Quote: Conference realignment has been a top priority for the athletic department for Karlgaard ever since he joined Rice following a stint as a top assistant at Stanford, his alma mater. Despite his best efforts, Karlgaard said that he has never been able to find the right opportunity.

“I got here on the back side of the last round of realignment,” Karlgaard said. “I started in 2013, and 2012 was the year that [the University of] Houston, [Southern Methodist University], Tulane [University] and Tulsa [University] left Conference USA, and Rice didn’t. I haven’t seen an opportunity for us quite emerge over the past eight years, but now I think we’re in an environment where I think it’s highly unlikely that the status quo will be maintained.”

While Karlgaard said that improving Rice’s conference set up is his top priority, he cautioned against jumping to conclusions about what that means.

“It’s probably my top priority right now to set us up for a better [conference] alignment,” Karlgaard said. “I don’t know quite what that looks like – it could mean more regional alignment, it could mean more academic alignment, it could be a better financial situation, it could be all three. It’s the thing over the past six weeks or so that I [have] probably spent more time on than any other single thing.”

(10-13-2021 07:37 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  I hope the naysayers click the link. Rice has had plenty of recent athletic success but not in football, where it would be the most visible. (Hey, Rice had a 20-0 win over #15 Marshall just last year, and then the Rice men sent Marshall home from the C-USA basketball tournament.). WKU fans might challenge his statement that Rice has won more C-USA 3.0 championships than any other school and has the best overall athletic program in C-USA. But women’s NIT championships aren’t often mentioned in realignment decisions.

I think it safe to say Rice prefers to align with Tulane, SMU, Tulsa and Navy.

(10-13-2021 07:54 AM)Bogg Wrote:  I think Rice is finally in a relatively good spot for realignment. I'm expecting the AAC to take at least one more Texas school, and the MW seems likely to take two (unless they can shake loose an AAC program, which I don't think they can). I figure there's a good chance all three of UNT, UTSA, and Rice wind up headed to new homes in the next few months.

(10-13-2021 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2021 07:54 AM)Bogg Wrote:  I think Rice is finally in a relatively good spot for realignment. I'm expecting the AAC to take at least one more Texas school, and the MW seems likely to take two (unless they can shake loose an AAC program, which I don't think they can). I figure there's a good chance all three of UNT, UTSA, and Rice wind up headed to new homes in the next few months.

I do not favor AAC backfill from Texas. But if you told me we had to add one Texas school, I would prefer it to be Rice.

(10-13-2021 09:18 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Rice should drop down to D3. They don't invest money in their athletics. That is why they were left behind in the first place and should be left behind again.

(10-13-2021 08:02 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I say 19 team MWC:

East: Tulsa, Navy/WSU, SMU, Tulane, Rice, AFA, CSU, UNM, Wyoming

West: BSU, USU, UNLV, FSU, Nevada, SJSU, SDSU, Hawaii/Zaga

Keep a spot open for BYU if the Big 12 is weakened by P4 poaching

(10-13-2021 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I do not favor AAC backfill from Texas. But if you told me we had to add one Texas school, I would prefer it to be Rice.

(10-13-2021 09:33 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(10-13-2021 07:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2021 07:54 AM)Bogg Wrote:  I think Rice is finally in a relatively good spot for realignment. I'm expecting the AAC to take at least one more Texas school, and the MW seems likely to take two (unless they can shake loose an AAC program, which I don't think they can). I figure there's a good chance all three of UNT, UTSA, and Rice wind up headed to new homes in the next few months.

I do not favor AAC backfill from Texas. But if you told me we had to add one Texas school, I would prefer it to be Rice.

Why not UTSA? Part of the AAC’s growth plans were to get city schools in big markets and grow those programs. UCF for Orlando, USF for Tampa, Cincy for Cincinnati, Tulane for NOLA, and so on.

I like Rice for many reasons, but there is no denying that they are tiny school in Houston that has halfhearted administrative support at best. UTSA seems to fit the profile of other schools in the conference as a large public school in a large metro area.

(10-13-2021 09:18 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Rice should drop down to D3. They don't invest money in their athletics. That is why they were left behind in the first place and should be left behind again.

(10-13-2021 10:12 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Rice has always been in a good position to rejoin a better conference. If only it ever really put into its athletics and kept at it as such, their current situation would be much different. Maybe even in a major conference by now. But, they don’t, so, now they’re not.

I mean, we know they’ve been active. Approaching the MWC, approaching the Big XII (maybe more than once)…AAC in its current state is going to be status quo, imo, or, just a shell of what it used to experience in CUSA back in 2010-13. Nothing against the AAC, either, but…if Rice doesn’t get a new home out of this? Fallen waaay back.

I get the impression, too, that they look to Tulane and SMU, when they should look at TCU and Baylor. Or, stop looking with disgust what Houston has been doing. Spend and win to get in.