Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
New football poster
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #41
RE: New football poster
(07-30-2018 01:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 10:42 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 10:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I point out false starts because that has been a particular topic of conversation the last few years, being used as an indication being unprepared or poorly coached. But it could as easily be dropped passes or missed assignments or time outs or any of the myriad other things that have been discussed here.
Here it is in black and white. If we have zero false starts, zero missed assignments, zero dropped passes, zero penalties, zero all the bad things, and yet still lose, I will not be happy. Some people here might be. Your point about that loss being unlikely (but not impossible) is valid, ut sometimes you play well and still lose, and other times you play badly and still win. If I have to choose one stat to be make me happy, it will be having more points on the scoreboard than the opponent when the clock goes to zero in the fourth quarter. If I get that one, I don't care much about the rest.
I certainly hope nobody on the sideline is saying the important thing is to look good. Those are steps to a goal, but the goal is winning.

If we have zero false starts, zero missed assignments, zero dropped passes, zero penalties, zero turnovers, and still lose, then we just got very badly out-athleted by a helluva football team. If we do those things, we won't lose often. Actually if we did all those things, we could probably beat either of the two teams that played for the national championship, or the one (UCF) that got left out. One thing for sure, we would not lose often, if at all, doing that.
I want to see those things eliminated, not for the sake of looking good, but because eliminating those things is how you win. Particularly at Rice, which is not often going to have the luxury of out-athleting people.

That's where we differ. You seem to think, or at least you postulate, as if it were an either/or proposition--would you rather see us look good or win? My point is that the things you see as looking good are the ways to win. Or in the Bailiff case, repeated failure to do those things caused repeated losing.
I am just saying the cake is more important that the ingredients. You are saying good ingredients usually produce good cakes. I agree, but so what? I am saying if the cake is good (a win), I don't need a report on the ingredients, and if the cake is bad (a loss), I will not be mollified by a report that the eggs were very fresh.

But you seem to act like the two are not connected, as if looking bad and winning, or looking good and losing, are the available options. I'd say it's far more likely that the options are looking good and winning or looking bad and losing. And given Rice's somewhat unique limitations, I think there's no way to win consistently without scheme, discipline, and execution.
07-30-2018 03:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #42
RE: New football poster
(07-30-2018 03:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 01:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 10:42 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 10:16 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I point out false starts because that has been a particular topic of conversation the last few years, being used as an indication being unprepared or poorly coached. But it could as easily be dropped passes or missed assignments or time outs or any of the myriad other things that have been discussed here.
Here it is in black and white. If we have zero false starts, zero missed assignments, zero dropped passes, zero penalties, zero all the bad things, and yet still lose, I will not be happy. Some people here might be. Your point about that loss being unlikely (but not impossible) is valid, ut sometimes you play well and still lose, and other times you play badly and still win. If I have to choose one stat to be make me happy, it will be having more points on the scoreboard than the opponent when the clock goes to zero in the fourth quarter. If I get that one, I don't care much about the rest.
I certainly hope nobody on the sideline is saying the important thing is to look good. Those are steps to a goal, but the goal is winning.

If we have zero false starts, zero missed assignments, zero dropped passes, zero penalties, zero turnovers, and still lose, then we just got very badly out-athleted by a helluva football team. If we do those things, we won't lose often. Actually if we did all those things, we could probably beat either of the two teams that played for the national championship, or the one (UCF) that got left out. One thing for sure, we would not lose often, if at all, doing that.
I want to see those things eliminated, not for the sake of looking good, but because eliminating those things is how you win. Particularly at Rice, which is not often going to have the luxury of out-athleting people.

That's where we differ. You seem to think, or at least you postulate, as if it were an either/or proposition--would you rather see us look good or win? My point is that the things you see as looking good are the ways to win. Or in the Bailiff case, repeated failure to do those things caused repeated losing.
I am just saying the cake is more important that the ingredients. You are saying good ingredients usually produce good cakes. I agree, but so what? I am saying if the cake is good (a win), I don't need a report on the ingredients, and if the cake is bad (a loss), I will not be mollified by a report that the eggs were very fresh.

But you seem to act like the two are not connected, as if looking bad and winning, or looking good and losing, are the available options. I'd say it's far more likely that the options are looking good and winning or looking bad and losing. And given Rice's somewhat unique limitations, I think there's no way to win consistently without scheme, discipline, and execution.

I do not think those are the only available options. That is something you read into my statements, not something I stated. Go back and read again. They are part of the spectrum of possibilities. Those would be tails in the bell curve. I just say the end result means more to me than the method of getting there.

