(04-29-2013 01:42 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 01:26 PM)07owl Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 11:20 AM)Barney Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 12:51 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  I am saying that we pissed away a bunch of games screwing around with the Wild Owl....

yep.

I 100% blame the Tulsa loss on that and if you look at that old game thread, you will see me raving about how we need to stop it immediately

The Tulsa loss was on running the WildOwl, in which Luke Turner rushes for over 100 yards and 6.8 ypc?

And not... say, our base offense, where McHargue was 15-35 with an INT and a couple horrible sacks in Tulsa territory that cost us points?

It was on continuing to run the WildOwl after it was clear Tulsa had completely adjusted and was ready for it

(04-29-2013 01:50 PM)07owl Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 01:42 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 01:26 PM)07owl Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 11:20 AM)Barney Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 12:51 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  I am saying that we pissed away a bunch of games screwing around with the Wild Owl....

yep.

I 100% blame the Tulsa loss on that and if you look at that old game thread, you will see me raving about how we need to stop it immediately

The Tulsa loss was on running the WildOwl, in which Luke Turner rushes for over 100 yards and 6.8 ypc?

And not... say, our base offense, where McHargue was 15-35 with an INT and a couple horrible sacks in Tulsa territory that cost us points?

It was on continuing to run the WildOwl after it was clear Tulsa had completely adjusted and was ready for it

We should have thrown out of it, or at least just shown pass out of it once in that sequence when we ran it like 20 times in a row.

(04-29-2013 01:50 PM)07owl Wrote:  It was on continuing to run the WildOwl after it was clear Tulsa had completely adjusted and was ready for it

Even with their adjustments we stuffed it down their throats for 2 first down conversions on our final possession in their territory... if anything the mistake was going back to McH for another sideways pass on the critical third down play.

We have four offensive players going to NFL camps. Tulsa has one defensive player.

None of our four would typically be on the field in wild owl.

I keep reading here about need to put best players on the field. WO does not do that.

the fact that we often didn't move the ball in our base offense speaks to coaching, but my pick is beyond broken on that topic.

I hope I'm not confusing anyone by doing this, but it seems to me that Vance's thread was getting away from us all being rightfully excited for him... but I think the topic is worth talking about.

(04-27-2013 03:24 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  ^^ And of course when I say, "maybe Rice will start getting some pub as Tight End U," I mean that this is one of the areas where Rice's Athletic Department fails me. I know it's hard work (I've done it many many times), but a subject can generate its own press. In other words, create your own pub, Rice. Interview Casey, interview Sloan, interview Vance, interview Luke, interview Bailiff, interview Harbaugh in SF, interview Carroll in Seattle, interview Kelly in Philly (he's already talking about his new TE plans; see below). Craft a story. Write the story. Pitch it, feed it, place it. In SI. On ESPN. In the Chron. In the NYT. With the AP. All over the web. Etc, etc. Yes, it's a ton of work. But for those that haven't worked the spin rooms, it's infinitely do-able. Don't wait for funding and wins and fans that may never come; use the media pulpit to effect the public's perception of "little old Rice," or as we've become, "little old Sunbelt Rice." It works. And it kills me when we don't maximize a gift-wrapped PR story like this. 2-star recruit to 2nd-round pick?? Where the NFC Champions traded up to snag him?? Right after another Rice TE was the top off-season target of Philly's new wonderboy, the most innovative offensive mind in football?? I mean, c'mon, man. That's gold. You don't think that helps get recruits?? You don't think that puts butts in seats?? You don't think that helps with conference realignment?? Perception is truth, Rice. Stop missing opportunities. Do the legwork. Rev up the PR machine. It's the wise man's sandwich board. Unconventional wisdom. Change the perception. Change the truth. Or not...

CHIP KELLY DISCUSSES DOMINATING WITH 3 TIGHT ENDS

You're a fascinating dude, smack. What you've described really does sound doable, and valuable.

Separate note: I really wish my Bucs had gotten Chip Kelly last year. Classic sleazy college coach, but that article sure makes it sound like he's going to make **** happen in Philadelphia. I think we've only seen the tip of the iceberg in exploiting TEs in the NFL; the newish receiver-protection rules open up a style of play that gets these Power Forward types big chunks of relatively easy yards, but wasn't an option 5 years because they would've been literally killed.

