(08-09-2018 01:29 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  How many times do we have to debunk this? The 2013 defense, contrary to the claims above, was #30 in Total Defense and #52 in footballoutsiders S&P+, the latter a schedule-adjusted rating.

Obviously those numbers not where we’d ideally like to be, but they were far ahead of our recruiting rankings, which have typically hovered in the 90-110 range across several coaching staffs. The presence of 2 excellent CBs says little about the overall talent level. It’s not like those guys weren’t utilized.

There is no shortage of things to criticize or even ridicule Bailiff for. At a high level, 2007 was a missed opportunity, 2009 was a year-3 disaster — which would be a big red flag for any staff at any school — and the subsequent building process was frustratingly slow. Worst of all, 2013 was followed not by continued improvement but by a painfully steady descent to the bottom of FBS. A more detailed look will produce plenty more fuel for that fire. There is no need to introduce alternative facts about 2013.

The fact that our defense was above average, but still made an impression on me, goes to show how awful we have always been on that side of the ball. That 2013 defense was more than adequate, especially given the soft schedule and clock-eating offense that actually functioned as intended that year. It needed to be a good defense, and for the most part, it was. We wouldn't have won that championship with a typical Rice defense. It is quite a statement when I hear Bloomgren saying that we'll play "great" defense. I've been a fan since the late 70's, and I've seen one great defense at Rice. That was in 1994. There are too many Bailiff shortcomings to list, but let's not dump on his biggest accomplishment.