How many times have we heard a fan of a losing team say something like "yet we outgained you by 200 yards, had more first downs, less penalties, etc.". I'm not doing that any more. It's win or lose.

To be clear, that does not mean that i will not note, after a loss, that Player A or Group B did well. If our team fights to the end and never dies, that is praiseworthy, but it is no substitute for winning. W-L is how I will evaluate the season, and the coach, and the staff.
07-30-2018 05:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #43
RE: New football poster
(07-30-2018 05:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I do not think those are the only available options. That is something you read into my statements, not something I stated. Go back and read again. They are part of the spectrum of possibilities. Those would be tails in the bell curve. I just say the end result means more to me than the method of getting there.
How many times have we heard a fan of a losing team say something like "yet we outgained you by 200 yards, had more first downs, less penalties, etc.". I'm not doing that any more. It's win or lose.
To be clear, that does not mean that i will not note, after a loss, that Player A or Group B did well. If our team fights to the end and never dies, that is praiseworthy, but it is no substitute for winning. W-L is how I will evaluate the season, and the coach, and the staff.

I agree that W or L is all that matters in the end. But winning games is a particular skill set. And teams that punch above their weight in the W/L column tend to be those teams that are disciplined, have a good scheme, and execute it well.

I think of someone like Navy. They probably recruit pretty close to the same athletic skill level that we do. Actually we probably get a somewhat higher skill level, but their system lets them get more numbers, so at the end of the day they have a better chance of finding diamonds in the rough. So call it pretty much a push on talent. But they've beaten Notre Dame 4 times in the last 11 years. And they have played the biggest boys in the game a whole lot more respectably than we have for over a decade. And they sure blew us out of the stadium a few years back with a team that probably didn't have anyone that we would have recruited.

My point is that the way for Rice to win is to have a good scheme and execute it well. We're not going to out-athlete many people, so winning consistently requires that. And those are the things that Bailiff's teams didn't do with any consistency. People said that Bailiff "got" Rice. Well he didn't "get" what needs to be done to win football games at Rice.
07-30-2018 06:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #44
RE: New football poster
(07-30-2018 06:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 05:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I do not think those are the only available options. That is something you read into my statements, not something I stated. Go back and read again. They are part of the spectrum of possibilities. Those would be tails in the bell curve. I just say the end result means more to me than the method of getting there.
How many times have we heard a fan of a losing team say something like "yet we outgained you by 200 yards, had more first downs, less penalties, etc.". I'm not doing that any more. It's win or lose.
To be clear, that does not mean that i will not note, after a loss, that Player A or Group B did well. If our team fights to the end and never dies, that is praiseworthy, but it is no substitute for winning. W-L is how I will evaluate the season, and the coach, and the staff.

I agree that W or L is all that matters in the end. But winning games is a particular skill set. And teams that punch above their weight in the W/L column tend to be those teams that are disciplined, have a good scheme, and execute it well.

I think of someone like Navy. They probably recruit pretty close to the same athletic skill level that we do. Actually we probably get a somewhat higher skill level, but their system lets them get more numbers, so at the end of the day they have a better chance of finding diamonds in the rough. So call it pretty much a push on talent. But they've beaten Notre Dame 4 times in the last 11 years. And they have played the biggest boys in the game a whole lot more respectably than we have for over a decade. And they sure blew us out of the stadium a few years back with a team that probably didn't have anyone that we would have recruited.

My point is that the way for Rice to win is to have a good scheme and execute it well. We're not going to out-athlete many people, so winning consistently requires that. And those are the things that Bailiff's teams didn't do with any consistency. People said that Bailiff "got" Rice. Well he didn't "get" what needs to be done to win football games at Rice.

This is not about Bailiff. It is about the 2018 Rice Owls football team. Bailiff is gone, he is history. Might as well explain to me what Heisman did wrong.

Just don't come to me after a loss and tell me we had a good scheme and executed it well, just got unlucky. sometimes you do everything as right as you can and still lose(UH 31, Rice 30; or UT 31, Rice 30)). Once in a while, you screw things up royally and come out smelling like a rose(Rice 18, FAU 14). Sure those are the less likely outcomes, but if we lose, we lose.

