JK should stick with Bailiff until DB isn't making progress. We should appreciate multiple winning seasons stacked on top of each other. I don't buy that the schedules now are much easier than in the WAC. We've beaten bowl teams from other G5 conferences, blow outs in fact! Air Force and Fresno used to blow us out back in the day. I don't agree with the theory that Bailiff has so much talent compared to our peers. That's laughable TBH. We've improved our talent, thanks to DB's recruiting and player development, but we're nowhere near P5 talent and the difference between Rice and any C-USA team in talent is not much. That he's a bad in-game coach is overrated as well. Keep in mind that DB critics who post here know very little about in-game coaching. And the facts are that we've won a lot more games as blowouts than lost blowouts recently. I don't think we had a lot more talent than Kansas, but we beat them twice in close games. We don't have more talent than any of the teams that have beaten us since 2012, ODU being the only exception.

Of the major sports, Bailiff has arguably been the best coach on campus in the past 4 seasons. In baseball, despite our much higher profile, we've been losing to the Louisiana Lafayettes in the postseason (they're good in baseball but don't have our resources, something we can't say about the teams that beat us in football), and basically have regressed from a top 10 program to a top 25 one. In basketball, we were a disaster after Braun's flame out with all the transfers, and Rhodes is going to be an exceptional coach, but have to give him time. Meanwhile, Bailiff has won a lot of games.

As for the thread's question - I wouldn't like to schedule games against top 10 teams anytime soon. We don't gain a lot in blowouts. I think JK is trying to schedule more middle of the pac P5 teams instead. I'd like to play SMU, UH, instead of A&M and Baylor. But I'd still like to play Texas even if they become a powerhoue again.

(09-28-2015 06:54 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  JK should stick with Bailiff until DB isn't making progress. We should appreciate multiple winning seasons stacked on top of each other. I don't buy that the schedules now are much easier than in the WAC. We've beaten bowl teams from other G5 conferences, blow outs in fact! Air Force and Fresno used to blow us out back in the day. I don't agree with the theory that Bailiff has so much talent compared to our peers. That's laughable TBH. We've improved our talent, thanks to DB's recruiting and player development, but we're nowhere near P5 talent and the difference between Rice and any C-USA team in talent is not much. That he's a bad in-game coach is overrated as well. Keep in mind that DB critics who post here know very little about in-game coaching. And the facts are that we've won a lot more games as blowouts than lost blowouts recently. I don't think we had a lot more talent than Kansas, but we beat them twice in close games. We don't have more talent than any of the teams that have beaten us since 2012, ODU being the only exception.

Of the major sports, Bailiff has arguably been the best coach on campus in the past 4 seasons. In baseball, despite our much higher profile, we've been losing to the Louisiana Lafayettes in the postseason (they're good in baseball but don't have our resources, something we can't say about the teams that beat us in football), and basically have regressed from a top 10 program to a top 25 one. In basketball, we were a disaster after Braun's flame out with all the transfers, and Rhodes is going to be an exceptional coach, but have to give him time. Meanwhile, Bailiff has won a lot of games.

As for the thread's question - I wouldn't like to schedule games against top 10 teams anytime soon. We don't gain a lot in blowouts. I think JK is trying to schedule more middle of the pac P5 teams instead. I'd like to play SMU, UH, instead of A&M and Baylor. But I'd still like to play Texas even if they become a powerhoue again.

I agree... Our talent level isn't head and shoulders above other C-USA teams. Marshall's talent level is far above us... FIU's average athlete is better than our average athlete, although in the case of FIU, they aren't better football players. Might not be politically correct, but those two schools in particular are recruiting a lot of thugs who can play football from inner city Miami high schools. Also, the fact that we can hardly ever take JuCo transfers handicaps us..

(09-28-2015 06:54 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  JK should stick with Bailiff until DB isn't making progress. We should appreciate multiple winning seasons stacked on top of each other. I don't buy that the schedules now are much easier than in the WAC. We've beaten bowl teams from other G5 conferences, blow outs in fact! Air Force and Fresno used to blow us out back in the day. I don't agree with the theory that Bailiff has so much talent compared to our peers. That's laughable TBH. We've improved our talent, thanks to DB's recruiting and player development, but we're nowhere near P5 talent and the difference between Rice and any C-USA team in talent is not much. That he's a bad in-game coach is overrated as well. Keep in mind that DB critics who post here know very little about in-game coaching. And the facts are that we've won a lot more games as blowouts than lost blowouts recently. I don't think we had a lot more talent than Kansas, but we beat them twice in close games. We don't have more talent than any of the teams that have beaten us since 2012, ODU being the only exception.

Of the major sports, Bailiff has arguably been the best coach on campus in the past 4 seasons. In baseball, despite our much higher profile, we've been losing to the Louisiana Lafayettes in the postseason (they're good in baseball but don't have our resources, something we can't say about the teams that beat us in football), and basically have regressed from a top 10 program to a top 25 one. In basketball, we were a disaster after Braun's flame out with all the transfers, and Rhodes is going to be an exceptional coach, but have to give him time. Meanwhile, Bailiff has won a lot of games.