(04-27-2013 03:24 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  ^^ And of course when I say, "maybe Rice will start getting some pub as Tight End U," I mean that this is one of the areas where Rice's Athletic Department fails me. I know it's hard work (I've done it many many times), but a subject can generate its own press. In other words, create your own pub, Rice. Interview Casey, interview Sloan, interview Vance, interview Luke, interview Bailiff, interview Harbaugh in SF, interview Carroll in Seattle, interview Kelly in Philly (he's already talking about his new TE plans; see below). Craft a story. Write the story. Pitch it, feed it, place it. In SI. On ESPN. In the Chron. In the NYT. With the AP. All over the web. Etc, etc. Yes, it's a ton of work. But for those that haven't worked the spin rooms, it's infinitely do-able. Don't wait for funding and wins and fans that may never come; use the media pulpit to effect the public's perception of "little old Rice," or as we've become, "little old Sunbelt Rice." It works. And it kills me when we don't maximize a gift-wrapped PR story like this. 2-star recruit to 2nd-round pick?? Where the NFC Champions traded up to snag him?? Right after another Rice TE was the top off-season target of Philly's new wonderboy, the most innovative offensive mind in football?? I mean, c'mon, man. That's gold. You don't think that helps get recruits?? You don't think that puts butts in seats?? You don't think that helps with conference realignment?? Perception is truth, Rice. Stop missing opportunities. Do the legwork. Rev up the PR machine. It's the wise man's sandwich board. Unconventional wisdom. Change the perception. Change the truth. Or not...

CHIP KELLY DISCUSSES DOMINATING WITH 3 TIGHT ENDS

Expecting Rice to comprehend this utterly ignores at least 50 years of history.

(04-29-2013 01:27 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 12:58 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 11:20 AM)Barney Wrote:  

(04-28-2013 12:51 AM)MemOwl Wrote:  I am saying that we pissed away a bunch of games screwing around with the Wild Owl....

yep.

What I don't understand is why the Wild Owl that was so effective one year was so ineffective the next.

Sadly, I ask the same question about everything else Rice football each year. What works in the latter half of the season is somehow forgotten by the start of the next season.

This was not a case of forgetting it, it was a case of remembering it but not being able to make it work.

And so many continue to forget that we play Tulane, Memphis, and UAB at season's end, but play UCLA, La Tech, A&M, UT, Tulsa, UH, etc at season's start.....

(04-29-2013 04:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-27-2013 03:24 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  ^^ And of course when I say, "maybe Rice will start getting some pub as Tight End U," I mean that this is one of the areas where Rice's Athletic Department fails me. I know it's hard work (I've done it many many times), but a subject can generate its own press. In other words, create your own pub, Rice. Interview Casey, interview Sloan, interview Vance, interview Luke, interview Bailiff, interview Harbaugh in SF, interview Carroll in Seattle, interview Kelly in Philly (he's already talking about his new TE plans; see below). Craft a story. Write the story. Pitch it, feed it, place it. In SI. On ESPN. In the Chron. In the NYT. With the AP. All over the web. Etc, etc. Yes, it's a ton of work. But for those that haven't worked the spin rooms, it's infinitely do-able. Don't wait for funding and wins and fans that may never come; use the media pulpit to effect the public's perception of "little old Rice," or as we've become, "little old Sunbelt Rice." It works. And it kills me when we don't maximize a gift-wrapped PR story like this. 2-star recruit to 2nd-round pick?? Where the NFC Champions traded up to snag him?? Right after another Rice TE was the top off-season target of Philly's new wonderboy, the most innovative offensive mind in football?? I mean, c'mon, man. That's gold. You don't think that helps get recruits?? You don't think that puts butts in seats?? You don't think that helps with conference realignment?? Perception is truth, Rice. Stop missing opportunities. Do the legwork. Rev up the PR machine. It's the wise man's sandwich board. Unconventional wisdom. Change the perception. Change the truth. Or not...

CHIP KELLY DISCUSSES DOMINATING WITH 3 TIGHT ENDS

Expecting Rice to comprehend this utterly ignores at least 50 years of history.

