomgren's first 54 games with Bailiff's last 54. If we were in a downward trajectory, surely the new coach would lift us back up.
Bailiff's last 54: 21-33
Bloomgren's first 54: 16-38

Both of which suck.

But why compare to Bailiff? Wasn't the intent to find a better coach than Bailiff? Why not compare to Willie Fritz's first 54 at Tulane 25-29 with 2 bowls, or since he seems to be the poster boy for staying the course, Frank Beamer's first 54 at at VaTech, 22-31-1 (with 2 6-win seasons).

Tulane for the win with the recruiting. Someone should do a case study on that. Larger school = admissions flexibility?