As for the thread's question - I wouldn't like to schedule games against top 10 teams anytime soon. We don't gain a lot in blowouts. I think JK is trying to schedule more middle of the pac P5 teams instead. I'd like to play SMU, UH, instead of A&M and Baylor. But I'd still like to play Texas even if they become a powerhoue again.

1. Please stop with "progress" crap. The football program has been on a plateau for 3 years now-- beating up on the bottom quartile of the FBS division...failing to even compete against. let alone beat, anyone ranked even n the Top 75 (save for the one win vs. Marshall). Where exactly is the progress?

2. And how in the world can anyone argue that the football program has outperformed the baseball program over the past 4 seasons? You're joking, right? You do realize the baseball program has won conference championships in each of those 4 seasons, been ranked in the Top 25 nationally in all 4 seasons, and played a much tougher OOC schedule than the football program.

(09-28-2015 07:34 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 06:54 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  JK should stick with Bailiff until DB isn't making progress. We should appreciate multiple winning seasons stacked on top of each other. I don't buy that the schedules now are much easier than in the WAC. We've beaten bowl teams from other G5 conferences, blow outs in fact! Air Force and Fresno used to blow us out back in the day. I don't agree with the theory that Bailiff has so much talent compared to our peers. That's laughable TBH. We've improved our talent, thanks to DB's recruiting and player development, but we're nowhere near P5 talent and the difference between Rice and any C-USA team in talent is not much. That he's a bad in-game coach is overrated as well. Keep in mind that DB critics who post here know very little about in-game coaching. And the facts are that we've won a lot more games as blowouts than lost blowouts recently. I don't think we had a lot more talent than Kansas, but we beat them twice in close games. We don't have more talent than any of the teams that have beaten us since 2012, ODU being the only exception.

Of the major sports, Bailiff has arguably been the best coach on campus in the past 4 seasons. In baseball, despite our much higher profile, we've been losing to the Louisiana Lafayettes in the postseason (they're good in baseball but don't have our resources, something we can't say about the teams that beat us in football), and basically have regressed from a top 10 program to a top 25 one. In basketball, we were a disaster after Braun's flame out with all the transfers, and Rhodes is going to be an exceptional coach, but have to give him time. Meanwhile, Bailiff has won a lot of games.

As for the thread's question - I wouldn't like to schedule games against top 10 teams anytime soon. We don't gain a lot in blowouts. I think JK is trying to schedule more middle of the pac P5 teams instead. I'd like to play SMU, UH, instead of A&M and Baylor. But I'd still like to play Texas even if they become a powerhoue again.

1. Please stop with "progress" crap. The football program has been on a plateau for 3 years now-- beating up on the bottom quartile of the FBS division...failing to even compete against. let alone beat, anyone ranked even n the Top 75 (save for the one win vs. Marshall). Where exactly is the progress?

2. And how in the world can anyone argue that the football program has outperformed the baseball program over the past 4 seasons? You're joking, right? You do realize the baseball program has won conference championships in each of those 4 seasons, been ranked in the Top 25 nationally in all 4 seasons, and played a much tougher OOC schedule than the football program.

1. I remember sitting as a student and watching us lose to those bottom programs a few years ago.

2. You don't understand that different programs have different standards and it isn't worth trying to explain to you anymore.

We play the P5 teams for several reasons. First, we make money playing them which reduces our AD deficit. Second, it reminds the world at large that we have a football program which is not that noticeable in the lowly CUSA. Finally, it is a litmus test for the football program - are we making any progress toward JK's goal of getting in the Top 25.

I am not a Bailiff defender at all. He is winning at the low levels in which we play and he does present a good image for the University. Hence the contract through 2018. But the main job of a football coach in the FBS is to win games and advance the program. When we step up in the class of our opponents, we get waxed. Period. We are not even competitive. It is even worse when we get waxed by our peers such as La Tech last year.

To the Bailiff defenders, I say this: If he is so good, why have no higher ranked schools tried to hire him? His name is never mentioned as a coach such schools would even consider. The answer is fairly obvious.

So we are stuck with him for the foreseeable future. We won't spend the money to buy out his contract even if we tank in the next four years. Talk of him being fired is futile.

(09-28-2015 07:34 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  1. Please stop with "progress" crap. The football program has been on a plateau for 3 years now-- beating up on the bottom quartile of the FBS division...failing to even compete against. let alone beat, anyone ranked even n the Top 75 (save for the one win vs. Marshall). Where exactly is the progress?

Just like I don't call for Bailiff's head because of 1 bad game, but rather view the game in the context of a season, I don't view "progress" as something that can be viewed as measuring individual seasons. The quality of opponents is just too varied season-to-season. So when I look at "progress," I look at 2-year or 3-year stretches as compared to the previous stretch. In that vein:
2013-2014 > 2012-2013 > 2011-2012 > 2010-2011 > 2009-2010
2012-2014 > 2011-2013 > 2010-2012 > 2009-2011

I'm leaving out 2008 because that was such an earlier outlier built on other coaches' recruits.