Hmmm. You could make a case it ignores 97, 98 or 99 years of history, depending on your source re: the year Dr. Lovett raised the hedges. That said, debating five decades versus ten decades is a waste of time. When you're rut is this deep it's a hole. Or a grave.

(04-29-2013 10:22 PM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 04:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-27-2013 03:24 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  ^^ And of course when I say, "maybe Rice will start getting some pub as Tight End U," I mean that this is one of the areas where Rice's Athletic Department fails me. I know it's hard work (I've done it many many times), but a subject can generate its own press. In other words, create your own pub, Rice. Interview Casey, interview Sloan, interview Vance, interview Luke, interview Bailiff, interview Harbaugh in SF, interview Carroll in Seattle, interview Kelly in Philly (he's already talking about his new TE plans; see below). Craft a story. Write the story. Pitch it, feed it, place it. In SI. On ESPN. In the Chron. In the NYT. With the AP. All over the web. Etc, etc. Yes, it's a ton of work. But for those that haven't worked the spin rooms, it's infinitely do-able. Don't wait for funding and wins and fans that may never come; use the media pulpit to effect the public's perception of "little old Rice," or as we've become, "little old Sunbelt Rice." It works. And it kills me when we don't maximize a gift-wrapped PR story like this. 2-star recruit to 2nd-round pick?? Where the NFC Champions traded up to snag him?? Right after another Rice TE was the top off-season target of Philly's new wonderboy, the most innovative offensive mind in football?? I mean, c'mon, man. That's gold. You don't think that helps get recruits?? You don't think that puts butts in seats?? You don't think that helps with conference realignment?? Perception is truth, Rice. Stop missing opportunities. Do the legwork. Rev up the PR machine. It's the wise man's sandwich board. Unconventional wisdom. Change the perception. Change the truth. Or not...

CHIP KELLY DISCUSSES DOMINATING WITH 3 TIGHT ENDS

Expecting Rice to comprehend this utterly ignores at least 50 years of history.

Hmmm. You could make a case it ignores 97, 98 or 99 years of history, depending on your source re: the year Dr. Lovett raised the hedges. That said, debating five decades versus ten decades is a waste of time. When you're rut is this deep it's a hole. Or a grave.

Maybe the Thresher can run w the idea?

(04-30-2013 12:01 AM)HawaiiOwl Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 10:22 PM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 04:15 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-27-2013 03:24 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  ^^ And of course when I say, "maybe Rice will start getting some pub as Tight End U," I mean that this is one of the areas where Rice's Athletic Department fails me. I know it's hard work (I've done it many many times), but a subject can generate its own press. In other words, create your own pub, Rice. Interview Casey, interview Sloan, interview Vance, interview Luke, interview Bailiff, interview Harbaugh in SF, interview Carroll in Seattle, interview Kelly in Philly (he's already talking about his new TE plans; see below). Craft a story. Write the story. Pitch it, feed it, place it. In SI. On ESPN. In the Chron. In the NYT. With the AP. All over the web. Etc, etc. Yes, it's a ton of work. But for those that haven't worked the spin rooms, it's infinitely do-able. Don't wait for funding and wins and fans that may never come; use the media pulpit to effect the public's perception of "little old Rice," or as we've become, "little old Sunbelt Rice." It works. And it kills me when we don't maximize a gift-wrapped PR story like this. 2-star recruit to 2nd-round pick?? Where the NFC Champions traded up to snag him?? Right after another Rice TE was the top off-season target of Philly's new wonderboy, the most innovative offensive mind in football?? I mean, c'mon, man. That's gold. You don't think that helps get recruits?? You don't think that puts butts in seats?? You don't think that helps with conference realignment?? Perception is truth, Rice. Stop missing opportunities. Do the legwork. Rev up the PR machine. It's the wise man's sandwich board. Unconventional wisdom. Change the perception. Change the truth. Or not...

CHIP KELLY DISCUSSES DOMINATING WITH 3 TIGHT ENDS

Expecting Rice to comprehend this utterly ignores at least 50 years of history.

Hmmm. You could make a case it ignores 97, 98 or 99 years of history, depending on your source re: the year Dr. Lovett raised the hedges. That said, debating five decades versus ten decades is a waste of time. When you're rut is this deep it's a hole. Or a grave.

