http://www.riceowls.com/genrel/032713aac.html

The last question brought a great response from Tomball Owl last night.

Q: What was the design, review and approval process that ended up with the new Sammy mascot?

A: A committee was formed consisting of alumni, donors, students, cheerleaders and past Sammy's. The group went through three-rounds of mock-up designs and proofs. The committee did not want to stray too far from the former Sammy with the ultimate goals of giving him more brawn and keep him child-friendly at the same time.

Tomball Owl asked which of the past Sammy's was a drag queen?

More Brawn? Seriously?

(03-29-2013 09:01 AM)Antarius Wrote:  More Brawn? Seriously?

Sounds like a perfect opportunity for a new Associate AD of Mascot Training and Muscular Development.

Or is it more Braun?

(03-29-2013 08:46 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  http://www.riceowls.com/genrel/032713aac.html

The last question brought a great response from Tomball Owl last night.

Q: What was the design, review and approval process that ended up with the new Sammy mascot?

A: A committee was formed consisting of alumni, donors, students, cheerleaders and past Sammy's. The group went through three-rounds of mock-up designs and proofs. The committee did not want to stray too far from the former Sammy with the ultimate goals of giving him more brawn and keep him child-friendly at the same time.

Tomball Owl asked which of the past Sammy's was a drag queen?

overlooking the obvious...

(03-29-2013 09:06 AM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  

(03-29-2013 09:01 AM)Antarius Wrote:  More Brawn? Seriously?

Sounds like a perfect opportunity for a new Associate AD of Mascot Training and Muscular Development.

Yes, and FIRE THE S&C COACH!!!

Quote:Editor's Note: We received two questions regarding Title IX:
Has Rice considered adding a women's golf or softball program?
Title IX recently turned forty. Where does Rice stand with regard to compliance? Will Rice need to add a new sport or replace an existing sport in order to increase the number of participants in women's athletics? Are any particular sports being considered?
Rice Athletics hired an outside consultant a year ago to assess the areas of compliance that are identified with Title IX. Since then, President Leebron has formed a Title IX Gender Equity committee that consists of faculty and staff on campus to review the report and make recommendations to him, including the potential addition of sports. We are currently working through this process.

Chances of this happening? Particularly softball? Wouldn't a softball team have to have 'equal' facilities as the baseball team?

(03-29-2013 08:46 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  http://www.riceowls.com/genrel/032713aac.html

The last question brought a great response from Tomball Owl last night.

Q: What was the design, review and approval process that ended up with the new Sammy mascot?

A: A committee was formed consisting of alumni, donors, students, cheerleaders and past Sammy's.

Forget the alleged discrimination. Greenspan should be fired for this egregious apostrophe violation.

I am really happy that the nonAD is focused on the really important things like Sammy's costume

(03-29-2013 09:11 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  I am really happy that the nonAD is focused on the really important things like Sammy's costume

Me too. If he is focussed on that, he has less time to screw up everything else.

(03-29-2013 01:07 PM)MOBalum Wrote:  

(03-29-2013 08:46 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  http://www.riceowls.com/genrel/032713aac.html

The last question brought a great response from Tomball Owl last night.

Q: What was the design, review and approval process that ended up with the new Sammy mascot?

A: A committee was formed consisting of alumni, donors, students, cheerleaders and past Sammy's.

Forget the alleged discrimination. Greenspan should be fired for this egregious apostrophe violation.

To be fair, this particular instance is a tricky and not very familiar issue. Should the plural of "Sammy" be:
- Sammys (following the usual practice of strictly treating a proper noun as an inviolable regular noun)
- Sammy's (analogizing to the old but now largely (but not entirely) discontinued custom of using apostrophes to form the non-possessive plurals of special terms, such as numbers ("the 1930's") or abbreviations ("PhD's")
- Sammies (analogizing to how a common noun with a similar ending would be declined)

The real answer: don't put it in writing -- all three options sound the same in speech

(03-29-2013 12:50 PM)owlaholic Wrote:  

Quote:Editor's Note: We received two questions regarding Title IX:
Has Rice considered adding a women's golf or softball program?
Title IX recently turned forty. Where does Rice stand with regard to compliance? Will Rice need to add a new sport or replace an existing sport in order to increase the number of participants in women's athletics? Are any particular sports being considered?
Rice Athletics hired an outside consultant a year ago to assess the areas of compliance that are identified with Title IX. Since then, President Leebron has formed a Title IX Gender Equity committee that consists of faculty and staff on campus to review the report and make recommendations to him, including the potential addition of sports. We are currently working through this process.