I am reminded of the 31-30 loss to Houston to start the Todd Era. We fought well, we executed well, we did everything right, and but for the fluke of a broken thumb, we probably would have won. But we didn't. And the L in that game counted the same as the L in the 17-41 Troy game in the 7-6 final tally. I don't want to see a bunch of games in which we are proud of our losing effort. I don't want to hear somebody say, "we only won three but we were in the game in the fourth quarter four other times". BFD. If we won 3, we lost 10. No excuses.
(This post was last modified: 07-30-2018 11:18 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
07-30-2018 11:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Antarius Offline
Say no to cronyism
*

Posts: 10,532
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 78
I Root For: Rice
Location: KHOU
Post: #45
RE: New football poster
(07-30-2018 11:16 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 06:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 05:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I do not think those are the only available options. That is something you read into my statements, not something I stated. Go back and read again. They are part of the spectrum of possibilities. Those would be tails in the bell curve. I just say the end result means more to me than the method of getting there.
How many times have we heard a fan of a losing team say something like "yet we outgained you by 200 yards, had more first downs, less penalties, etc.". I'm not doing that any more. It's win or lose.
To be clear, that does not mean that i will not note, after a loss, that Player A or Group B did well. If our team fights to the end and never dies, that is praiseworthy, but it is no substitute for winning. W-L is how I will evaluate the season, and the coach, and the staff.

I agree that W or L is all that matters in the end. But winning games is a particular skill set. And teams that punch above their weight in the W/L column tend to be those teams that are disciplined, have a good scheme, and execute it well.

I think of someone like Navy. They probably recruit pretty close to the same athletic skill level that we do. Actually we probably get a somewhat higher skill level, but their system lets them get more numbers, so at the end of the day they have a better chance of finding diamonds in the rough. So call it pretty much a push on talent. But they've beaten Notre Dame 4 times in the last 11 years. And they have played the biggest boys in the game a whole lot more respectably than we have for over a decade. And they sure blew us out of the stadium a few years back with a team that probably didn't have anyone that we would have recruited.

My point is that the way for Rice to win is to have a good scheme and execute it well. We're not going to out-athlete many people, so winning consistently requires that. And those are the things that Bailiff's teams didn't do with any consistency. People said that Bailiff "got" Rice. Well he didn't "get" what needs to be done to win football games at Rice.

This is not about Bailiff. It is about the 2018 Rice Owls football team. Bailiff is gone, he is history. Might as well explain to me what Heisman did wrong.

Just don't come to me after a loss and tell me we had a good scheme and executed it well, just got unlucky. sometimes you do everything as right as you can and still lose(UH 31, Rice 30; or UT 31, Rice 30)). Once in a while, you screw things up royally and come out smelling like a rose(Rice 18, FAU 14). Sure those are the less likely outcomes, but if we lose, we lose.

I am reminded of the 31-30 loss to Houston to start the Todd Era. We fought well, we executed well, we did everything right, and but for the fluke of a broken thumb, we probably would have won. But we didn't. And the L in that game counted the same as the L in the 17-41 Troy game in the 7-6 final tally. I don't want to see a bunch of games in which we are proud of our losing effort. I don't want to hear somebody say, "we only won three but we were in the game in the fourth quarter four other times". BFD. If we won 3, we lost 10. No excuses.

18-14 over 6-6 FAU in CUSA is smelling like Roses? The fact that we barely beat a ****** FAU team is why we were a bottom half team that year (and every year).

This is flat earther level logic bending.

Also we lost to UH on a missed XP. That's also an execution error that cost Rice the game.
07-30-2018 11:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #46
RE: New football poster
(07-30-2018 11:16 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  This is not about Bailiff. It is about the 2018 Rice Owls football team. Bailiff is gone, he is history. Might as well explain to me what Heisman did wrong.
Just don't come to me after a loss and tell me we had a good scheme and executed it well, just got unlucky. sometimes you do everything as right as you can and still lose(UH 31, Rice 30; or UT 31, Rice 30)). Once in a while, you screw things up royally and come out smelling like a rose(Rice 18, FAU 14). Sure those are the less likely outcomes, but if we lose, we lose.
I am reminded of the 31-30 loss to Houston to start the Todd Era. We fought well, we executed well, we did everything right, and but for the fluke of a broken thumb, we probably would have won. But we didn't. And the L in that game counted the same as the L in the 17-41 Troy game in the 7-6 final tally. I don't want to see a bunch of games in which we are proud of our losing effort. I don't want to hear somebody say, "we only won three but we were in the game in the fourth quarter four other times". BFD. If we won 3, we lost 10. No excuses.