Even looking at specific individual seasons, I still think the general trend is upward. Sure, there was a dip from 2013-->2014, but 2014 was better than 2012 so I still think that preserves the general trend upward.

That said, and I think I said this during the off-season, 2015 is really an important year for determining whether Coach Bailiff has plateaued or whether the momentum continues. If 2015 is more like 2012 or 2014, then I would agree that Coach Bailiff seems to have plateaued as a guy who can regularly perform in the upper-half of CUSA and sometimes challenge for CUSA championships. If 2015 is more like 2013, then I don't think we can say he has plateaued.

As for my reasoning ... well I was fully in the "fire Bailiff" camp midway through 2012. I never could have predicted that he would get Rice out of the gutter. Rice isn't great yet, but the team is certainly respectable. Much more so than I thought possible after the 2012 UH and Memphis games. So considering the improvement over the last 3 years from the previous 3 years, I'm willing to at least see how 2015 turns out before proclaiming he has plateaued. I mean, if Rice rattles off 9 straight wins to win the CUSA championship and then beats a middling P5 team in the HOD bowl, I still consider that another step in the right direction and definitely do not consider it a sign of "plateau."

(All that said, I have been frustrated by the pace of progress under Bailiff)

(09-28-2015 05:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, so far JK has picked Bailiff.

I'm not sure that is a fully correct characterization. It might be better to say that so far, JK has not determined the situation under Bailiff has reached the level where despite his performances in big games buying out his contract is the better option. For all we know, JK may wish he'd never extended Bailiff, and feel he got caught in Bailiff's magic timing and his hand was somewhat forced as a new AD.

As we do know, Rice athletics does not consider itself flush with money at the moment, so buying out several years of a coach who one may not necessarily like might just be deemed still too expensive vs regrettably keeping him a while longer. As another year passes, that becomes less of an issue. I think Bailiff is smart enough to know this, which is why he frames his "historic success" the way he does at every opportunity. The question will come once Bailiff is in his final contract season.

Speaking historically, Rice has not been a school that likes to pay big buyouts for coaches it no longer wants. That does not mean the leaders don't wish to do so, they just might feel it's still too expensive and wish they had more money available to eat the bad contract for the coach they may not really want anymore. Perhaps someday, if JK stays around long enough to get the financial athletics house more self-sustaining, we can have the luxury of more quickly jettisoning coaches who don't advance the cause.

One thing that could speed this up, is if the big-money donors who JK is trying to get to help stabilize the athletics funding refuse to donate much unless a change is made in the football coach. I guess that hasn't happened publicly yet, but few really know what is actually going on behind the scenes.

I think back to WTW and the renovation of Autry into Tudor. Wilson was of the mind that if his facilities were better, he'd get over the hump. While we did greatly improve the basketball facilities (which I'm glad we did) we dumped Wilson and hired Braun initially on the cheap since Cal was footing the bill for most or all of his big (for us) contract the first few seasons. And we got caught in another extension fiasco with Braun by extending him too soon and too long. There was a buyout of Braun in the end, but not before the program tanked again.

No doubt, this is a tricky business. You don't always guess right. But like the saying in baseball goes, better to get rid of a player a year to early than several years too late. Bailiff may have a few more plateau seasons left in him. And it is a risk to get someone else in. But what if that someone else was able to take Bailiff's talent and do more with it? Todd Graham took Hat's 1-11 team and turned it into Rice's first bowl since the 60's. If he had spent more time prepping the team and focusing on beating Troy in New Orleans instead of in the stalls negotiating, perhaps we would have won there as well. Yes , a coaching change can go bad, but I'm optimistic that a coaching change can go well too.

I hope when the time comes (I'd hope it comes sooner rather than later, but it will eventually come) Rice doesn't get fooled again by Bailiff.

(09-28-2015 06:54 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  Keep in mind that DB critics who post here know very little about in-game coaching.

Yes, I very much agree...everyone should keep in mind that some of the folks who post here to get rid of Bailiff sooner rather than later are not football experts or former players. What people like me ARE, however are the very kind of alumns and casual football fans who Rice needs a heck of a lot more of to raise the level of financial success of the program.

The die-hard, football expert fans and former players, God bless them all, are already about as plugged in as most of them can get--there's not so much opportunity for growth fishing only in those waters. They are important, no doubt, but a relatively tiny fraction of the greater picture Rice needs to reach out to to become more successful.

So if you are smart (and I believe our AD is) you just might want to pay attention to what the somewhat less in-game knowledgeable fans and alumns you might not be getting a whole lot of interest from might be feeling about how the coach is doing rather than his pied-piper loyal followers.

The elitsim and stuffiness about sports at Rice is worse than Buzz Killington. Get over it. It's sports. It's supposed to be fun and people are supposed to let loose and be passionate about it. Its not a bleedin' board meeting at the country club.





