Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Transformation vs Incrementalism
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
waltgreenberg Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,274
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #61
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 09:39 AM)picrig Wrote:  Edit: If someone wants to tell me how to edit my little handmade table of records, I'd be happy to.

Can I just make a point about this whole record vs. Top 50 teams point that keeps coming up over and over again?

First, let me say up front that our record vs. Top 50 is abysmal. Our record vs. Top 60 is abysmal. And vs. the outside of Top 60 is pretty good to very good.

The consensus (with which I agree) is that we need to be better against the Top 50/60. And that this is what is holding us back. I think, though, that the reality is MOST teams are pretty bad against the Top 60 and pretty good against the bottom 60. So I thought I'd take a look over the last three years (what seems to be the new baseline for Rice football) using Massey ratings.

Team Record vs. Top 60 Record vs. 60+
Rice 0-9 25-6
Marshall 2-4 26-8
West Virginia 8-17 10-3
Virginia Tech 12-11 12-6
NC State 1-16 17-4
ECU 3-7 23-6
UH 1-8 20-9

Note that NC State's one win against top 60 was against the #60 team. We have a win against Marshall who was about #65. Not sure those wins are substantively different. So we basically profile out as NC State. Or UH (their one win was against #41 Memphis). Or Marshall (their two top 60 wins came against #60 and #52).

I don't know if I have some earth shattering point other than most other teams who we say we are higher in the proverbial pecking order than us (via either P5 association or being perceived as top tier G5) don't have vastly different resumes than us. They don't beat Top 60 teams often (and when they do, it's almost never a top 50 team), and even P5 teams who aren't at the top half of their conference don't have great records against the Top 50. Virginia Tech is the anomaly here. They're pretty crappy against crappy teams and pretty good against good teams.

Of course I'd like to be better against better teams. And we need to be to get in the conversation. But this representation that we suck against good teams and other schools we're striving to be like (P5 or "higher level" G5) don't struggle against Top 50 teams is disingenuous.

First off, thanks for the research and additional insights. The only issue I have with this analysis is that your cherry picking your other teams that you 're comparing Rice against, and that
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2015 10:24 AM by waltgreenberg.)
01-14-2015 10:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoodleOwl Offline
All Noodle
*

Posts: 4,391
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 26
I Root For: the Owls! HOOT!
Location: Austin, TX

Folding@NCAAbbsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #62
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 08:05 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  That's your opinion; not mine. A new coach does not guarantee anything, but Bailiff's 0-50 record vs. Top 50, with almost every single one of those loses being blow outs, combined with his rather complacent public comments after such losses (not to mention almost no victories against teams ranked ahead of us), gives at least me considerable doubt as to whether a new coach is required to get us to the next level. Bailiff has not only not gotten us any big wins (save for last year's Marshall game), he hasn't even had his teams competing in games against Top 35 - 50 opponents (let alone Top 25).

Typo or hyperbole? (just curious) Of course, DB is 48-53 overall at Rice, and not all of those 53 have been against top teams.

Just to bring some hard data into the discussion: (Massey composite rankings used)
Over the last 3 years:
  • Rice is 0-10 vs. the top 50, with an average 21 point deficit.
  • Rice is 25-5 vs. everyone else (24-2 since Memphis '12)
    • Average MoV vs. 51-75: 7 points (3-1)
    • Average MoV vs. 76-100: 7 points (6-3)
    • Average MoV vs. 101-125: 15 points (16-1)

Entering the realm of opinion --
The data above suggests to me that Rice is performing like a ~ #60 team, and consistently (90% over the past 2.5 years) beating the teams beneath us. The MoV data suggests to me that there's a fairly large qualitative gap between top 50 & everyone else, likely attributable to the P5/G5 dichotomy -- as we saw in a previous post, 80% of the top 50 is P5.

With the right coaching move, a team can rise through the ranks quickly, though not necessarily immediately. Marshall had been stuck in the 70s-80s prior to hiring Doc Holliday. Over the last 3 years (Holliday's 3rd/4th/5th year), their final ranking has gone 93/54/21. Sometimes you draw the inside straight, sometimes you draw Ellis Johnson.