Maybe the Thresher can run w the idea?

The Thresher could do it, but the Thresher would have to tell the story so that (1) it goes viral and (2) major sports media can't ignore it. Better yet, do it so that major sports media WANT it.

This could be done rather inexpensively, actually. The right way requires website video as well as an accompanying text article.

All of our NFL guys are very pro-Rice. Interview McDonald, Willson, and Casey on camera. Don't limit the chat to tight end play and football. Shoot some of the video while walking around our great campus. Get game video (in Thor's case some NFL video). Have Harbaugh say (on camera) he sees Ditka in McDonald. Segue into Baliff talking about how he recruits-- in other words, how he sees players at an earlier stage of development-- but Baliff adds that Rice is preparing students for life beyond football. (Hey, he says this all the time.) Get a couple of profs who had these players in class and have them talk about them as students (30 second clips will do it-- and make the point). Discuss the Rice-Canada connection with Willson -- which puts Covington and Shahin on camera and gets Solomon into the picture. Baliff mentions that coaches know what Rice does, when it comes to their sons and daughters. NFL coaches sure do. This gets Frazier and Kubiak a mention. (Like, potential recruits, you are not lost going to Rice.)

Who handles the interviews? How about N. D. Kalu? The video must use, of course, the clip of JFK asking why Rice plays Texas.

Text article adds quotes and personal color, etc.

Here's how I would "theme" the video and article: tight ends and H-backs are multi-dimensional threats. Rice gives its students a multi-dimensional education. (I can attest to that.)

The Thresher and the school would have to give this a PR push. But ee if you can get the 49ers, Eagles etc involved. The aTM game is a PR opportunity.

I did this on the fly. Very busy day today. I just re-read what I wrote, did a couple of edits, added the Kalu and JFK bit. But this is doable, my friends.

(04-27-2013 03:24 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  ^^ And of course when I say, "maybe Rice will start getting some pub as Tight End U," I mean that this is one of the areas where Rice's Athletic Department fails me. I know it's hard work (I've done it many many times), but a subject can generate its own press. In other words, create your own pub, Rice. Interview Casey, interview Sloan, interview Vance, interview Luke, interview Bailiff, interview Harbaugh in SF, interview Carroll in Seattle, interview Kelly in Philly (he's already talking about his new TE plans; see below). Craft a story. Write the story. Pitch it, feed it, place it. In SI. On ESPN. In the Chron. In the NYT. With the AP. All over the web. Etc, etc. Yes, it's a ton of work. But for those that haven't worked the spin rooms, it's infinitely do-able. Don't wait for funding and wins and fans that may never come; use the media pulpit to effect the public's perception of "little old Rice," or as we've become, "little old Sunbelt Rice." It works. And it kills me when we don't maximize a gift-wrapped PR story like this. 2-star recruit to 2nd-round pick?? Where the NFC Champions traded up to snag him?? Right after another Rice TE was the top off-season target of Philly's new wonderboy, the most innovative offensive mind in football?? I mean, c'mon, man. That's gold. You don't think that helps get recruits?? You don't think that puts butts in seats?? You don't think that helps with conference realignment?? Perception is truth, Rice. Stop missing opportunities. Do the legwork. Rev up the PR machine. It's the wise man's sandwich board. Unconventional wisdom. Change the perception. Change the truth. Or not...

CHIP KELLY DISCUSSES DOMINATING WITH 3 TIGHT ENDS

Have you pitched this to anyone on campus?

The idea of creating our own media content that is uniquely Rice and focusing beyond the playing fields for our athletes has been pitched to a number of constituencies around the campus.

In this day and age, EVERYONE is a videographer. It is cheap and easy... and the networks and major websites are clamoring for content.

(04-30-2013 10:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The idea of creating our own media content that is uniquely Rice and focusing beyond the playing fields for our athletes has been pitched to a number of constituencies around the campus.

In this day and age, EVERYONE is a videographer. It is cheap and easy... and the networks and major websites are clamoring for content.

I was just talking about that specific idea. I feel like Rice has been churning out video at a higher rate than before. Don't know how "easy" it is to make it acceptable quality though.

