I can't help but believe that we'll always be in a conference full of "leftovers." My hope is that it's at least regional and has private school members other than Rice. Far from ideal, but much, much better than our current situation in CUSA.

(12-04-2018 02:31 PM)At Ease Wrote:  Our season ticket sale numbers were ~4K a few years ago. Is it your belief that they are near 19K now?

My thoughts exactly. And we have the Owl club financisl breakdown available so we can chart the change over the last few years.

My guess is it's not a 375% change.

FTR, I think the Athletic Department is doing a pretty good job with the task on hand. Any form of growth in a period of barely any wins and some ugly losses is commendable. There is only so much one can sell though - the product has to come through.

(12-04-2018 03:02 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:31 PM)At Ease Wrote:  Our season ticket sale numbers were ~4K a few years ago. Is it your belief that they are near 19K now?

My thoughts exactly. And we have the Owl club financisl breakdown available so we can chart the change over the last few years.

My guess is it's not a 375% change.

FTR, I think the Athletic Department is doing a pretty good job with the task on hand. Any form of growth in a period of barely any wins and some ugly losses is commendable. There is only so much one can sell though - the product has to come through.

again agree they are doing a great job of reaching and getting blood out of turnip.

(12-04-2018 02:45 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:37 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:30 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:23 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Agree with Antarius on this. Whatever is left of the B12 would grab the best of the AAC and MWC, and then move on without us. That's why I see us taking in Tulane, Tulsa, and SMU at that point. TCU, Baylor, and UH want no association with Rice. Never will. When we joined CUSA, TCU was gone to the MWC in a matter of weeks. We're small and weak. No fans and no real institutional support for athletics.

To clarify, this is one scenario, but another scenario is that OU and UT bolt, leaving the Big XII remnants with no clout or purchasing power. That means the BigXII could easily become non aspirational. And putting all our eggs in that basket is dangerous if the bottom of the basket falls out.

If the latter happens, the AAC could be a better fit for us. Other than the Big XII money, what separates Iowa State from Western Kentucky? Not much. Take away the payday and the Big XII is culturally just like CUSA.

Nightowl is right that we need to be planning ahead and ne ready for whatever comes. That could be the Big XII, the AAC, MWC, CUSA or some amalgamation of them.

Your New England/East Coast provincialism is showing. Iowa State is in the AAU (as is Kansas for that matter). Try not to lump every public school in flyover country together, please.

Do you think there is a sizable difference between applicant overlap for ISU and Rice vs WKU and Rice? And more importantly, a sizable number to form any sort of rivalry?

Simply put, there are two groups - one with overlap that Rice can build a rivalry with, and the rest. I dont think that has anything to do with "East Coast provincialism", nor do I think characterizing my opinions as somehow east coast biased is fair.

I think there is a significant difference between WKU and Iowa State (or KU)... Say you're a student at Rice from Iowa. When you were in high school, you were a really good student and applied to top private schools like Rice, Vandy, Northwestern, etc.. But if you didn't get in or didn't get the financial aid you wanted, you applied to a couple in-state public schools. So you applied to ISU and Iowa. Hey, if you end up there, it wouldn't be the worst thing. They have great campus life, you'll have friends from high school there, and though they aren't USNWR top 25, nobody is going to call you a loser for going there.

The equivalent school to ISU in Kentucky would be UK or Louisville... Not WKU. WKU is more like UNI (which would also likely beat us in basketball every year, and football in way too years (lately at least)).

Just the thought of WKU makes me cringe.

(12-04-2018 03:42 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Just the thought of WKU makes me cringe.

Well you’ve got bigger problems than your team’s conference affiliation then.

(12-04-2018 03:43 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 03:42 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Just the thought of WKU makes me cringe.

Well you’ve got bigger problems than your team’s conference affiliation then.

I can't argue with that.