ETA: I was compiling this while picrig was doing his post above. (The difference in records is due to using Massey's own ratings vs. the Massey composite of 100+ computer ratings.) Additional support for the large gap between the haves and the have-nots.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2015 10:18 AM by NoodleOwl.)
01-14-2015 10:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
picrig Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 108
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 13
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #63
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
Quote:First off, thanks for the research and additional insights. The only issue I have with this analysis is that your cherry picking your other teams that you 're comparing Rice against, and that

I prefer random selection over cherry picking:-) You're right, to some extent they're cherry picked. I didn't have enough free time at work this morning to analyze everyone by hand or write code to pull all the data. But, that sounds like a good lunch project.

When I randomly cherry-picked the teams, I tried to think of either 1) mid-tier P5 teams (e.g. P5 teams that are consistently around .500 give or take a game or two) or G5 teams that we (or others) perceive as being better than us.

Like I said, I'd be happy to run the data for a larger population. Do you (or anyone else) want to suggest a so-called "Top 10 G5" that we could pull the data for? Would we be agreeable to use average Massey rating over the last 3 years to determine the top 10 G5 for this purpose? If so, I could pull together that data at lunch pretty easily.
01-14-2015 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,274
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #64
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 10:18 AM)picrig Wrote:  
Quote:First off, thanks for the research and additional insights. The only issue I have with this analysis is that your cherry picking your other teams that you 're comparing Rice against, and that

I prefer random selection over cherry picking:-) You're right, to some extent they're cherry picked. I didn't have enough free time at work this morning to analyze everyone by hand or write code to pull all the data. But, that sounds like a good lunch project.

When I randomly cherry-picked the teams, I tried to think of either 1) mid-tier P5 teams (e.g. P5 teams that are consistently around .500 give or take a game or two) or G5 teams that we (or others) perceive as being better than us.

Like I said, I'd be happy to run the data for a larger population. Do you (or anyone else) want to suggest a so-called "Top 10 G5" that we could pull the data for? Would we be agreeable to use average Massey rating over the last 3 years to determine the top 10 G5 for this purpose? If so, I could pull together that data at lunch pretty easily.

Sorry for my incomplete post above as I got called into the doctor's office mid-post.

1. I'd argue Rice's "abysmal" record extends to the Top 70-75.

2. There's quite a difference on quality of competition between teams in the Top 60, and programs in P5 conferences play far more if their Top 60 games against opponents ranked in the Top 25-35.

3. I'd argue that almost all those other teams cited competed much more closely against those Top 60 opponents than Rice has done.

Having said that, thanks for the analysis. Much appreciated.
01-14-2015 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,926
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #65
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
Love that we are finally getting some facts into the discussion. i can understand why some of yall think a guy with a 0-0 record against top 60 might be a good gamble over somebody withan 0-10, 0-25, or 0-50 record (pick your time frame and record). In 3-4 years, when his record is 0-10, do we go for another guy with a 0-0 record?

bring me somebody with skins on the wall instead of just potential, and I will change sides. i would rate that a good gamble.
Right now, since the trajectory seems to be "up", I think the bird in the hand is the better bet. Neiither is sure thing.

I don't see yet the reasoning behind projecting a breakout 11-1 or 12-0 season. is it because UT may be weak? i thought we wanted to beat strong teams, not weak. s it because we will have a senior QB?

i like our teams chances at a good season, but that falls short of expecting a breakout season.

2015 prediction: continued disturbances, some rain, some sun, nobody happy.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2015 10:57 AM by OptimisticOwl.)
01-14-2015 10:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
picrig Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 108
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 13
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
Out of genuine curiosity (not being combative), Walt, what would be a robust, meaningful data set for you to compare Rice/other G5 schools vs. P5 schools? I've yet to see a set of data which you find particularly valuable (but in baseball you use records vs. 1-25, 25-50, 51-100). Every data set has limitations, but there is still some useful data.

You say Rice's record extends to the Top 70-75....what if we ran a dataset with records vs. 1-75, 76-120 (but this is another arbitrary cutoff....I picked 60 b/c it's basically half of FBS). Or better yet, 1-30, 30-80, and 80+. Basically gives you the top quartile, middle 50%, and the dregs.

Would honestly like to know what dataset would be useful to you.
01-14-2015 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,274
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #67
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 11:12 AM)picrig Wrote:  Out of genuine curiosity (not being combative), Walt, what would be a robust, meaningful data set for you to compare Rice/other G5 schools vs. P5 schools? I've yet to see a set of data which you find particularly valuable (but in baseball you use records vs. 1-25, 25-50, 51-100). Every data set has limitations, but there is still some useful data.