(04-30-2013 11:01 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 10:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The idea of creating our own media content that is uniquely Rice and focusing beyond the playing fields for our athletes has been pitched to a number of constituencies around the campus.

In this day and age, EVERYONE is a videographer. It is cheap and easy... and the networks and major websites are clamoring for content.

I was just talking about that specific idea. I feel like Rice has been churning out video at a higher rate than before. Don't know how "easy" it is to make it acceptable quality though.

Thresher can get Rice students with the skills to do it for the web. If a professional crew and producer-editor (non-Rice) did it TV quality -- ouch. That can get expensive. I could make a wild guess but I won't. We've had a Rice videographer post on the parliament, alerting us about a couple of videos the university made before and after the Armed Forces Bowl. I'm sure his estimate would be much more accurate than mine.

(04-30-2013 11:50 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 11:01 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 10:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The idea of creating our own media content that is uniquely Rice and focusing beyond the playing fields for our athletes has been pitched to a number of constituencies around the campus.

In this day and age, EVERYONE is a videographer. It is cheap and easy... and the networks and major websites are clamoring for content.

I was just talking about that specific idea. I feel like Rice has been churning out video at a higher rate than before. Don't know how "easy" it is to make it acceptable quality though.

Thresher can get Rice students with the skills to do it for the web. If a professional crew and producer-editor (non-Rice) did it TV quality -- ouch. That can get expensive. I could make a wild guess but I won't. We've had a Rice videographer post on the parliament, alerting us about a couple of videos the university made before and after the Armed Forces Bowl. I'm sure his estimate would be much more accurate than mine.

I appreciate the discussion of this--I honestly do--but my frustration stems from the "why" not the "how." In other words, "why isn't the university already doing this?" Rather than "how does the university do this?" I have to assume (yes, perhaps "an ass out of me and me") that these people know how to do this. These are adults earning salaries working for a top-tier, internationally-respected, multi-billion-dollar-endowed university. These aren't students. Or interns. They must know how. Must. I can't handle or fathom that they don't know how. I've just always assumed there was some reason why they didn't: overworked, lack of priority, told by someone (AD? BOT?) not to pander lest it be perceived as sandwich-boarding, etc, etc.

Look, I don't know anyone in the Athletic Department. Not a soul. But I've heard tons of nice things on these boards about some of those folks; from Walt, from Tiki, from other posters who imply there are some good-hearted Rice-loving people in there. I'm not talking about Greenspan; I'm talking about the SID (Chuck?), the woman who helps with baseball (LeeAnn?), etc. And I'm trying to be very careful not to sound like I'm calling anyone out. I have no torch or pitchfork here. I'm just saying that the Athletic Department drops the ball again and again with the media, and I've never understood why Rice doesn't play the game smarter. We all act like we're so smart, but maybe we're not.

I mean, a Rice grad is the freakin' President of CBS News. You'd think our AD would work to place *something* through him. Jason Collins is about to be on every news outlet known to man with fluffy interviews talking about how discrimination is bad. I know that Vance McDonald and James Casey and Lance Berkman don't merit that attention, but it's all about framing a story. I'm spit-balling here, but for example, in the age of steroids and A-Rod treatments and athlete deification, why not work with Lance to pitch him as a correspondent on "CBS This Morning" or "48 Hours," detailing how grueling an MLB season is for a 37 year-old slugger. You know how ESPN did "The Life"? Well work with CBS on a 4- or 6-part documentary series aired at intervals on what 162 games are like on an athlete's body, and the expenses involved with being an athlete, and see why another athlete might be tempted by HGH, etc, etc. Oh and by the way, during that 4- or 6-part series on network TV being watched by MILLIONS of Americans, Lance will invariably work-out in Rice Baseball shorts, or he'll take BP for the Rangers in an Owls cap, or we'll get some backstory on Lance from an interview with his college coach, etc, etc. Rice isn't the story. It's the subtext. But subtext sticks.