The AAU membership is a large deal to college presidents, who are the ones that are playing a large part in signing off on a move to a new conference, etc. - hence one angle of the massive gap between joining the Big 12 leftovers / AAC privates versus C-USA. Because of our administration's royal f*** up with the defection of CUSA schools to the AAC, we are probably one of the few universities in the entire U.S. (at any level of intercollegiate competition) that belongs to an athletic conference without at least one/multiple "relative" academic peers.

Re: the delta between season tickets sold (whatever the actual amount is) and butts in the seat, that's a testament to our ticket staff being able to go above and beyond to sell tickets. The reality is that the product on the field has been such garbage for four years that even people who live in Houston and have season tickets will find anything else to do on a Saturday besides go to a Rice football game that they have already paid for. Or, in my case, I prefer to continue tailgating outside the stadium throughout the entirety of the game rather than go inside to watch another blowout against a school that either didn't have a program a decade ago or was in FCS a decade ago.

Hey, I've certainly indulged in some elitism here before and probably will again before this post is done, I'm just saying I wouldn't go so far as to call a hypothetical Big XII sans UT & OU something that would be beneath us. Any conference that has AAU members and/or state flagships/co-flagships would be a quantum leap up from this one and probably about the best we could ever hope to get back to.

Curious: which group would be more palatable/beneficial to Rice -- Rice University, not just Rice Athletics -- over the long term:

A) the MWC, which has an academic peer (Air Force) and multiple flagship schools but no one within 1000 miles of Houston; or

B) CUSA West, which has better geographic proximity but not even a semblance of any other "overlap" with us to put it euphemistically?

But anyway, for those who think building a consistently winning football program is going to be our ticket to getting out of CUSA: What if I told you that simply being in CUSA itself effectively makes that impossible for us? That the disconnect between us and every other school ensures that we will never come up with the support and commitment (dollars, attendance, etc.) needed to go on a dominating run against those very same schools? What then?

(12-04-2018 04:32 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  The AAU membership is a large deal to college presidents, who are the ones that are playing a large part in signing off on a move to a new conference, etc. - hence one angle of the massive gap between joining the Big 12 leftovers / AAC privates versus C-USA. Because of our administration's royal f*** up with the defection of CUSA schools to the AAC, we are probably one of the few universities in the entire U.S. (at any level of intercollegiate competition) that belongs to an athletic conference without at least one/multiple "relative" academic peers.

Further to your point -- because you are absolutely correct that this stuff largely happens at the president level -- it's *Leebron*, not Karlgaard or his deputies, who needs to be working this issue and making athletic conference improvement a priority for us. He could start by giving two s***s about the matter, as far as I can tell. It also follows that Leebron is the one who needs to be hearing it from concerned alumni.

Ironically, I think Tanner is probably too good at the alumni-relations aspect of his job. He absorbs the concerns, mollifies them with "we hear you" and "we're looking into it" and "call me any time," and the alumni go away placated . . . and here we still are.

(12-04-2018 06:25 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  Hey, I've certainly indulged in some elitism here before and probably will again before this post is done, I'm just saying I wouldn't go so far as to call a hypothetical Big XII sans UT & OU something that would be beneath us. Any conference that has AAU members and/or state flagships/co-flagships would be a quantum leap up from this one and probably about the best we could ever hope to get back to.

Curious: which group would be more palatable/beneficial to Rice -- Rice University, not just Rice Athletics -- over the long term:

A) the MWC, which has an academic peer (Air Force) and multiple flagship schools but no one within 1000 miles of Houston; or

B) CUSA West, which has better geographic proximity but not even a semblance of any other "overlap" with us to put it euphemistically?

But anyway, for those who think building a consistently winning football program is going to be our ticket to getting out of CUSA: What if I told you that simply being in CUSA itself effectively makes that impossible for us? That the disconnect between us and every other school ensures that we will never come up with the support and commitment (dollars, attendance, etc.) needed to go on a dominating run against those very same schools? What then?