You say Rice's record extends to the Top 70-75....what if we ran a dataset with records vs. 1-75, 76-120 (but this is another arbitrary cutoff....I picked 60 b/c it's basically half of FBS). Or better yet, 1-30, 30-80, and 80+. Basically gives you the top quartile, middle 50%, and the dregs.

Would honestly like to know what dataset would be useful to you.

The To 25/50/100 data set I continue to refer to in baseball is the one used by the baseball Selection Committe. Football is a tougher, less definitive nut to crack, but since you asked I'd probably go with Top 20/50/75, as anything below the Top 75 is not a quality opponent. In baseball, anyone ranked in the Top 100 is considered a competitive or quality opponent, with Top 50 usually comprising post-season teams.
01-14-2015 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoodleOwl Offline
All Noodle
*

Posts: 4,391
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 26
I Root For: the Owls! HOOT!
Location: Austin, TX

Folding@NCAAbbsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #68
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 11:21 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(01-14-2015 11:12 AM)picrig Wrote:  Out of genuine curiosity (not being combative), Walt, what would be a robust, meaningful data set for you to compare Rice/other G5 schools vs. P5 schools? I've yet to see a set of data which you find particularly valuable (but in baseball you use records vs. 1-25, 25-50, 51-100). Every data set has limitations, but there is still some useful data.

You say Rice's record extends to the Top 70-75....what if we ran a dataset with records vs. 1-75, 76-120 (but this is another arbitrary cutoff....I picked 60 b/c it's basically half of FBS). Or better yet, 1-30, 30-80, and 80+. Basically gives you the top quartile, middle 50%, and the dregs.

Would honestly like to know what dataset would be useful to you.

The To 25/50/100 data set I continue to refer to in baseball is the one used by the baseball Selection Committe. Football is a tougher, less definitive nut to crack, but since you asked I'd probably go with Top 20/50/75, as anything below the Top 75 is not a quality opponent. In baseball, anyone ranked in the Top 100 is considered a competitive or quality opponent, with Top 50 usually comprising post-season teams.

I gave y'all records vs. 50/75/100/125 just a few posts up. 03-wink

Over the last 3 years:
Rice is 0-10 vs. the top 50, with an average 21 point deficit.
Rice is 25-5 vs. everyone else (24-2 since Memphis '12)
Average MoV vs. 51-75: 7 points (3-1)
Average MoV vs. 76-100: 7 points (6-3)
Average MoV vs. 101-125: 15 points (16-1)

ETA: If you want to split that 0-10 into top25/next 25, it's 0-2/0-8. The 2 are #20 A&M last year and #21 Marshall this year.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2015 12:38 PM by NoodleOwl.)
01-14-2015 12:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 9,144
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 238
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #69
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 10:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Love that we are finally getting some facts into the discussion. i can understand why some of yall think a guy with a 0-0 record against top 60 might be a good gamble over somebody withan 0-10, 0-25, or 0-50 record (pick your time frame and record). In 3-4 years, when his record is 0-10, do we go for another guy with a 0-0 record?

9 years ago, DBD was the guy with the 0-0 record against top 60, i.e. HE was the one you don't wish to hire.

TODAY, 9 years later, we have the data on how he performs, with a Rice team, no less, against top 60. The argument for DBD being suspect at this point is his own record. Look at the data just above this in NoodleOwl's post #68. While it is possible he could suddenly change overnight (or over the next 9 years) and become Frank Beamer, the odds do appear highly unlikely with the data he has accumulated.

If you play poker with the same philosophy you use with your DBD analysis, it would appear that no matter what hand you are dealt, you always play it, and you always play it to the river no matter the bets, no matter the flop, turn or river. That does not appear to be very sound strategy to me. Don't the odds necessarily change with every card that is dealt--and thus what may at first appear to be a strong hand at the beginning of the game, can end up looking like a weak or losing hand toward the end of the hand? No big deal if you have the largest stack at the table and everyone else is short-stacked. You can afford to be sloppy and lose some hands or take some flyers. IOW, a P5 school doesn't have to worry about how to get into the P5--they're already there.

But Rice's situation is the reverse--we are the shortest stack at the table, and we have a hand that every year looks worse against the competition. We have to perform far better than other schools do to have a chance to catch up. Yes, we're catching some Jacks, but every year we have to beat Kings or better and Jacks just won't do it, even though they are good enough to beat the 10's, 9's 8's etc... Sometimes, the information you gain during the play of the hand makes you decide to fold what you thought was going to be a winning hand and play a new, unknown hand.