Argh. Sorry for the soapbox. It's obviously something I'm passionate about. And something I'm frustrated with in regards to dear ol' Rice U. They're losing $10m a year (apparently) and free-falling from the D1 ranks, yet they don't seem to be acting like their house in on fire. In truth, that's also why I assume it's an issue of "why" and not "how." I hate to admit it, but I've started to suspect that maybe the track we're on is exactly the track the President and BOT wants us on, y'know? There are just too many things they're not doing for me to believe that our athletic health is a priority for them.

P.S. It's not expensive to shoot something like you envision, 3-Owls. Not at all. Much cheaper than a billboard. And way cheaper than a salary. But the type of exposure I'm talking about costs grey matter and phone charges.

EDIT: Ha. Perfect example here. As I was typing, this article rolls in from SI (thanks to smcvick for posting): SI ON CINGRANI. Rice is mentioned once in the article, near the end. Now the Rice Athletic Department should be all over this: calling the Reds PR Dept, calling Albert Chen at SI, calling Tony, formulating Cingrani stories, placing the stories with other outlets--ESPN, Fox Sports, AP, MLB.com, Cincinnati Enquirer, etc. Not just working themselves into the conversation; *creating* the conversation (and inserting themselves as subtext along the way). But I digress... :)

(04-30-2013 04:17 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 11:50 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 11:01 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 10:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The idea of creating our own media content that is uniquely Rice and focusing beyond the playing fields for our athletes has been pitched to a number of constituencies around the campus.

In this day and age, EVERYONE is a videographer. It is cheap and easy... and the networks and major websites are clamoring for content.

I was just talking about that specific idea. I feel like Rice has been churning out video at a higher rate than before. Don't know how "easy" it is to make it acceptable quality though.

Thresher can get Rice students with the skills to do it for the web. If a professional crew and producer-editor (non-Rice) did it TV quality -- ouch. That can get expensive. I could make a wild guess but I won't. We've had a Rice videographer post on the parliament, alerting us about a couple of videos the university made before and after the Armed Forces Bowl. I'm sure his estimate would be much more accurate than mine.

I appreciate the discussion of this--I honestly do--but my frustration stems from the "why" not the "how." In other words, "why isn't the university already doing this?" Rather than "how does the university do this?" I have to assume (yes, perhaps "an ass out of me and me") that these people know how to do this. These are adults earning salaries working for a top-tier, internationally-respected, multi-billion-dollar-endowed university. These aren't students. Or interns. They must know how. Must. I can't handle or fathom that they don't know how. I've just always assumed there was some reason why they didn't: overworked, lack of priority, told by someone (AD? BOT?) not to pander lest it be perceived as sandwich-boarding, etc, etc.

Look, I don't know anyone in the Athletic Department. Not a soul. But I've heard tons of nice things on these boards about some of those folks; from Walt, from Tiki, from other posters who imply there are some good-hearted Rice-loving people in there. I'm not talking about Greenspan; I'm talking about the SID (Chuck?), the woman who helps with baseball (LeeAnn?), etc. And I'm trying to be very careful not to sound like I'm calling anyone out. I have no torch or pitchfork here. I'm just saying that the Athletic Department drops the ball again and again with the media, and I've never understood why Rice doesn't play the game smarter. We all act like we're so smart, but maybe we're not.

I mean, a Rice grad is the freakin' President of CBS News. You'd think our AD would work to place *something* through him. Jason Collins is about to be on every news outlet known to man with fluffy interviews talking about how discrimination is bad. I know that Vance McDonald and James Casey and Lance Berkman don't merit that attention, but it's all about framing a story. I'm spit-balling here, but for example, in the age of steroids and A-Rod treatments and athlete deification, why not work with Lance to pitch him as a correspondent on "CBS This Morning" or "48 Hours," detailing how grueling an MLB season is for a 37 year-old slugger. You know how ESPN did "The Life"? Well work with CBS on a 4- or 6-part documentary series aired at intervals on what 162 games are like on an athlete's body, and the expenses involved with being an athlete, and see why another athlete might be tempted by HGH, etc, etc. Oh and by the way, during that 4- or 6-part series on network TV being watched by MILLIONS of Americans, Lance will invariably work-out in Rice Baseball shorts, or he'll take BP for the Rangers in an Owls cap, or we'll get some backstory on Lance from an interview with his college coach, etc, etc. Rice isn't the story. It's the subtext. But subtext sticks.