Fans and alumns like me represent the biggest growth upside for revenue and interest for Rice. Rice needs tons more casual fans that don't know all the ins and outs of in game coaching, but just enjoy the heck out of following an entertaining, winning team with an exciting playing style led by a charismatic head coach that can beat some of the elite name teams many of them root against unless they happen to be alumns and agree with the coach's style and play-calling more often than not. In a city as big as Houston, Texas there's tens of thousands of more fans like me that Rice needs to put in the seats than there are of Buzz Killingtons like the Buho00's and others on here.

Watch the seats fill back up in Tudor the next year or two because Rhoades appears to be that kind of coach. he'll play exciting ball, he's a straight shooter in press conferences, he's not afraid to wear his heart on his sleeve as a coach, and he states No excuses as his motto. Fans like that. Even non-alum casual fans. That generates ticket sales, merch sales, gets a buzz going and makes games special. Hope we pay Rhoades well if he does do it, because Wayne's not gonna be around forever, and we need some coach to carry the torch around here.

It strikes me as hugely ironic that if this were a conversation about diversity or politics, the kind of elitism shown by Buho00 and countless others in these type of posts above about Rice sports over the years would be vilified to no end. But it's okay to be a bigot when it's about Rice sports, I guess. That's just Bull. We're a good school, but our stuff stinks just like every other team that plays the game, from Alabama and Texas on down to Charlotte. Get over yourselves. Play the game. Play to win.

There's a reason a coach with Bailiff's 9-year record does not exist at any other Div I school--it's a losing play, plain and simple. Everyone else knows it, and we look stupid for trying to ignore that fact. We look even more stupid for doing it while we crow about being so much smarter than all the other schools. Sure, Briles and others on our schedule praise Bailiff--they want to be sure to keep having a pansy to beat up on, and we're dumb enough to let them keep having it.

So do keep in mind what we think. It's vital to the future of Rice athletics.

The buzz about Rhoades is less about personality and much more about product on the court. I'm not sure how much casual Rice fans even know what Mike Rhoades looks like. No one comes to Rice baseball games because of Wayne's personality, they come because the team wins and goes to the post-season. Albeit attendance is dipping, which does go to show that just like with football, beating no names only gets you so far. To truly catch the attention of the general public, you eventually need to consistently beat the big boys. This is the one knock on Bailiff no one can deny.

(09-29-2015 02:16 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 07:34 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  1. Please stop with "progress" crap. The football program has been on a plateau for 3 years now-- beating up on the bottom quartile of the FBS division...failing to even compete against. let alone beat, anyone ranked even n the Top 75 (save for the one win vs. Marshall). Where exactly is the progress?

Just like I don't call for Bailiff's head because of 1 bad game, but rather view the game in the context of a season, I don't view "progress" as something that can be viewed as measuring individual seasons. The quality of opponents is just too varied season-to-season. So when I look at "progress," I look at 2-year or 3-year stretches as compared to the previous stretch. In that vein:
2013-2014 > 2012-2013 > 2011-2012 > 2010-2011 > 2009-2010
2012-2014 > 2011-2013 > 2010-2012 > 2009-2011

I'm leaving out 2008 because that was such an earlier outlier built on other coaches' recruits.

Even looking at specific individual seasons, I still think the general trend is upward. Sure, there was a dip from 2013-->2014, but 2014 was better than 2012 so I still think that preserves the general trend upward.

That said, and I think I said this during the off-season, 2015 is really an important year for determining whether Coach Bailiff has plateaued or whether the momentum continues. If 2015 is more like 2012 or 2014, then I would agree that Coach Bailiff seems to have plateaued as a guy who can regularly perform in the upper-half of CUSA and sometimes challenge for CUSA championships. If 2015 is more like 2013, then I don't think we can say he has plateaued.

As for my reasoning ... well I was fully in the "fire Bailiff" camp midway through 2012. I never could have predicted that he would get Rice out of the gutter. Rice isn't great yet, but the team is certainly respectable. Much more so than I thought possible after the 2012 UH and Memphis games. So considering the improvement over the last 3 years from the previous 3 years, I'm willing to at least see how 2015 turns out before proclaiming he has plateaued. I mean, if Rice rattles off 9 straight wins to win the CUSA championship and then beats a middling P5 team in the HOD bowl, I still consider that another step in the right direction and definitely do not consider it a sign of "plateau."

(All that said, I have been frustrated by the pace of progress under Bailiff)

Jonathon Sadow's analysis shows the same thing.

(09-29-2015 03:16 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 05:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, so far JK has picked Bailiff.

I'm not sure that is a fully correct characterization. It might be better to say that so far, JK has not determined the situation under Bailiff has reached the level where despite his performances in big games buying out his contract is the better option. For all we know, JK may wish he'd never extended Bailiff, and feel he got caught in Bailiff's magic timing and his hand was somewhat forced as a new AD.