I thought this was about Rice winning football games. The point is that having a good scheme and executing it well is how to win football games. The UH game that you mention is a good example. We felt excited after that game because we were coming off a 1-10 season, UH was expected to be very good (and were), and playing them tough was an indicator that the season had the potential to be a good one (it was). We lost that game to UH because we made more mistakes than we had the athletic talent to overcome. You can play sloppy and win if you out-athlete people. That's never going to be a common occurrence for Rice.

You act as if eliminating stupid mistakes is something apart from winning games. You have this repeated mantra about not being happy if we play soundly and lose, and being happy if we play stupidly and lose. Number one, if you lose you didn't play well enough, and if you win you didn't play too badly. I'm with you that winning versus losing is what matters. The worst win is better than the best loss. My only point is that playing sound football is the way to win. Maybe not every time. Sometimes you have a good plan and execute it well, but just get out-athleted. Navy lost 31-27 a few years ago, to an Ohio State team that won the Rose Bowl, at Columbus. A few weeks later, they beat Rice 63-14, and they also beat Notre Dame in South Bend, and finished 10-4 with a bowl win over Mizzou. What is significant is remembering the comments after the game at Rice, where the laments were strong that we played very sloppy football to lose badly to a team the we probably out-athleted. A team the we out-ahleted played Ohio State down to the last whistle, and beat Army, Air Force, Mizzou, and ranked Notre Dame, plus six others. That is the difference that scheme and execution make. Would I have been a happy Navy fan after the Ohio State game? Hell, no, particularly considering that IIRC they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Would I have been pretty happy with the season? Hell, yes. I want to see Rice overachieve like Navy. That means scheme and execution, because we are not going to out-athlete people. I mention Bailiff only as a point of reference. If his teams had plated smart, solid, error-free (or relatively so), and well-executed football, would they have won a lot more games? Absolutely. But they didn't. I hope this guy's teams will. First year, it may be hard to win most games, even if we execute perfectly, because 1-11 says that Bailiff left the cupboard pretty bare.

Paul Bryant's first Alabama team was 5-4-1. Would "Bama fans be happy with that result today? Hell, no. But they were ecstatic then, because that was huge progress considering where they had been. Did that team execute better than its predecessor? Absolutely, and that inspired hope for a better future. Which happened, big-time. I'd be ecstatic with that kind of result for this year's Rice team. With no ties any more and a 12-game schedule, 5-4-1 would translate to something like 7-5 with a loss in a bowl game. Would I like losing a bowl game? No. Would getting to a bowl represent significant progress? You betcha. Just like in 2006.

What I want to see is smart, well-executed football, that gets absolutely the most out of the talent available. I want Rice to stop beating Rice. If we do that, will we win every game? Of course not. Particularly in 2018, there will be times when we are simply out-athleted. But recruit better to narrow the talent gap, and make up the rest with scheme and execution. Do that and better talent will want to come.. Do that long enough, and better conferences will want us to join them.

If I'm interpreting this conversation correctly, I'd say that your position is that winning and losing is more important than style points, and my position is that scheme and execution are what Rice needs to do to win consistently. Yes, we can steal some wins against the run of play without doing that. Bailiff did. But that's not the way to plan to have sustained success. This staff has a concept (intellectual brutality), they have a plan to implement it (run the rock, move the clock, and play great defense), and as nearly as can be told from practicing against yourself, they seem to be doing a good job implementing it. Is that the perfect plan? I don't know, but at least I know what they are trying to do. Can they get that done with this group of talent? Who knows, but 2006 says it's not outside the realm of possibility. Can they get it done over the long haul? I certainly expect so, and I expect to see signs of that this year. Just not the end product. Just like 'Bama in 1958. I saw Bryant's first win at 'Bama, by the way. In a Denny Stadium that seated 28,000 in those days, and was maybe half full. Will we have a 60-year run like 'Bama has had? Probably not. But they didn't start a whole lot further ahead of where we are today.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 12:47 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
07-31-2018 12:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #47
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 12:30 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-30-2018 11:16 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  This is not about Bailiff. It is about the 2018 Rice Owls football team. Bailiff is gone, he is history. Might as well explain to me what Heisman did wrong.
Just don't come to me after a loss and tell me we had a good scheme and executed it well, just got unlucky. sometimes you do everything as right as you can and still lose(UH 31, Rice 30; or UT 31, Rice 30)). Once in a while, you screw things up royally and come out smelling like a rose(Rice 18, FAU 14). Sure those are the less likely outcomes, but if we lose, we lose.
I am reminded of the 31-30 loss to Houston to start the Todd Era. We fought well, we executed well, we did everything right, and but for the fluke of a broken thumb, we probably would have won. But we didn't. And the L in that game counted the same as the L in the 17-41 Troy game in the 7-6 final tally. I don't want to see a bunch of games in which we are proud of our losing effort. I don't want to hear somebody say, "we only won three but we were in the game in the fourth quarter four other times". BFD. If we won 3, we lost 10. No excuses.