Chances of this happening? Particularly softball? Wouldn't a softball team have to have 'equal' facilities as the baseball team?

Yes. That's why softball won't be happening at Rice at any time in the near future. Women's golf would be the likely first new sport. Of course, Rice could help the participation numbers for women, simply by allowing more slots for the non-head count sports.

(03-30-2013 11:05 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Women's golf would be the likely first new sport. O

Is a sport whoe contests are never seen by any fan whatsoever really the best way to expand our athletic program? I realize that no new sport will MAKE money, and so perhaps the biggest calculus is simply which will lose the least. But surely the notion that there is positive value in students, faculty, alumni and other fans actually seeing Rice athletes compete would be at least a marginal factor. Otherwise, why add any teams at all? (After all, if the goal is simply to miminize losses, surely reducing sports is more effective path than adding them.)

Is there much in the way of women's lacrosse or field hockey in this part of the country? My high school alma mater, St. John's, which is in Houston, certainly participates in these sports and, indeed, pretty regularly sends young women to colleges (sometimes on scholarships) for these sports (the popular destinations seem to be Princeton and Stanford). So I think these sports are reasonably popular in Texas at the high school level; I just have no idea about the college level.

I am a former Sammy....I was NEVER consulted re: the new outfit. I think that it is a shame.

(03-30-2013 11:32 AM)Barrett Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:18 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:05 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Women's golf would be the likely first new sport.

Is a sport whose contests are never seen by any fan whatsoever really the best way to expand our athletic program? I realize that no new sport will MAKE money, and so perhaps the biggest calculus is simply which will lose the least. But surely the notion that there is positive value in students, faculty, alumni and other fans actually seeing Rice athletes compete would be at least a marginal factor. Otherwise, why add any teams at all? (After all, if the goal is simply to miminize losses, surely reducing sports is more effective path than adding them.)

Is there much in the way of women's lacrosse or field hockey in this part of the country? My high school alma mater, St. John's, which is in Houston, certainly participates in these sports and, indeed, pretty regularly sends young women to colleges (sometimes on scholarships) for these sports (the popular destinations seem to be Princeton and Stanford). So I think these sports are reasonably popular in Texas at the high school level; I just have no idea about the college level.

Aside from his erroneous statement that there isn't "any fan whatesoever" who watches colleagiate golf, (I do! I enjoyed seeing the Owls compete at SF's Olympic Club a few years back, and a friend on the Duke team down at CordeValle; both PGA/USGA championship courses)) I suspect that George is setting the stage for making the case that Rice should add a women's sport that would attract many new fans and, hopefully, paying customers.

Knowing his strong research and analytical bent, I wouldn't be surprised if his proposal would be that Rice join our academic near-peer, soon-to-be-former Conference USA and would-be Magnolia conference mate, Tulane, Cinderella school da jour, Florida Gulf Coast, continuing C-USA competitor, UAB, and 31 other colleges (including Stanford, Cal & UCLA) in fielding a women's team that even our AD could get behind ... sand (aka, beach) volleyball.

This is an "emerging" NCAA sport, which will get championship status when more than 40 schools field a team. Apparently in D-1, the NCAA allows six scholarships over four years, and rules benefit schools that keep sand and indoor volleyball separate.

Got sand?

(03-30-2013 02:09 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:32 AM)Barrett Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:18 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:05 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Women's golf would be the likely first new sport.

Is a sport whose contests are never seen by any fan whatsoever really the best way to expand our athletic program? I realize that no new sport will MAKE money, and so perhaps the biggest calculus is simply which will lose the least. But surely the notion that there is positive value in students, faculty, alumni and other fans actually seeing Rice athletes compete would be at least a marginal factor. Otherwise, why add any teams at all? (After all, if the goal is simply to miminize losses, surely reducing sports is more effective path than adding them.)

Is there much in the way of women's lacrosse or field hockey in this part of the country? My high school alma mater, St. John's, which is in Houston, certainly participates in these sports and, indeed, pretty regularly sends young women to colleges (sometimes on scholarships) for these sports (the popular destinations seem to be Princeton and Stanford). So I think these sports are reasonably popular in Texas at the high school level; I just have no idea about the college level.

Aside from his erroneous statement that there isn't "any fan whatesoever" who watches colleagiate golf, (I do! I enjoyed seeing the Owls compete at SF's Olympic Club a few years back, and a friend on the Duke team down at CordeValle; both PGA/USGA championship courses)) I suspect that George is setting the stage for making the case that Rice should add a women's sport that would attract many new fans and, hopefully, paying customers.