As we do know, Rice athletics does not consider itself flush with money at the moment, so buying out several years of a coach who one may not necessarily like might just be deemed still too expensive vs regrettably keeping him a while longer. As another year passes, that becomes less of an issue. I think Bailiff is smart enough to know this, which is why he frames his "historic success" the way he does at every opportunity. The question will come once Bailiff is in his final contract season.

Speaking historically, Rice has not been a school that likes to pay big buyouts for coaches it no longer wants. That does not mean the leaders don't wish to do so, they just might feel it's still too expensive and wish they had more money available to eat the bad contract for the coach they may not really want anymore. Perhaps someday, if JK stays around long enough to get the financial athletics house more self-sustaining, we can have the luxury of more quickly jettisoning coaches who don't advance the cause.

One thing that could speed this up, is if the big-money donors who JK is trying to get to help stabilize the athletics funding refuse to donate much unless a change is made in the football coach. I guess that hasn't happened publicly yet, but few really know what is actually going on behind the scenes.

I think back to WTW and the renovation of Autry into Tudor. Wilson was of the mind that if his facilities were better, he'd get over the hump. While we did greatly improve the basketball facilities (which I'm glad we did) we dumped Wilson and hired Braun initially on the cheap since Cal was footing the bill for most or all of his big (for us) contract the first few seasons. And we got caught in another extension fiasco with Braun by extending him too soon and too long. There was a buyout of Braun in the end, but not before the program tanked again.

No doubt, this is a tricky business. You don't always guess right. But like the saying in baseball goes, better to get rid of a player a year to early than several years too late. Bailiff may have a few more plateau seasons left in him. And it is a risk to get someone else in. But what if that someone else was able to take Bailiff's talent and do more with it? Todd Graham took Hat's 1-11 team and turned it into Rice's first bowl since the 60's. If he had spent more time prepping the team and focusing on beating Troy in New Orleans instead of in the stalls negotiating, perhaps we would have won there as well. Yes , a coaching change can go bad, but I'm optimistic that a coaching change can go well too.

I hope when the time comes (I'd hope it comes sooner rather than later, but it will eventually come) Rice doesn't get fooled again by Bailiff.

Every day, when JK rolls out of bed, he has an option with regard to our football coach. And so far, every single day, he has opted to keep Bailiff. You and others here express confidence that JK can find the Knute Rockne reincarnation who is going to take us to heights never before attained. Then later on, you say you hope he doesn't get fooled by Bailiff. Again.

There may - or may not - be truth to the idea of the reluctance to eat Bailiff's salary. If so, then it means the Administration does not share the goal of P5 status or national prominence. It would also mean that they would likely let time run off after they decided to change coaches - maybe an extra season or two, to save cash. My opinion is that the money is not really a consideration. If so, if cash is not driving the choice, we are back to JK choosing DB, at least for today.

Yeah if our big money donors were to demand a change, I bet they would get it. Maybe they could all jump into a VW Bug and drive over to give the ultimatum to JK. On one hand, we talk about a cash crunch, then look the big money guys to throw their wallets around. A bit schizoid.

I think all this stuff about money, extensions, and donors is just a way of rationalizing why JK hasn't fired DB yet. I think the best explanation is the simplest: he likes him. He thinks he is doing a good job. At least so far. And maybe he sees rolling the dice on a coach as a gamble too big. Probably there is a reincarnation of Knute Rockne out there. What are our chances of finding him, identifying him, and convincing him to come to Rice, especially if money is guiding our decisions? Why do we expect that we will be the only ones to discern this diamond in the rough that nobody else can see?
It's a crapshoot, and JK knows it, and maybe he is just unwilling to toss the dice on a long shot when he has something comfortable in hand.

That being said, when/if JK decides to pull the trigger, I hope he does find that 99th percentile coach and gets him. For now, though, since I am powerless to do anything more than squawk, I will just trust JK's judgment. As of Monday, he chose DB. Today may be a different story.

(09-29-2015 08:58 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(09-29-2015 03:16 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 05:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, so far JK has picked Bailiff.

I'm not sure that is a fully correct characterization. It might be better to say that so far, JK has not determined the situation under Bailiff has reached the level where despite his performances in big games buying out his contract is the better option. For all we know, JK may wish he'd never extended Bailiff, and feel he got caught in Bailiff's magic timing and his hand was somewhat forced as a new AD.

As we do know, Rice athletics does not consider itself flush with money at the moment, so buying out several years of a coach who one may not necessarily like might just be deemed still too expensive vs regrettably keeping him a while longer. As another year passes, that becomes less of an issue. I think Bailiff is smart enough to know this, which is why he frames his "historic success" the way he does at every opportunity. The question will come once Bailiff is in his final contract season.

Speaking historically, Rice has not been a school that likes to pay big buyouts for coaches it no longer wants. That does not mean the leaders don't wish to do so, they just might feel it's still too expensive and wish they had more money available to eat the bad contract for the coach they may not really want anymore. Perhaps someday, if JK stays around long enough to get the financial athletics house more self-sustaining, we can have the luxury of more quickly jettisoning coaches who don't advance the cause.