I thought this was about Rice winning football games. The point is that having a good scheme and executing it well is how to win football games. The UH game that you mention is a good example. We felt excited after that game because we were coming off a 1-10 season, UH was expected to be very good (and were), and playing them tough was an indicator that the season had the potential to be a good one (it was). We lost that game to UH because we made more mistakes than we had the athletic talent to overcome. You can play sloppy and win if you out-athlete people. That's never going to be a common occurrence for Rice.

You act as if eliminating stupid mistakes is something apart from winning games. You have this repeated mantra about not being happy if we play soundly and lose, and being happy if we play stupidly and lose. Number one, if you lose you didn't play well enough, and if you win you didn't play too badly. I'm with you that winning versus losing is what matters. The worst win is better than the best loss. My only point is that playing sound football is the way to win. Maybe not every time. Sometimes you have a good plan and execute it well, but just get out-athleted. Navy lost 31-27 a few years ago, to an Ohio State team that won the Rose Bowl, at Columbus. A few weeks later, they beat Rice 63-14, and they also beat Notre Dame in South Bend, and finished 10-4 with a bowl win over Mizzou. What is significant is remembering the comments after the game at Rice, where the laments were strong that we played very sloppy football to lose badly to a team the we probably out-athleted. A team the we out-ahleted played Ohio State down to the last whistle, and beat Army, Air Force, Mizzou, and ranked Notre Dame, plus six others. That is the difference that scheme and execution make. Would I have been a happy Navy fan after the Ohio State game? Hell, no, particularly considering that IIRC they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Would I have been pretty happy with the season? Hell, yes. I want to see Rice overachieve like Navy. That means scheme and execution, because we are not going to out-athlete people. I mention Bailiff only as a point of reference. If his teams had plated smart, solid, error-free (or relatively so), and well-executed football, would they have won a lot more games? Absolutely. But they didn't. I hope this guy's teams will. First year, it may be hard to win most games, even if we execute perfectly, because 1-11 says that Bailiff left the cupboard pretty bare.

Paul Bryant's first Alabama team was 5-4-1. Would "Bama fans be happy with that result today? Hell, no. But they were ecstatic then, because that was huge progress considering where they had been. Did that team execute better than its predecessor? Absolutely, and that inspired hope for a better future. Which happened, big-time. I'd be ecstatic with that kind of result for this year's Rice team. With no ties any more and a 12-game schedule, 5-4-1 would translate to something like 7-5 with a loss in a bowl game. Would I like losing a bowl game? No. Would getting to a bowl represent significant progress? You betcha. Just like in 2006.

What I want to see is smart, well-executed football, that gets absolutely the most out of the talent available. I want Rice to stop beating Rice. If we do that, will we win every game? Of course not. Particularly in 2018, there will be times when we are simply out-athleted. But recruit better to narrow the talent gap, and make up the rest with scheme and execution. Do that and better talent will want to come.. Do that long enough, and better conferences will want us to join them.

If I'm interpreting this conversation correctly, I'd say that your position is that winning and losing is more important than style points, and my position is that scheme and execution are what Rice needs to do to win consistently. Yes, we can steal some wins against the run of play without doing that. Bailiff did. But that's not the way to plan to have sustained success. This staff has a concept (intellectual brutality), they have a plan to implement it (run the rock, move the clock, and play great defense), and as nearly as can be told from practicing against yourself, they seem to be doing a good job implementing it. Is that the perfect plan? I don't know, but at least I know what they are trying to do. Can they get that done with this group of talent? Who knows, but 2006 says it's not outside the realm of possibility. Can they get it done over the long haul? I certainly expect so, and I expect to see signs of that this year. Just not the end product. Just like 'Bama in 1958. I saw Bryant's first win at 'Bama, by the way. In a Denny Stadium that seated 28,000 in those days, and was maybe half full. Will we have a 60-year run like 'Bama has had? Probably not. But they didn't start a whole lot further ahead of where we are today.

