https://southcarolina.forums.rivals.com/...ch.253751/

I agree with this post from gamecock stock:

"I really believe Roper would be a good choice for Rice. Perry Orth said that Muschamp told Roper to open up the offense in the 3rd quarter in last year's bowl game when we fell behind by 17. At that point, we came back to tie the game in regulation. Also, I'm told, that Orth says that Muschamp does the game planning for both the offense and defense before each game. I believe that Roper has been hamstrung by a defense-oriented coach here. When he worked for an offense-oriented coach in David Cutcliffe, Roper produced.. Time will tell. But, I believe Roper would do a fantastic job for Rice."

(12-04-2017 02:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I agree with this post from gamecock stock:

"I really believe Roper would be a good choice for Rice. Perry Orth said that Muschamp told Roper to open up the offense in the 3rd quarter in last year's bowl game when we fell behind by 17. At that point, we came back to tie the game in regulation. Also, I'm told, that Orth says that Muschamp does the game planning for both the offense and defense before each game. I believe that Roper has been hamstrung by a defense-oriented coach here. When he worked for an offense-oriented coach in David Cutcliffe, Roper produced.. Time will tell. But, I believe Roper would do a fantastic job for Rice."

I read a similar thing in another article that basically said that Muschamp makes sure that the offense stays balanced (i.e. hamstrings Roper a bit).

This sounds about right to me...

Quote:If Rice hires Kurt Roper. they are not hiring Will Muschamp's Offensive Coordintor. Would you, based on our offense this past two years? No. They will be hiring David Cutcliffe's Offensive Coordinator, after talking with Cutcliffe.

As I said elsewhere, I think it would be fair to categorize Muschamp as Bailiff, except his defense plays sound defense.

(12-04-2017 02:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I agree with this post from gamecock stock:

"I really believe Roper would be a good choice for Rice. Perry Orth said that Muschamp told Roper to open up the offense in the 3rd quarter in last year's bowl game when we fell behind by 17. At that point, we came back to tie the game in regulation. Also, I'm told, that Orth says that Muschamp does the game planning for both the offense and defense before each game. I believe that Roper has been hamstrung by a defense-oriented coach here. When he worked for an offense-oriented coach in David Cutcliffe, Roper produced.. Time will tell. But, I believe Roper would do a fantastic job for Rice."

Sounds like a Bailiff-Herman argument.

South Carolina fan here. A lot of our fans are ready to be done with Roper but I do think he would make a good head man. In many ways he is similar to Shawn Elliott (our former OL coach) who is now at Georgia St and has them a much improved 6-5 in year 1.

Roper is a great football mind, an excellent evaluator, and a good teacher of the QB position - all qualities you want in a head coach. His struggle was always how to call plays at game time and he often clammed up and went too conservative. How much of that was him and how much of that was Muschamp we'll never know. I think with the right OC who has a good feel for calling plays he would do very well. Obviously he is also familiar with the school, he would want to be there, and is familiar with the challenges in coaching at a small private school with certain academic hurdles in recruiting.

(12-04-2017 02:51 PM)Buho00 Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 02:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I agree with this post from gamecock stock:
"I really believe Roper would be a good choice for Rice. Perry Orth said that Muschamp told Roper to open up the offense in the 3rd quarter in last year's bowl game when we fell behind by 17. At that point, we came back to tie the game in regulation. Also, I'm told, that Orth says that Muschamp does the game planning for both the offense and defense before each game. I believe that Roper has been hamstrung by a defense-oriented coach here. When he worked for an offense-oriented coach in David Cutcliffe, Roper produced.. Time will tell. But, I believe Roper would do a fantastic job for Rice."

Sounds like a Bailiff-Herman argument.

Yep.

Muschamp is pretty much another Bailiff, except his defenses play good defense.

(12-04-2017 03:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Muschamp is pretty much another Bailiff, except his defenses play good defense.

This is a great quote. THAT would really go down well at the Gamecock booster club. But it is empirically true.

(12-04-2017 06:59 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 03:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Muschamp is pretty much another Bailiff, except his defenses play good defense.