Argh. Sorry for the soapbox. It's obviously something I'm passionate about. And something I'm frustrated with in regards to dear ol' Rice U. They're losing $10m a year (apparently) and free-falling from the D1 ranks, yet they don't seem to be acting like their house in on fire. In truth, that's also why I assume it's an issue of "why" and not "how." I hate to admit it, but I've started to suspect that maybe the track we're on is exactly the track the President and BOT wants us on, y'know? There are just too many things they're not doing for me to believe that our athletic health is a priority for them.

P.S. It's not expensive to shoot something like you envision, 3-Owls. Not at all. Much cheaper than a billboard. And way cheaper than a salary. But the type of exposure I'm talking about costs grey matter and phone charges.

EDIT: Ha. Perfect example here. As I was typing, this article rolls in from SI (thanks to smcvick for posting): SI ON CINGRANI. Rice is mentioned once in the article, near the end. Now the Rice Athletic Department should be all over this: calling the Reds PR Dept, calling Albert Chen at SI, calling Tony, formulating Cingrani stories, placing the stories with other outlets--ESPN, Fox Sports, AP, MLB.com, Cincinnati Enquirer, etc. Not just working themselves into the conversation; *creating* the conversation (and inserting themselves as subtext along the way). But I digress... :)

Someone in the AD needs to take MassCom101. Do we offer that at Rice? This stuff begs to be written and placed out there in on-line media, social media,etc

(04-30-2013 04:17 PM)smackdaddy Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 11:50 AM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 11:01 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 10:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The idea of creating our own media content that is uniquely Rice and focusing beyond the playing fields for our athletes has been pitched to a number of constituencies around the campus.

In this day and age, EVERYONE is a videographer. It is cheap and easy... and the networks and major websites are clamoring for content.

I was just talking about that specific idea. I feel like Rice has been churning out video at a higher rate than before. Don't know how "easy" it is to make it acceptable quality though.

Thresher can get Rice students with the skills to do it for the web. If a professional crew and producer-editor (non-Rice) did it TV quality -- ouch. That can get expensive. I could make a wild guess but I won't. We've had a Rice videographer post on the parliament, alerting us about a couple of videos the university made before and after the Armed Forces Bowl. I'm sure his estimate would be much more accurate than mine.

I appreciate the discussion of this--I honestly do--but my frustration stems from the "why" not the "how." In other words, "why isn't the university already doing this?" Rather than "how does the university do this?" I have to assume (yes, perhaps "an ass out of me and me") that these people know how to do this. These are adults earning salaries working for a top-tier, internationally-respected, multi-billion-dollar-endowed university. These aren't students. Or interns. They must know how. Must. I can't handle or fathom that they don't know how. I've just always assumed there was some reason why they didn't: overworked, lack of priority, told by someone (AD? BOT?) not to pander lest it be perceived as sandwich-boarding, etc, etc.

Look, I don't know anyone in the Athletic Department. Not a soul. But I've heard tons of nice things on these boards about some of those folks; from Walt, from Tiki, from other posters who imply there are some good-hearted Rice-loving people in there. I'm not talking about Greenspan; I'm talking about the SID (Chuck?), the woman who helps with baseball (LeeAnn?), etc. And I'm trying to be very careful not to sound like I'm calling anyone out. I have no torch or pitchfork here. I'm just saying that the Athletic Department drops the ball again and again with the media, and I've never understood why Rice doesn't play the game smarter. We all act like we're so smart, but maybe we're not.

I mean, a Rice grad is the freakin' President of CBS News. You'd think our AD would work to place *something* through him. Jason Collins is about to be on every news outlet known to man with fluffy interviews talking about how discrimination is bad. I know that Vance McDonald and James Casey and Lance Berkman don't merit that attention, but it's all about framing a story. I'm spit-balling here, but for example, in the age of steroids and A-Rod treatments and athlete deification, why not work with Lance to pitch him as a correspondent on "CBS This Morning" or "48 Hours," detailing how grueling an MLB season is for a 37 year-old slugger. You know how ESPN did "The Life"? Well work with CBS on a 4- or 6-part documentary series aired at intervals on what 162 games are like on an athlete's body, and the expenses involved with being an athlete, and see why another athlete might be tempted by HGH, etc, etc. Oh and by the way, during that 4- or 6-part series on network TV being watched by MILLIONS of Americans, Lance will invariably work-out in Rice Baseball shorts, or he'll take BP for the Rangers in an Owls cap, or we'll get some backstory on Lance from an interview with his college coach, etc, etc. Rice isn't the story. It's the subtext. But subtext sticks.