You're not interpreting this correctly, and I am tired of trying to clarify it for you. Let's just go into the season and see how things work out. We both want to see Rice win. Let's leave it there. I will be happy with all wins, and few, if any losses. JMHO.
07-31-2018 12:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #48
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 12:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  You're not interpreting this correctly, and I am tired of trying to clarify it for you. Let's just go into the season and see how things work out. We both want to see Rice win. Let's leave it there. I will be happy with all wins, and few, if any losses. JMHO.

Well, then, what are you saying?

You're not going to be happy with better scheming and execution if they don't result in wins? Fine, I agree. But better schemes and execution are what will produce wins.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 01:07 AM by Owl 69/70/75.)
07-31-2018 01:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,271
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #49
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 01:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 12:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  You're not interpreting this correctly, and I am tired of trying to clarify it for you. Let's just go into the season and see how things work out. We both want to see Rice win. Let's leave it there. I will be happy with all wins, and few, if any losses. JMHO.

Well, then, what are you saying?

You're not going to be happy with better scheming and execution if they don't result in wins? Fine, I agree. But better schemes and execution are what will produce wins.

Hey, 69 and OO, me think it's time to take your back and forth off-line. Enough of the circular debate. FTR, I agree with 69 on this one. Sure, we all want wins, even ugly ones, BUT if we're going to get the program on the right track and be able to produce winning on a consistent basis, it requires vastly improved discipline, execution, accountability and scheming. It is the ONLY way we will ever be competitive against Top 50 caliber opponents, or be able able to win consistently against teams outside the bottom quartile of the FBS division.
07-31-2018 07:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
loki_the_bubba Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #50
RE: New football poster
Intellectually Brutal Arguments...
07-31-2018 07:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #51
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 01:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 12:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  You're not interpreting this correctly, and I am tired of trying to clarify it for you. Let's just go into the season and see how things work out. We both want to see Rice win. Let's leave it there. I will be happy with all wins, and few, if any losses. JMHO.

Well, then, what are you saying?

You're not going to be happy with better scheming and execution if they don't result in wins? Fine, I agree. But better schemes and execution are what will produce wins.

Exactly what I am saying. I am not going to celebrate better scheming and execution if they do not result in wins. I will not be the one after a 2-11 season saying how much better we are and how satisfied I am with the progress. You and Walt can have that,, if you want it. Now I agree with Walt, time to quit this. I have the bottom line I look at, while you and Walt are looking at the individual lines of the budget. Tweak this, eliminate that, it should give us a better bottom line. Well, it should, but if it doesn't, I will not celebrate the tweaking and ignore the bottom line.

I don't understand why people are more concerned with how we try to get there than with where we get to. Ride the bus, take the train, get on your burro, I don't care, as long as it gets us to Double Digit Win Town. Its the destination, not the journey.

What say we drop this until after the season? I would not at all mind comparing our thoughts on how the season went afterwards. Walt, you are invited.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 09:57 AM by OptimisticOwl.)
07-31-2018 09:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,271
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #52
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 09:57 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 01:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 12:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  You're not interpreting this correctly, and I am tired of trying to clarify it for you. Let's just go into the season and see how things work out. We both want to see Rice win. Let's leave it there. I will be happy with all wins, and few, if any losses. JMHO.

Well, then, what are you saying?

You're not going to be happy with better scheming and execution if they don't result in wins? Fine, I agree. But better schemes and execution are what will produce wins.

Exactly what I am saying. I am not going to celebrate better scheming and execution if they do not result in wins. I will not be the one after a 2-11 season saying how much better we are and how satisfied I am with the progress. You and Walt can have that,, if you want it. Now I agree with Walt, time to quit this. I have the bottom line I look at, while you and Walt are looking at the individual lines of the budget. Tweak this, eliminate that, it should give us a better bottom line. Well, it should, but if it doesn't, I will not celebrate the tweaking and ignore the bottom line.

I don't understand why people are more concerned with how we try to get there than with where we get to. Ride the bus, take the train, get on your burro, I don't care, as long as it gets us to Double Digit Win Town. Its the destination, not the journey.

What say we drop this until after the season? I would not at all mind comparing our thoughts on how the season went afterwards. Walt, you are invited.