To me, DBD represents starting Hold 'em with a pair of Jacks. The flop over the 9 years has been A-K-4, and we are staring at 7 other guys at the table, a few folding, and the remaining players betting strong, representing they have a pair of Aces or Kings. The Turn is a throwaway card, in this case a "7" representing the continued muddling around. Even if we bet heavily on the turn to represent trip 7s to try to knock the others out and steal the pot, it has not worked. We have no flush possibility with the cards we hold. We're at the river representing trip 7s or two pair, but in reality holding that pair of Jacks, hoping to catch a Jack on the river, when our competition is representing at least a pair of Aces, a pair of Kings, or two pair, or possibly trip Aces or trip Kings. Heck maybe they have the trip 7s, or two pair, as every round of betting they raise. Any of which have us beat. But we're choosing to go all-in with DBD in that scenario hoping for that Jack on the river and no one else has trips, or catches a Full House. Bad odds.



(01-14-2015 10:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  bring me somebody with skins on the wall instead of just potential, and I will change sides. i would rate that a good gamble.
Right now, since the trajectory seems to be "up", I think the bird in the hand is the better bet. Neiither is sure thing.

That's the thing. The trend has not been up. It's been very sideways. Even within seasons it's been inconsistent, skewed and sideways. Walt's very point over many posts is that the needle has not been moved against signature wins, plural, over 8 years. That is a necessary requirement to make some noise and move the needle.

(01-14-2015 10:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't see yet the reasoning behind projecting a breakout 11-1 or 12-0 season. is it because UT may be weak? i thought we wanted to beat strong teams, not weak. s it because we will have a senior QB?

i like our teams chances at a good season, but that falls short of expecting a breakout season.

Please define exactly what "good" season is to you, OO.

Scenario #1: I've posted it before, but I'll post it again. The reason I feel, in my opinion that a breakout season is possible for DBD in 2015 is that if I am wrong about him, and he is in fact the wonderful coach some say he is and I just can't see it, then we should beat all the bad CUSA teams we have on the schedule next year, no matter which ones they are. Also, we should beat the better teams in CUSA if I am wrong, as DBD himself predicted being able to win conference to a sideline reporter before the Hawaii Bowl, and since as you say his trajectory is "up" that is a step "up" from where we are now. Then we should be able to beat Army at home. That gets us a CUSA Championship and a non-con win against Army. 9-0 so far. Then there's a down Texas team on the road. For all those complaining about signature wins, DBD the Great, deems it time to show that he's really been toying with us all these years, and he coaches a great game to get his first meaningful win against a P5 name team in his 9th season. Now we're up to 10-0.

Then there's the "Mystery Team" yet to be announced. If it is Wagner or the like, as has been rumored, I will go out on a limb and guess that DBD is such a great coach now that another Nicholls State is not in the offing and we win. If it is UH, we should still have their number as they have a brand new coach, and DBD has established his superiority over the years and our trend is "up", so time to beat them, too.

Baylor is on the road and a Top 5 team in the nation. It is highly unlikely we beat them, but stranger things have happened over the years in college football. That's the one loss in the 11-1 scenario. If the stars do choose to align, and DBD coaches a signature game, there's your 12-0. Plausible, yet highly unlikely. Certainly not expected. Then we are in the national conversation for the second half of the season for the access bowl. Gets Rice's name out there in a way it has never been before, and all of a sudden the needle actually moves for real. Terrible scenario, I know, and shame on me for thinking it plausible. But that's if DBD is really the coach you think he is.

Scenario #2: If I'm right, however, and DBD continues his established pattern of mediocrity, odds are the following is the more realistic scenario:

We will probably end up losing at least one, perhaps even two, games to a C-USA bottom-feeder, lose to one or two good CUSA teams on our schedule whoever they will be, lose at both Texas and Baylor, and perhaps UH if scheduled, or one other weird game. The blame will be laid squarely as on being "on him" and also due to 'injuries', which only Rice has to deal with, of course, other teams always playing us at full strength and having no excuses, and the fact that we "have to play better defense."