I'm not saying it would be beneath us. To be honest, we are the bottom of CUSA; we are the worst of the worst. So while I rail on CUSA - I rail on Rice more because we arent better than anyone.

My points were
1. Without OU and UT, the Big XII isnt a P5 conference. So putting all ours eggs into a basket that may break is a bad idea.
2. We share little overlap with a lot of the Big XII. The same is true for CUSA. So even if we did get into the Big XII 2.0, building interest will be just as challenging as now.

Which brings me back to the ISU vs WKU statement- I simply do not believe Iowa State vs Rice would attract much more interest than Rice vs WKU.

(12-04-2018 12:37 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  Honestly I think aligning with schools that "think like us" is pointless. Cause if they are thinking like "us" they aren't too good cause they are constantly riding the whole "we are an academic institution" thing. Honestly to make the moves we want we have to incorporate "their" thinking. It almost like our administration wants us to lose to prove we are more committed to academics. Last time I checked stanford is still a highly regarded undergrad degree AND their athletics are formidable year in and year out across the board. We finally got one of their coaches, after trying for many years. I just feel that the school presidents need to sit down and talk so that our president can get some first hand words of advise on this issue. This is a very interesting topic with many solutions.

(12-04-2018 07:09 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 04:32 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  The AAU membership is a large deal to college presidents, who are the ones that are playing a large part in signing off on a move to a new conference, etc. - hence one angle of the massive gap between joining the Big 12 leftovers / AAC privates versus C-USA. Because of our administration's royal f*** up with the defection of CUSA schools to the AAC, we are probably one of the few universities in the entire U.S. (at any level of intercollegiate competition) that belongs to an athletic conference without at least one/multiple "relative" academic peers.

Further to your point -- because you are absolutely correct that this stuff largely happens at the president level -- it's *Leebron*, not Karlgaard or his deputies, who needs to be working this issue and making athletic conference improvement a priority for us. He could start by giving two s***s about the matter, as far as I can tell. It also follows that Leebron is the one who needs to be hearing it from concerned alumni.

Well, not many years ago Leebron served a 2-year term on the NCAA's D1 Board of Directors ... and he didn't do squat because (based on my interpretation of his answers to my questions about it) there was no hope of the non-P5 schools making any headway.

The board has 25 members, including one from each of the 12 FBS conferences. So that's 5 from P5 and 7 from non-P5 FBS and 12 more from FCS and other conferences. And even the small college/conference presidents voted with the P5 folks ... afraid, I'd suspect, that the P5 would leave the NCAA and take their TV money with them if they didn't (always!) get their way.

Sad. Very sad. And discouraging.

(12-04-2018 03:17 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:45 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:37 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:30 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 02:23 PM)Ourland Wrote:  Agree with Antarius on this. Whatever is left of the B12 would grab the best of the AAC and MWC, and then move on without us. That's why I see us taking in Tulane, Tulsa, and SMU at that point. TCU, Baylor, and UH want no association with Rice. Never will. When we joined CUSA, TCU was gone to the MWC in a matter of weeks. We're small and weak. No fans and no real institutional support for athletics.

To clarify, this is one scenario, but another scenario is that OU and UT bolt, leaving the Big XII remnants with no clout or purchasing power. That means the BigXII could easily become non aspirational. And putting all our eggs in that basket is dangerous if the bottom of the basket falls out.

If the latter happens, the AAC could be a better fit for us. Other than the Big XII money, what separates Iowa State from Western Kentucky? Not much. Take away the payday and the Big XII is culturally just like CUSA.

Nightowl is right that we need to be planning ahead and ne ready for whatever comes. That could be the Big XII, the AAC, MWC, CUSA or some amalgamation of them.

Your New England/East Coast provincialism is showing. Iowa State is in the AAU (as is Kansas for that matter). Try not to lump every public school in flyover country together, please.