Geez, OO, will you give it a rest already. 03-banghead Better scheming, discipline, accountability and execution will almost inevitably result in more wins. To rebuild a program, you've got to first change the culture and build the foundation. Obviously, getting better athletes will help, but it's going to take another two or three years before we see the fruits of Bloomgren's first couple full recruiting classes. In the interim, the only way we're going to see more wins is through improved discipline, execution, scheming and accountability. Why do you not get that? Even against CUSA's weak SoS, you're not going to win ugly more than once or twice a season.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 10:54 AM by waltgreenberg.)
07-31-2018 10:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tiki Owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,562
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 100
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Tiki Island

The Parliament AwardsCrappiesNew Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #53
RE: New football poster
For all the flak the poster is getting you would think Bloomgren was using “Unconventional Wisdom” as the tag line.
07-31-2018 10:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #54
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 10:36 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 09:57 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 01:04 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 12:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  You're not interpreting this correctly, and I am tired of trying to clarify it for you. Let's just go into the season and see how things work out. We both want to see Rice win. Let's leave it there. I will be happy with all wins, and few, if any losses. JMHO.

Well, then, what are you saying?

You're not going to be happy with better scheming and execution if they don't result in wins? Fine, I agree. But better schemes and execution are what will produce wins.

Exactly what I am saying. I am not going to celebrate better scheming and execution if they do not result in wins. I will not be the one after a 2-11 season saying how much better we are and how satisfied I am with the progress. You and Walt can have that,, if you want it. Now I agree with Walt, time to quit this. I have the bottom line I look at, while you and Walt are looking at the individual lines of the budget. Tweak this, eliminate that, it should give us a better bottom line. Well, it should, but if it doesn't, I will not celebrate the tweaking and ignore the bottom line.

I don't understand why people are more concerned with how we try to get there than with where we get to. Ride the bus, take the train, get on your burro, I don't care, as long as it gets us to Double Digit Win Town. Its the destination, not the journey.

What say we drop this until after the season? I would not at all mind comparing our thoughts on how the season went afterwards. Walt, you are invited.



Geez, OO, will you give it a rest already. 03-banghead Better scheming, discipline, accountability and execution will almost inevitably result in more wins. To rebuild a program, you've got to first change the culture and build the foundation. Obviously, getting better athletes will help, but it's going to take another two or three years before we see the fruits of Bloomgren's first couple full recruiting classes. In the interim, the only way we're going to see more wins is through improved discipline, execution, scheming and accountability. Why do you not get that? Even against CUSA's weak SoS, you're not going to win ugly more than once or twice a season.

What part of "What say we drop this until after the season?" did you miss? 03-banghead

Why do you not get what I am saying? I don't care if we use better bricks and better lumber, and improve the way the construction crew works together, I care about how the house looks. I care about the structure, not the materials.

Y'all keep harping on how better ingredients will lead almost inevitably to better pizza. No argument here, although I might quibble over the definition of "almost inevitably", but when I say I want to see how the pizza turns out, you have an issue.

"STFU, OO, better ingredients mean better pizza. End of discussion!!!!

For some obscure reason, y'all have decided that I am saying that better execution and better schemes have no effect. Usually, they do. But if we get better everything but record, is that what we want? It is possible. I have said it is not likely, but it is possible.

so how will you judge this season? I will judge primarily on record. I guess you will judge on approach. maybe we will both be satisfied.

Now drop it.
07-31-2018 11:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,868
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 58
I Root For:
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #55
RE: New football poster
"Tastes great!"

"Less filling!"
07-31-2018 01:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #56
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 11:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  For some obscure reason, y'all have decided that I am saying that better execution and better schemes have no effect.

No, that's not what I'm saying, and I don't think Walter is either.

Quote:Usually, they do. But if we get better everything but record, is that what we want? It is possible. I have said it is not likely, but it is possible.
so how will you judge this season? I will judge primarily on record. I guess you will judge on approach. maybe we will both be satisfied.
Now drop it.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see the distinction you are making between judging on record and judging on approach, because I think the likelihood of improving either without the other is so slight as to be ignored.

What do I expect? I expect to beat PVAM, and will be sorely disappointed if we don't. I expect to lose to LSU. I don't expect to see any debacles like Stanford or Army. Beyond that, I think virtually every game will be winnable or losable. CUSA simply isn't good enough for things to be otherwise. If we truly scheme and execute well, I expect to be in a bowl. If we merely improve somewhat, I would expect 4 wins. I'm looking for improved schemes and execution, but I think how much we improve is tied pretty directly to the W/L record that we will achieve.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 02:09 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
07-31-2018 01:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #57
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 01:51 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 11:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  For some obscure reason, y'all have decided that I am saying that better execution and better schemes have no effect.

No, that's not what I'm saying, and I don't think Walter is either.