One thing that could speed this up, is if the big-money donors who JK is trying to get to help stabilize the athletics funding refuse to donate much unless a change is made in the football coach. I guess that hasn't happened publicly yet, but few really know what is actually going on behind the scenes.

I think back to WTW and the renovation of Autry into Tudor. Wilson was of the mind that if his facilities were better, he'd get over the hump. While we did greatly improve the basketball facilities (which I'm glad we did) we dumped Wilson and hired Braun initially on the cheap since Cal was footing the bill for most or all of his big (for us) contract the first few seasons. And we got caught in another extension fiasco with Braun by extending him too soon and too long. There was a buyout of Braun in the end, but not before the program tanked again.

No doubt, this is a tricky business. You don't always guess right. But like the saying in baseball goes, better to get rid of a player a year to early than several years too late. Bailiff may have a few more plateau seasons left in him. And it is a risk to get someone else in. But what if that someone else was able to take Bailiff's talent and do more with it? Todd Graham took Hat's 1-11 team and turned it into Rice's first bowl since the 60's. If he had spent more time prepping the team and focusing on beating Troy in New Orleans instead of in the stalls negotiating, perhaps we would have won there as well. Yes , a coaching change can go bad, but I'm optimistic that a coaching change can go well too.

I hope when the time comes (I'd hope it comes sooner rather than later, but it will eventually come) Rice doesn't get fooled again by Bailiff.

Every day, when JK rolls out of bed, he has an option with regard to our football coach. And so far, every single day, he has opted to keep Bailiff. You and others here express confidence that JK can find the Knute Rockne reincarnation who is going to take us to heights never before attained. Then later on, you say you hope he doesn't get fooled by Bailiff. Again.

There may - or may not - be truth to the idea of the reluctance to eat Bailiff's salary. If so, then it means the Administration does not share the goal of P5 status or national prominence. It would also mean that they would likely let time run off after they decided to change coaches - maybe an extra season or two, to save cash. My opinion is that the money is not really a consideration. If so, if cash is not driving the choice, we are back to JK choosing DB, at least for today.

Yeah if our big money donors were to demand a change, I bet they would get it. Maybe they could all jump into a VW Bug and drive over to give the ultimatum to JK. On one hand, we talk about a cash crunch, then look the big money guys to throw their wallets around. A bit schizoid.

I think all this stuff about money, extensions, and donors is just a way of rationalizing why JK hasn't fired DB yet. I think the best explanation is the simplest: he likes him. He thinks he is doing a good job. At least so far. And maybe he sees rolling the dice on a coach as a gamble too big. Probably there is a reincarnation of Knute Rockne out there. What are our chances of finding him, identifying him, and convincing him to come to Rice, especially if money is guiding our decisions? Why do we expect that we will be the only ones to discern this diamond in the rough that nobody else can see?
It's a crapshoot, and JK knows it, and maybe he is just unwilling to toss the dice on a long shot when he has something comfortable in hand.

That being said, when/if JK decides to pull the trigger, I hope he does find that 99th percentile coach and gets him. For now, though, since I am powerless to do anything more than squak, I will just trust JK's judgment. As of Monday, he chose DB. Today may be a different story.

Buddy, you are just naïve if you think money isn't a big factor in all this. JK has a budget he has to adhere to...and a buyout would significantly eat into that budget. Second, there is no benefit in firing a college head coach in-season unless you're pretty much given up on that season. Any decision on DB's future will wait until after the 2015 season is over. I said from the outset (during Spring practice) that DB's job would be in at least somewhat jeopardy with anything worse than an 8-4 record this year. Should we go 7-5, with blowout losses to both WKU and LaTech, I do think JK's patience with DB will begin to wear thin.

(09-29-2015 09:09 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Buddy, you are just naïve if you think money isn't a big factor in all this. JK has a budget he has to adhere to...and a buyout would significantly eat into that budget. Second, there is no benefit in firing a college head coach in-season unless you're pretty much given up on that season. Any decision on DB's future will wait until after the 2015 season is over. I said from the outset (during Spring practice) that DB's job would be in at least somewhat jeopardy with anything worse than an 8-4 record this year. Should we go 7-5, with blowout losses to both WKU and LaTech, I do think JK's patience with DB will begin to wear thin.

appreciate the civil response.

From my naïve POV, of course money is always a factor. I don't think it is the controlling factor, just a consideration (pun not intended). But I think if JK felt a change was needed, he would not let money considerations deter him from making that change.

As for the rest I agree. The time to announce a firing would be late in the season. You cannot hire the guy we want earlier, recruiting would go to hell, and who the heck would yall propose as the interim HC?