Do you think there is a sizable difference between applicant overlap for ISU and Rice vs WKU and Rice? And more importantly, a sizable number to form any sort of rivalry?

Simply put, there are two groups - one with overlap that Rice can build a rivalry with, and the rest. I dont think that has anything to do with "East Coast provincialism", nor do I think characterizing my opinions as somehow east coast biased is fair.

I think there is a significant difference between WKU and Iowa State (or KU)... Say you're a student at Rice from Iowa. When you were in high school, you were a really good student and applied to top private schools like Rice, Vandy, Northwestern, etc.. But if you didn't get in or didn't get the financial aid you wanted, you applied to a couple in-state public schools. So you applied to ISU and Iowa. Hey, if you end up there, it wouldn't be the worst thing. They have great campus life, you'll have friends from high school there, and though they aren't USNWR top 25, nobody is going to call you a loser for going there.

The equivalent school to ISU in Kentucky would be UK or Louisville... Not WKU. WKU is more like UNI (which would also likely beat us in basketball every year, and football in way too years (lately at least)).

My own personal anecdote - graduated from HS in Kansas. My final two were KU and Rice. Glad I went to Rice, but I'm sure I would have been fine at KU. Though with much a more heated college basketball rivalry with my Tarheel brother...

(12-04-2018 06:25 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  Hey, I've certainly indulged in some elitism here before and probably will again before this post is done, I'm just saying I wouldn't go so far as to call a hypothetical Big XII sans UT & OU something that would be beneath us. Any conference that has AAU members and/or state flagships/co-flagships would be a quantum leap up from this one and probably about the best we could ever hope to get back to.

Curious: which group would be more palatable/beneficial to Rice -- Rice University, not just Rice Athletics -- over the long term:

A) the MWC, which has an academic peer (Air Force) and multiple flagship schools but no one within 1000 miles of Houston; or

B) CUSA West, which has better geographic proximity but not even a semblance of any other "overlap" with us to put it euphemistically?

But anyway, for those who think building a consistently winning football program is going to be our ticket to getting out of CUSA: What if I told you that simply being in CUSA itself effectively makes that impossible for us? That the disconnect between us and every other school ensures that we will never come up with the support and commitment (dollars, attendance, etc.) needed to go on a dominating run against those very same schools? What then?

I'd say hands down the MWC would be better, despite us being on an island. MWC currently has two teams in the top 25.

Big 12 remnant or AAC would be better, but we would be crazy to turn down the MWC if that was our only offer. Plus I think we'd be more attractive to other conferences in future realignments coming from the MWC.

+1. As long as we're stuck at the G5 level, we need to be playing state schools with name recognition (MWC) or schools in very close proximity to ourself (new regional conference).

(12-05-2018 12:43 AM)Antarius Wrote:  

(12-04-2018 06:25 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  Hey, I've certainly indulged in some elitism here before and probably will again before this post is done, I'm just saying I wouldn't go so far as to call a hypothetical Big XII sans UT & OU something that would be beneath us. Any conference that has AAU members and/or state flagships/co-flagships would be a quantum leap up from this one and probably about the best we could ever hope to get back to.
Curious: which group would be more palatable/beneficial to Rice -- Rice University, not just Rice Athletics -- over the long term:
A) the MWC, which has an academic peer (Air Force) and multiple flagship schools but no one within 1000 miles of Houston; or
B) CUSA West, which has better geographic proximity but not even a semblance of any other "overlap" with us to put it euphemistically?
But anyway, for those who think building a consistently winning football program is going to be our ticket to getting out of CUSA: What if I told you that simply being in CUSA itself effectively makes that impossible for us? That the disconnect between us and every other school ensures that we will never come up with the support and commitment (dollars, attendance, etc.) needed to go on a dominating run against those very same schools? What then?

