(09-17-2017 06:35 PM)BufflOwl Wrote: Who said anything about easier and why'd you'd nix the entire rest of my post to address one sentence?
Umm, you stated that as if it were somehow invalidating McKinsey. That would imply that you see an easier path than the options that McKinsey presented. What is the other option that you see? What would you do?
Quote:But since you asked, since then, we've won a national championship in baseball and went to 3 straight college World Series after it. We won a conference championship in football and have been to several bowl games. We built a new basketball gym, soccer facility and football end zone facility. What that means. We've won! Against better competition, in recent memory we have been very good, drew good crowds and had our games broadcasted on actual TV stations. All of which did not exist before it. If it did we wouldn't of even had that study.
We actually won the baseball national championship before McKinsey. In fact, it appeared to a lot of people that the McKinsey mission was to find a satisfactory way to drop football but keep baseball at the level it was, since nobody really seemed willing to spend the political capital to dump a national championship program. And they pretty much concluded that there was not one. If some way has opened since then, what is it? If not, then why is McKinsey irrelevant?
The one example that i can think of is Wichita State. Can you think of another?
Quote:Oh and the dynamic you asked about there are more teams that make the playoffs in every sport, there is a playoff in football, we have IMG to sell Corporate sponsorships as a form of revenue, there are 4 layers of media rights oh and there is social media! That means a well managed department can actually control some of their own fate. The entire dynamic had changed since 2002 and will change even more in 5 years and that's why more and more schools are adding D1 football...not dropping it!! Hell nearly half the teams in our conference this year didn't exist during the McKinsey years.. Now they're beating us and you're saying no one can build athletic programs anymore? What the ****?!
And exactly how do those things create different options? And by the way, where am I saying that no one can build athletic programs? It can be done, but it has to be done within certain constraints. I agree that more schools are adding D1 football than dropping out. That should send a pretty strong message.
Quote:We do not need to cite 15 entire year old studies that most agreed at the time we're a complete crock. We don't need to change college athletics or cheat or anything that's not Rice. We need inspired leaders who want to take Rice Athletics back to where we were 10 freaking years ago and then beyond it. And they need to do that only rather than padding resumes with nonesense logo changes, made up stats about nominally better revenue numbers and making sure everyone says nice things about them on a fan message board!
I doubt that "most" agreed that it was a crock at the time. Most informed people with whom I talked thought McKinsey did a pretty good job. They told us that it was pretty much time to poop or get off the pot. That needed to be said. Unfortunately, we haven't done much to implement their recommendations.
We don't need to go back to were we were 10 years ago. We need to go somewhere that we have never been. I don't see the point to the logo changes. But overall, the athletic program is being run more like a business than it was 10 years ago. And that is a step in the right direction. Getting basketball to where it makes money would be a big step in the right direction. Getting a football coach with an approach that has a chance to work in our unique set of circumstances would be another.