This is a great quote. THAT would really go down well at the Gamecock booster club. But it is empirically true.

With the caveat that Muschamp has beaten a top 25 team.

(12-04-2017 07:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 06:59 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 03:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Muschamp is pretty much another Bailiff, except his defenses play good defense.

This is a great quote. THAT would really go down well at the Gamecock booster club. But it is empirically true.

With the caveat that Muschamp has beaten a top 25 team.

If Rice had good defenses under Bailiff, Rice probably would have under Bailiff at some point, too.

One particularly good thing going for Roper is that he has plenty of experience with relatively successful SEC/ACC teams. The fact that he has worked with several competent D1 programs gives him an advantage over the two Stanford coordinators, both of whom have Stanford as their only significant D1 coaching gig. Lance Anderson came up with Jim Harbaugh at the University of San Diego, and he would have likely been the Owls' linebackers coach had Harbaugh received his wish of being hired by Rice in 2006.

Roper knows what it takes to compete in D1; something Bailiff never got. With his lack of preparation and execution, Bailiff was adrift, in over his head most of the time, running the program like a DIII outfit. Bailiff didn't have the "right stuff" to be a D1 head coach. Bailiff put the program into a deep sleep, and it's long past due to wake the program up!

(12-04-2017 08:09 PM)baker-13 Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 07:48 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 06:59 PM)MemOwl Wrote:  

(12-04-2017 03:05 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Muschamp is pretty much another Bailiff, except his defenses play good defense.

This is a great quote. THAT would really go down well at the Gamecock booster club. But it is empirically true.

With the caveat that Muschamp has beaten a top 25 team.

If Rice had good defenses under Bailiff, Rice probably would have under Bailiff at some point, too.

Probably more than once.

(12-04-2017 02:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I agree with this post from gamecock stock:

"I really believe Roper would be a good choice for Rice. Perry Orth said that Muschamp told Roper to open up the offense in the 3rd quarter in last year's bowl game when we fell behind by 17. At that point, we came back to tie the game in regulation. Also, I'm told, that Orth says that Muschamp does the game planning for both the offense and defense before each game. I believe that Roper has been hamstrung by a defense-oriented coach here. When he worked for an offense-oriented coach in David Cutcliffe, Roper produced.. Time will tell. But, I believe Roper would do a fantastic job for Rice."

Very encouraging to hear this.

I have decided to wait at least until the new coach is announced before I start to dislike him! Call me crazy! Go Owls.

Having compared videos of both Kurt Roper and Mike Bloomgren talking coachspeak, Bloomgren does seem to have more fire and charisma in him, which is extremely important in a head coach. Roper certainly seems competent with a solid record of performance, but his manner of speaking doesn't exude enthusiasm. The concern with Bloomgren is that he's relatively new to the coordinator level, but over his last four years as an OC, he's thrived.

I am glad we're getting an offensive guy, because we need to get the offense going to make an immediate impact. Good defenses take more time to build, and Rice just has a harder time recruiting freakishly athletic defenders.

Bloomgren's offensive style should suit Rice well. We need a teacher who can mold talented-but-underdeveloped recruits into disciplined high-performers. Rice can attract promising OLs much more easily than promising DLs, and power-running football relies more on discipline and coordination than natural athletic talent.

With all the talented RBs and TEs Bailiff had at his disposal over the years, I never understood why he relied on a one-RB, 4-receiver spread so often. Well, actually, I think I do know, but it never helped Bailiff's image as a thinker.

(12-05-2017 03:58 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  With all the talented RBs and TEs Bailiff had at his disposal over the years, I never understood why he relied on a one-RB, 4-receiver spread so often. Well, actually, I think I do know, but it never helped Bailiff's image as a thinker.

Ain't that the truth. I can't remember what year it was, maybe 2015, but it was clear that our 4 most talented offensive players were RB's and just kept on rotating them through, while the same WR's stayed on the field. Seems like we couldn't analyze what we had and find ways to make the best out of them.

Seen the same in my professional life and it is a complete waste of talent and as stupid as it can be. Manager's (and coach's) job is to utilize the assets in the maximum way until improvements can be made......