Knowing his strong research and analytical bent, I wouldn't be surprised if his proposal would be that Rice join our academic near-peer, soon-to-be-former Conference USA and would-be Magnolia conference mate, Tulane, Cinderella school da jour, Florida Gulf Coast, continuing C-USA competitor, UAB, and 31 other colleges (including Stanford, Cal & UCLA) in fielding a women's team that even our AD could get behind ... sand (aka, beach) volleyball.

This is an "emerging" NCAA sport, which will get championship status when more than 40 schools field a team. Apparently in D-1, the NCAA allows six scholarships over four years, and rules benefit schools that keep sand and indoor volleyball separate.

Got sand?

Waaay more appeal to the casual fan than golf.

(03-30-2013 02:12 PM)ChicagoOwl (BS 07) Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 02:09 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:32 AM)Barrett Wrote:  [quote='georgewebb' pid='9174110' dateline='1364660333']
[quote='WRCisforgotten79' pid='9174063' dateline='1364659536']

Women's golf would be the likely first new sport.

Knowing his strong research and analytical bent, I wouldn't be surprised if his proposal would be that Rice join our academic near-peer, soon-to-be-former Conference USA and would-be Magnolia conference mate, Tulane, Cinderella school da jour, Florida Gulf Coast, continuing C-USA competitor, UAB, and 31 other colleges (including Stanford, Cal & UCLA) in fielding a women's team that even our AD could get behind ... sand (aka, beach) volleyball.

This is an "emerging" NCAA sport, which will get championship status when more than 40 schools field a team. Apparently in D-1, the NCAA allows six scholarships over four years, and rules benefit schools that keep sand and indoor volleyball separate.

Got sand?

Waaay more appeal to the casual fan than golf.

Jones built a white sand volleyball court while I was there in the 90's. We played (what seemed like) every day. Best year--and best tan--of the undergrad four.

Though I do worry about how many of the guys' heads (and slacks) might explode if we added a dozen or so sand volleyball lassies to the Rice ratio...

(03-30-2013 02:09 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:18 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:05 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Women's golf would be the likely first new sport.

Is a sport whose contests are never seen by any fan whatsoever...

... his erroneous statement that there isn't "any fan whatesoever" who watches colleagiate golf, (I do! I enjoyed seeing the Owls compete at SF's Olympic Club a few years back, and a friend on the Duke team down at CordeValle; both PGA/USGA championship courses))

Mike, you got me! And hats off to you for going to see the Owls at Olympic -- a rare and worthy opportunity.

(03-30-2013 02:09 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:32 AM)Barrett Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:18 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 11:05 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Women's golf would be the likely first new sport.

Is a sport whose contests are never seen by any fan whatsoever really the best way to expand our athletic program? I realize that no new sport will MAKE money, and so perhaps the biggest calculus is simply which will lose the least. But surely the notion that there is positive value in students, faculty, alumni and other fans actually seeing Rice athletes compete would be at least a marginal factor. Otherwise, why add any teams at all? (After all, if the goal is simply to miminize losses, surely reducing sports is more effective path than adding them.)

Is there much in the way of women's lacrosse or field hockey in this part of the country? My high school alma mater, St. John's, which is in Houston, certainly participates in these sports and, indeed, pretty regularly sends young women to colleges (sometimes on scholarships) for these sports (the popular destinations seem to be Princeton and Stanford). So I think these sports are reasonably popular in Texas at the high school level; I just have no idea about the college level.

Aside from his erroneous statement that there isn't "any fan whatesoever" who watches colleagiate golf, (I do! I enjoyed seeing the Owls compete at SF's Olympic Club a few years back, and a friend on the Duke team down at CordeValle; both PGA/USGA championship courses)) I suspect that George is setting the stage for making the case that Rice should add a women's sport that would attract many new fans and, hopefully, paying customers.

Knowing his strong research and analytical bent, I wouldn't be surprised if his proposal would be that Rice join our academic near-peer, soon-to-be-former Conference USA and would-be Magnolia conference mate, Tulane, Cinderella school da jour, Florida Gulf Coast, continuing C-USA competitor, UAB, and 31 other colleges (including Stanford, Cal & UCLA) in fielding a women's team that even our AD could get behind ... sand (aka, beach) volleyball.

This is an "emerging" NCAA sport, which will get championship status when more than 40 schools field a team. Apparently in D-1, the NCAA allows six scholarships over four years, and rules benefit schools that keep sand and indoor volleyball separate.

Got sand?

Beach Volleyball would be a great addition. One could renovate Jake Hess for it. With expected growth, crowds would demand renovation of HRS for Beach Volleyball.