I completely agree that a 70-17 loss is something the program should never accept. I completely agree that we have struggled to finish in big games. HOWEVER, I do not think we have struggled as mightily in those big name games under Bailiff as many of you want to believe. Where we struggle is with depth and match-ups as many of you have noted. Because of this we cannot play 4 quarters with the big dogs and that is not Bailiff's fault, that is just the reality of the athletes we have and the athletes we are able to recruit. Think about our "big name" games in recent history and where Rice stood in the 2nd half of those games:

2010 #5 Texas (@Reliant): 24-10 w/ 1 minute remaining in the 3Q. Final: 34-17
2010 Baylor (@Rice): 20-6 w/8 min left in the 3Q. Final: 30-13
2010 Northwestern (@Rice): 20-6 w/ 5 min left in the 3Q. Final: 30-13

2011 #7 Texas (@UT): 13-9 w/ 5 min left in the 3Q. Final: 34-9
2011 Purdue (@Rice): Final: 24-22 Rice Wins
2011 #15 Baylor (@Baylor): Was never within reach

2012 UCLA (@Rice): 35-24 to start the 4Q. Final: 49-24
2012 Kansas (@KU): 25-24 Rice Wins

2013 #7 Texas A&M (@A&M): 38-28 w 14 min left in 4Q. Final:52-31
2013 Kansas (@Rice): 23-14 Rice Wins

2014 #17 Notre Dame (@ND): Never in contention.
2014 #6 Texas A&M (@A&M): 21-7 halftime. Final: 38-10

2015 Texas (@UT): 21-14 halftime. Final 42-28.
2015 #5 Baylor (@Baylor): Never in contention.

A few MAJOR factors to consider here.
1. When we get big schools to come to Rice we are much more competitive, naturally.
2. We can play with most anyone for 3 quarters, after that is where depth and raw talent kicks in.

No large underdog ever beats teams on the road by coming back in the 4th quarter. They beat big name schools with big plays on special teams, stubborn defense, and an ability to barely hold on in the 4th quarter.

All of that being said, I think it is important to note that this 2015 Baylor team is hands down the best football team Rice has faced in recent memory (15+ years). Better than the 2010 Texas team coming off a National Championship birth, better than the 2010 and 2011 RG3 led Baylor teams, better than Johnny Football's 2013 Aggies. That might be the best football team in America right now and I think come Christmas time we will all be watching them prepare for a National Championship.

IMHO, Saturday's game is not an indicator of our lack of progress, it is simply an indicator of the incredible leaps Baylor has take to solidify itself as a national powerhouse. The true indicator of our program is the North Texas game. That game was a trap. It was a road conference opponent that has always played us tough, sandwiched between two Big 12 games. That is the type of game that, 5 years ago, Rice loses. A game that can ruin the entire season if the start is 1-3 (0-1). HOWEVER, our coaches had the Owls ready in Denton and they took care of business.

Now lets be honest, if in February someone would have told any of you we would be 2-2 (1-0) coming out of the Baylor game you would have ALL said "that's what I expect". Would we have all liked to be 3-1(1-0) at the point? Absolutely! But if you can take a step back and look at the big picture, we are exactly where we need to be: undefeated in conference play and ready to start the games that matter.

Too much attention is paid to the rivalry games, the big name games, the spotlight games. Not enough attention is paid to the body of work. We lost to Cougar High 3/4 year I played at Rice but you know what we did that trumps all of that? We won a C-USA Conference Championship. The players, the staff, and David Bailiff put that trophy on Rice's campus for the first time in 57 years.

If this team goes on to win the C-USA West, no one will care about the Baylor game.
If this team goes on to win the C-USA Championship, no one will care about the Texas game.
If this team goes on to its 4th CONSECUTIVE bowl game, something never achieved in Rice history, no one should care about either Baylor or Texas because David Bailiff is achieving something no one ever has at Rice. Consistent success.

Bailiff will be at Rice for as long as he wants. He'll continue to be successful. We'll continue to have winning seasons and go to bowl games over and over again. Every few years Rice will win a conference championship, as little as that means to many here, and we'll play a P5 opponent in the postseason. Every once in awhile we'll get a big upset victory that has eluded us so far. It'll happen. Any talk of Bailiff being on the "hot seat" is absolutely ridiculous. Get over it. He's our coach and he will be for a long time. Anyone who has a problem with how Rice prioritizes academics and integrity over athletics success shouldn't have gone to Rice. You should have gone to Baylor, TCU, SMU, or any public university. Live with it because it will never change. Rice will never sell out in order to be recognized nationally in football or to get into a P5 conference. You people went to Rice and you don't even understand this.

(09-29-2015 10:44 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  Bailiff will be at Rice for as long as he wants. He'll continue to be successful. We'll continue to have winning seasons and go to bowl games over and over again. Every few years Rice will win a conference championship, as little as that means to many here, and we'll play a P5 opponent in the postseason. Every once in awhile we'll get a big upset victory that has eluded us so far. It'll happen. Any talk of Bailiff being on the "hot seat" is absolutely ridiculous. Get over it. He's our coach and he will be for a long time. Anyone who has a problem with how Rice prioritizes academics and integrity over athletics success shouldn't have gone to Rice. You should have gone to Baylor, TCU, SMU, or any public university. Live with it because it will never change. Rice will never sell out in order to be recognized nationally in football or to get into a P5 conference. You people went to Rice and you don't even understand this.