So there's your 6-6 or 7-5, in C-USA, against primarily or exclusively the worst teams in college football. Allow me to show how ridiculous the unbridled cheering for that appears to me: Another WINNING SEASON, YAY!!! We get our unprecedented and !!!!Historic Fourth Consecutive Bowl game!!!! in the Toilet Bowl vs Troy, AL Trojans (tried to dress it up and make it look as good as possible there) (a new bowl played in Troy, NY for the bottom two bowl teams to play each-other at 1am on Christmas Eve.) The Bowl marketers go crazy selling "Troy in Troy" t-shirts to all the fans! It's a new bowl for Rice, and there are plenty of shots of the Rice fans in Troy, NY (motto is "at least we're not Scranton!) who traveled and the "R" Texas flags and the relatively empty stands (normal now for most lower bowl games, we are reminded--these are TV events nowadays, after all), and the announcers are able to plug Rice's new EZF construction again at the end of the game (3:30am Eastern, but only 2:30am Central), to all those viewers who watched until the end.

I admit, it is better than having a losing record and no bowl, but not by all that much. And I certainly don't think DBD is the only coach who can do that at present-level Rice.

I'll take the first scenario as being better for Rice and the one I will root for, but then, I'm the one who "wants us to lose" as someone posted. The "winners" apparently want more seasons of Scenario #2.

That's just backwards to me, but whatever.

Lastly, I'll ask again: Please define exactly what "good" season is to you, OO.

ETA: to be clear, the Turn in the Hold'em poker illustration above is a meaningless card, a "7" we choose to bluff on to try to push some others out, representing either trip 7's or two pair to the other players. Added it in above and adjusted the flop to be clear it is the Turn card we are representing on...
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2015 06:21 PM by GoodOwl.)
01-14-2015 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NoodleOwl Offline
All Noodle
*

Posts: 4,391
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 26
I Root For: the Owls! HOOT!
Location: Austin, TX

Folding@NCAAbbsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #70
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
Another semi-random observation on the data set --
The schedule this year was very bimodal. 4 games against teams ranked 20-40, which we lost by an average of 30 points, and 9 games against teams 80-120, which we won by an average of 15 (even including the 3 point loss to ODU). We didn't play a real middle-of-the-road team, which makes it harder to gauge our performance this year.
01-14-2015 12:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
owl95 Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 876
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 25
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
I don't see ANYONE on this board thinking that a 6-6 or 7-5 season next year is ok due to our returning Senior QB and other talent.
01-14-2015 12:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 9,144
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 238
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #72
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 12:52 PM)owl95 Wrote:  I don't see ANYONE on this board thinking that a 6-6 or 7-5 season next year is ok due to our returning Senior QB and other talent.

I have seen many posts over several threads that appear to me to think that very thing. I'd ask them to go back to page 7 of this thread and read my Post #69 and see how their Scenario #2 looks to my plausible Scenario #1 that I root for. Not at all saying anyone wants it, but many would be Okay with it again and again. Logic is that it's better than losing seasons. They're right--it is better, but that by itself does not make it good enough to do what Rice needs to do.

To be clear, I'm for letting him coach in 2015 to see what happens. We can't fire him today. I am not saying that, though I consider him very suspect still.

Should we go 7-5 or 6-6 or worse with a similar pattern to this season, then my pitchfork is at the ready and I would say dump him, and let JK choose his own style of coach to build on where we are. Better than that, would depend on if he actually gets the statement/signature win or wins in there. It's past time. (No, UH or any CUSA team are not signature, even in a potential CUSA Champ game again.)

Either we're moving on up or we're not. Moving up is going to be harder from here on out. The low-hangin' fruit has done been all picked.



(This post was last modified: 01-14-2015 03:22 PM by GoodOwl.)
01-14-2015 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Antarius Offline
Say no to cronyism
*

Posts: 10,544
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 78
I Root For: Rice
Location: KHOU
Post: #73
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 01:12 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Should we go 7-5 or 6-6 or worse with a similar pattern to this season, then my pitchfork is at the ready and I would say dump him, and let JK choose his own style of coach to build on where we are. Better than that, would depend on if he actually gets the statement/signature win or wins in there. It's past time. (No, UH or any CUSA team are not signature, even in a potential CUSA Champ game again.)

I agree. IMO, most of the board would probably agree as well.
01-14-2015 02:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 9,144
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 238
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #74
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 02:22 PM)Antarius Wrote:  
(01-14-2015 01:12 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Should we go 7-5 or 6-6 or worse with a similar pattern to this season, then my pitchfork is at the ready and I would say dump him, and let JK choose his own style of coach to build on where we are. Better than that, would depend on if he actually gets the statement/signature win or wins in there. It's past time. (No, UH or any CUSA team are not signature, even in a potential CUSA Champ game again.)