Quote:Usually, they do. But if we get better everything but record, is that what we want? It is possible. I have said it is not likely, but it is possible.
so how will you judge this season? I will judge primarily on record. I guess you will judge on approach. maybe we will both be satisfied.
Now drop it.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see the distinction you are making between judging on record and judging on approach, because I think the likelihood of improving either without the other is so slight as to be ignored.

What do I expect? I expect to beat PVAM, and will be sorely disappointed if we don't. I expect to lose to LSU. I don't expect to see any debacles like Stanford or Army. Beyond that, I think virtually every game will be winnable or losable. CUSA simply isn't good enough for things to be otherwise. If we truly scheme and execute well, I expect to be in a bowl. If we merely improve somewhat, I would expect 4 wins. I'm looking for improved schemes and execution, but I think how much we improve is tied pretty directly to the W/L record that we will achieve.

So if we win four, our schemes and execution were better than if we had won three, but not as good as if we had won five? Sounds a lot like my system.

Four wins is my expectation for this year. PVAM, UTEP, and two random games. If it was just an everyday coach, I would say three, but I think Bloom can keep us close enough in enough games to steal a fourth one. So my over/under for 2018.is four. Does four satisfy me. Hell, no. Four should not satisfy anybody. But it would a reasonable first year. Next year, 7. The year after, ten. And so forth.

I guess I am insatiable. We could win 10 games this year and I would be thinking about the 3 that got away. Kind of like 2008 or 2010.

But you won't find me saying at the end of the year is that 2 or 1 is OK because the kids showed more discipline than previously. Translate that discipline into wins, please.

Time to go now. Walt might see that we are still talking way past our bedtimes.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 04:15 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
07-31-2018 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #58
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 04:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But you won't find me saying at the end of the year is that 2 or 1 is OK because the kids showed more discipline than previously. Translate that discipline into wins, please.

I just don't see any way that better schemes and execution and discipline can fail to translate into a significant improvement in wins and losses. We have been so deficient in those areas for so long that any significant improvement should have a big effect.

I've posted before that the book on Bailiff at Texas State was that his teams played hard but were sloppy and undisciplined. That's pretty much what I saw from his Rice teams, although I'm not sure how hard they played the last couple of years. Play hard, play disciplined, and I think you could very well see a massive uptick. I'm going to pick somewhere in the range 4-7 wins. Will nail it down a bit tighter after I see more,
07-31-2018 06:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,903
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 470
I Root For: Rice
Location: Paradise

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #59
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 06:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I just don't see any way that better schemes and execution and discipline can fail to Play hard, play disciplined, and I think you could very well see a massive uptick. I'm going to pick somewhere in the range 4-7 wins. Will nail it down a bit tighter after I see more,

Until I see more, I will stick at 4, which I suspect may be generous. If we beat UH, or lose to PVAM, I will reconsider. But I guess it is time for the annual prediction thread. Twenty five days until conjecture starts to become reality.
(This post was last modified: 07-31-2018 08:00 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
07-31-2018 07:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 55,812
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #60
RE: New football poster
(07-31-2018 07:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(07-31-2018 06:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I just don't see any way that better schemes and execution and discipline can fail to Play hard, play disciplined, and I think you could very well see a massive uptick. I'm going to pick somewhere in the range 4-7 wins. Will nail it down a bit tighter after I see more,
Until I see more, I will stick at 4, which I suspect may be generous. If we beat UH, or lose to PVAM, I will reconsider. But I guess it is time for the annual prediction thread. Twenty five days until conjecture starts to become reality.

Upon further review, it strikes me that one reason for our difference of opinion may be that I take a much dimmer view of the coaching philosophy (to the extent I can identify one) that was previously in effect. It really did look to me like the plan was always that we were going to keep forcing square pegs into round holes until we could recruit enough round pegs to make it work. It appeared to be based solely on out-athleting people, and I don't think that can work at Rice.

As Bum Phillips said, there are only two ways to improve--get better players or get the players you have to play better. There's only so far that the first one can take you by itself, and with Rice's restrictions and limitations, that's not far enough to support sustained winning. You can catch lightning in a bottle--and Bailiff did, twice--but that's not sustainable. You need to to do more of the second.

I think Bloomgren has a much better approach to doing the second--intellectual brutality--pound the rock, run the clock, and play great defense. I don't know how far the defense can come in a year. But at least I think we are now doing something that can work, and I expect that to make a difference.
07-31-2018 10:35 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.