Thanks for telling me where I should have gone to school and what I should think and understand. I don't know what I'd do without your wisdom....NOT. Absolutely no one is asking to sell out, or place athletic success over academics or integrity. No one...so stop YOUR ridiculous comments. I'm not going to apologize that some of us here think you can still uphold our academic and integrity standing while striving for more than mediocrity at best on the football field...and, yes, despite the winning seasons and bowl appearances (courtesy of a watered down schedule an 75 bowl participants) Rice football is nothing more than a mediocrity-- even during our three seasons of "historically unprecedented success". Whoopie, we can beat up on the bottom quartile of the FBS division, which represents over two-thirds of our scheduled games. The fact is we fail to be even competitive, let alone occasionally beat, teams even slightly better than us. We're no more than a borderline Top 75 club under Bailiff. Sure, that's much better than we have been for much of the past 35+ years, but it is a far cry from the standard of excellence held for every other program the University offers.

(09-28-2015 11:38 PM)NolaOwl Wrote:  To the Bailiff defenders, I say this: If he is so good, why have no higher ranked schools tried to hire him? His name is never mentioned as a coach such schools would even consider. The answer is fairly obvious.

The obvious answer is that 4 of his first 5 years stunk.

But if we continue to post winning/bowl seasons, then the bad years become increasingly diluted and distant, and they look more and more like his predecessor's fault (which I don't completely accept, but I can see how it looks). I think it's entirely possible that he will get hired away after this year or next, depending on which schools have openings.

I hope Karlgaard has a plan in case that does happen.

(09-29-2015 11:03 AM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 11:38 PM)NolaOwl Wrote:  To the Bailiff defenders, I say this: If he is so good, why have no higher ranked schools tried to hire him? His name is never mentioned as a coach such schools would even consider. The answer is fairly obvious.

The obvious answer is that 4 of his first 5 years stunk.

But if we continue to post winning/bowl seasons, then the bad years become increasingly diluted and distant, and they look more and more like his predecessor's fault (which I don't completely accept, but I can see how it looks). I think it's entirely possible that he will get hired away after this year or next, depending on which schools have openings.

I hope Karlgaard has a plan in case that does happen.

If a Purdue, Wake Forest, Kansas, etc, came calling would he even want to move? He's not going to get a call from an Auburn, Ok State, or Iowa type job. Would the step up to a P5 bottom-feeder even be worth it?

(09-29-2015 11:15 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(09-29-2015 11:03 AM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 11:38 PM)NolaOwl Wrote:  To the Bailiff defenders, I say this: If he is so good, why have no higher ranked schools tried to hire him? His name is never mentioned as a coach such schools would even consider. The answer is fairly obvious.

The obvious answer is that 4 of his first 5 years stunk.

But if we continue to post winning/bowl seasons, then the bad years become increasingly diluted and distant, and they look more and more like his predecessor's fault (which I don't completely accept, but I can see how it looks). I think it's entirely possible that he will get hired away after this year or next, depending on which schools have openings.

I hope Karlgaard has a plan in case that does happen.

If a Purdue, Wake Forest, Kansas, etc, came calling would he even want to move? He's not going to get a call from an Auburn, Ok State, or Iowa type job. Would the step up to a P5 bottom-feeder even be worth it?

Please tell us how and why a current bottom-feeder P5 school, looking to improve their football program, would have any interest in hiring Bailiff (given his record against teams ranked in the Top 75)? The donors at any school that would even consider DB would have a hissy fit, and rightfully so.

(09-29-2015 11:23 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(09-29-2015 11:15 AM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  

(09-29-2015 11:03 AM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(09-28-2015 11:38 PM)NolaOwl Wrote:  To the Bailiff defenders, I say this: If he is so good, why have no higher ranked schools tried to hire him? His name is never mentioned as a coach such schools would even consider. The answer is fairly obvious.

The obvious answer is that 4 of his first 5 years stunk.

But if we continue to post winning/bowl seasons, then the bad years become increasingly diluted and distant, and they look more and more like his predecessor's fault (which I don't completely accept, but I can see how it looks). I think it's entirely possible that he will get hired away after this year or next, depending on which schools have openings.

I hope Karlgaard has a plan in case that does happen.

If a Purdue, Wake Forest, Kansas, etc, came calling would he even want to move? He's not going to get a call from an Auburn, Ok State, or Iowa type job. Would the step up to a P5 bottom-feeder even be worth it?

Please tell us how and why a current bottom-feeder P5 school, looking to improve their football program, would have any interest in hiring Bailiff (given his record against teams ranked in the Top 75)? The donors at any school that would even consider DB would have a hissy fit, and rightfully so.

There have been far worse hires than Bailiff. Heck, Rice hired Greenspan whose track record includes not 1 but two destroyed athletic departments.