Argh. Sorry for the soapbox. It's obviously something I'm passionate about. And something I'm frustrated with in regards to dear ol' Rice U. They're losing $10m a year (apparently) and free-falling from the D1 ranks, yet they don't seem to be acting like their house in on fire. In truth, that's also why I assume it's an issue of "why" and not "how." I hate to admit it, but I've started to suspect that maybe the track we're on is exactly the track the President and BOT wants us on, y'know? There are just too many things they're not doing for me to believe that our athletic health is a priority for them.

P.S. It's not expensive to shoot something like you envision, 3-Owls. Not at all. Much cheaper than a billboard. And way cheaper than a salary. But the type of exposure I'm talking about costs grey matter and phone charges.

EDIT: Ha. Perfect example here. As I was typing, this article rolls in from SI (thanks to smcvick for posting): SI ON CINGRANI. Rice is mentioned once in the article, near the end. Now the Rice Athletic Department should be all over this: calling the Reds PR Dept, calling Albert Chen at SI, calling Tony, formulating Cingrani stories, placing the stories with other outlets--ESPN, Fox Sports, AP, MLB.com, Cincinnati Enquirer, etc. Not just working themselves into the conversation; *creating* the conversation (and inserting themselves as subtext along the way). But I digress... :)

I share your disgust. I may be more critical of some folks at the university than you are because I've witnessed (personally) -- how to put it?...ah, yes--- I have witnessed unenlightened individual reactions to "outside ideas." Now, unenlightened is a euphemism for totally foolish knee jerk reactions, like, naked exhibition of the turf protection DNA carried by every petty bureaucrat on the planet. (Not Invented Here. NIH.)

For the record, my estimate of a TV-ready, pro-shot, pro-edited version of the 12 to 15 minute segment I outlined is, oh, around $8K. This assumes you don't pay a talent fee to the interviewer and that you have access to pro-quality edit/production software. This figure also assumes Rice U let's us use a broadcast tv quality on campus studio facility rent-free. It also assumes whoever lays out the story board and scripts (ie, sketches) the interviews does so for zip nada, but I basically did that on the fly this morning and I'll finish it for zip nada. And future scotch considerations. This figure may or may not be in line with your estimate, but I guessing this would take a half day on location (campus) and a half day in the rent-free broadcast quality studio.

(04-30-2013 06:05 PM)3-OwlsInTheNest Wrote:  For the record, my estimate of a TV-ready, pro-shot, pro-edited version of the 12 to 15 minute segment I outlined is, oh, around $8K. This assumes you don't pay a talent fee to the interviewer and that you have access to pro-quality edit/production software. This figure also assumes Rice U let's us use a broadcast tv quality on campus studio facility rent-free. It also assumes whoever lays out the story board and scripts (ie, sketches) the interviews does so for zip nada, but I basically did that on the fly this morning and I'll finish it for zip nada. And future scotch considerations. This figure may or may not be in line with your estimate, but I guessing this would take a half day on location (campus) and a half day in the rent-free broadcast quality studio.

I'd say much, much cheaper than $8k. Especially if you're excluding all those line items (equipment, prep, talent, etc). It could easily be done in LA for $1k or $2k, so Houston can't be 4x as much. Rice should own a high-end package by now (I have no clue if they do or don't); at least a cam body and a multi-use lens, if not a set of primes. It's no longer expensive. Canons for under $2k. To *own*. Even a good Red can be had for under $8k. To *own*. Great portable, batt-powered lights are cheap now, too (Kino's, etc). A high-end FCP set-up, etc. But all this is beside the point (mine, at least). I'm not talking about production. I'm talking about good old-fashioned PR, pub, spin, etc. That costs virtually nothing. Just effort. I chuckle when people mock or bemoan the media; the media is just us. It's our tool. Rice should exploit it more.