I'm not saying it would be beneath us. To be honest, we are the bottom of CUSA; we are the worst of the worst. So while I rail on CUSA - I rail on Rice more because we arent better than anyone.
My points were
1. Without OU and UT, the Big XII isnt a P5 conference. So putting all ours eggs into a basket that may break is a bad idea.
2. We share little overlap with a lot of the Big XII. The same is true for CUSA. So even if we did get into the Big XII 2.0, building interest will be just as challenging as now.
Which brings me back to the ISU vs WKU statement- I simply do not believe Iowa State vs Rice would attract much more interest than Rice vs WKU.

I hate to break the news to everybody, but back in the glory days of the SWC that we now remember so fondly, we didn't exactly pack the place. We had three good draws--TexasU, LSU, and aTm (the latter only when they were good, which they often were not). At one point we played aTm in Houston every year for a decade (1958-67 IIRC). My sophomore year, the Campanile had a comment about how it was unusual to be the visiting team at Homecoming. The Aggies simply were not the juggernaut that they have become. So there were really only two consistently big draws. I used to think it was interesting that when LSU came to HRS we added a premium charge for tickets, just like TexasU--so we charged more for a non-conference game than we did for a conference game. Those were the only two games that felt like big time football. Outside of the big two, we didn't draw back then. Not as bad as now, but not good, so let's not kid ourselves. I've seen plenty of SMU and TCU and Baylor crowds that looked as bad as what we ave now. I remember two Baylor games--one here, one there--were the crowd was in the hundreds, and not many hundreds at that.

Back then, we basically ran the athletic program off TexasU and LSU. If we could get long-term deals with LSU and either TexasU or aTm, and turn UH into an annual cross-town rivalry game that could draw, that would be pretty much analogous to what we had in the SWC. Not good enough in today's world, because costs have skyrocketed, but that's what we had back then. We screwed it up once, I would hope that we would do better the next time.

We used to have the "18.5 rule." No matter what, we would not announce a crowd smaller than 18,500. It was a joke. I remember the clown night basketball game against Abe Lemons and Texas. Old Autry was fairly full. Bill Whitmore wanted to announce 4,500 as the attendance. Billy Siems was arguing that it was not over 3,500. They asked me to be the tiebreaker, and I replied, "I've seen smaller crowds announced as 18,500." They both laughed and agreed.

Thanks for that. Good perspective

owl69/70/75 you have kinda supported what the spirit of this post is....we need a reality check. I'm not saying we need to stop striving and pushing to do better, but we have to be smart and realistic about what our goals/expectations are yearly with respect to attendance.

(12-05-2018 02:01 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  owl69/70/75 you have kinda supported what the spirit of this post is....we need a reality check. I'm not saying we need to stop striving and pushing to do better, but we have to be smart and realistic about what our goals/expectations are yearly with respect to attendance.

My larger point is that those good old days weren't all that good, primarily because we didn't bother to take care of business back then. We tried to run an athletic program off what we made with TexasU and LSU came to town. In the early 1980s, LSU stopped coming (or we stopped them, not sure who initiated it). Since then the road has just been steadily downhill. And it didn't start that high up the hill to begin with.

(12-05-2018 02:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-05-2018 02:01 PM)nightowl24 Wrote:  owl69/70/75 you have kinda supported what the spirit of this post is....we need a reality check. I'm not saying we need to stop striving and pushing to do better, but we have to be smart and realistic about what our goals/expectations are yearly with respect to attendance.

My larger point is that those good old days weren't all that good, primarily because we didn't bother to take care of business back then. We tried to run an athletic program off what we made with TexasU and LSU came to town. In the early 1980s, LSU stopped coming (or we stopped them, not sure who initiated it). Since then the road has just been steadily downhill. And it didn't start that high up the hill to begin with.

This is good perspective (SWC days were long before my time) - all I have is the second hand nostalgic yearning that harkens back to the SWC days.

aTm isn't in the BigXII. LSU is SEC. If UT leaves, the Big XII isn't going to be a gravy train. Then what do we do? Its the SWC all over again without the teams that could carry us along.