I agree. IMO, most of the board would probably agree as well.

Thank you, Ant. That is all I am asking for with my posts.
01-14-2015 02:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
picrig Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 108
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 13
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #75
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
Some quick records I pulled over lunch:

Team/vs. 1 - 20/vs. 21-50/51-75/75+
Rice/0-1/0-7/1-3/24-4
LaTech/0-3/0-3/3-2/19-8
NcSt/1-7/0-4/2-7/15-2
Utah St/0-1/3-6/4-3/23-1

We're basically NC State. Sure, they have the one win over a top 20 team. But like many have contended, one signature win doesnt' change who you are as a program (even if it looks good). Utah State has clearly been a better program, and LaTech has been slightly better against the 51-75 teams. But worse against the dregs of FBS.
01-14-2015 03:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gsloth Offline
perpetually tired
*

Posts: 6,029
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Rice&underdogs
Location: Central VA

Donators
Post: #76
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
I was the one who did the original research on the DB's Top 50 record, and I believe it came to 0-26.

Interestingly enough, Western Michigan was #43 heading into that 2008 bowl game, but the blowout loss dropped them out of the top 50 for Massey and the Massey Composite. I'm a believer in basing everyone's ranking on end of year only, but there are those (like in the SEC) who want to base their claims based on the ranking at the time. So 0-26 it is.

I'll leave any comments to the rest of this conversation to another time.
01-14-2015 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoodOwl Offline
The 1 Hoo Knocks
*

Posts: 9,144
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 238
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
Post: #77
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 03:20 PM)picrig Wrote:  Some quick records I pulled over lunch:

Team/vs. 1 - 20/vs. 21-50/51-75/75+
Rice/0-1/0-7/1-3/24-4
LaTech/0-3/0-3/3-2/19-8
NcSt/1-7/0-4/2-7/15-2
Utah St/0-1/3-6/4-3/23-1

We're basically NC State. Sure, they have the one win over a top 20 team. But like many have contended, one signature win doesnt' change who you are as a program (even if it looks good). Utah State has clearly been a better program, and LaTech has been slightly better against the 51-75 teams. But worse against the dregs of FBS.

picrig, I appreciate seeing this.
Possible to quickly pull the records of Boise State, UCF, ECU, Northern Illinois? Along with Marshall, UTSA and maybe others mentioned in conversations as either the best of the G5 or ones mentioned for potential move-ups scenarios out there (UConn, Cincinnati, and recently, Memphis). Those would be more relevant to compare to for me.
Thanks for posting your data.
01-14-2015 04:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rick Gerlach Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,529
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 70
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsCrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #78
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
Have the final 2015 Massey and Massey composite rankings come out?

Last week we were speculating whether Rice would move into the G5 Top 20 or Top 15, given our win (and LaTech's and CUSA's generally doing well, etc)
01-14-2015 05:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,274
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #79
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 03:20 PM)picrig Wrote:  Some quick records I pulled over lunch:

Team/vs. 1 - 20/vs. 21-50/51-75/75+
Rice/0-1/0-7/1-3/24-4
LaTech/0-3/0-3/3-2/19-8
NcSt/1-7/0-4/2-7/15-2
Utah St/0-1/3-6/4-3/23-1

We're basically NC State. Sure, they have the one win over a top 20 team. But like many have contended, one signature win doesnt' change who you are as a program (even if it looks good). Utah State has clearly been a better program, and LaTech has been slightly better against the 51-75 teams. But worse against the dregs of FBS.

Great job-- thank you! So we are 1-11 vs. Top 75 opponents during our "historic, unprecedented" run of success, with the one win being Marshall in last year's home CUSA championship game. Keep in mind, teams ranked in the Top 50 - 75 range are NOT perceived by any college football fan as "good" teams. This only confirms that our unprecedented win totals the last 3 years have come exclusively by beating up on the dredge of college football. Yes, it's progress that we are no longer perceived amongst the dredge, but that's about it.
01-14-2015 05:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,274
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #80
RE: Transformation vs Incrementalism
(01-14-2015 05:17 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  Have the final 2015 Massey and Massey composite rankings come out?

Last week we were speculating whether Rice would move into the G5 Top 20 or Top 15, given our win (and LaTech's and CUSA's generally doing well, etc)

YOU were speculating. Many of us think such a comparison and ranking is absolutely meaningless to the national football audience.
01-14-2015 05:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.