(03-09-2021 12:56 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote: (Just so we’re clear, I’m not advocating settling for mediocrity.)
Rice is a below-average D1 coaching and AD destination. To expect Rice to consistently land and retain above-average coaching and AD talent is illogical, as is expecting Rice to never hire a dud.
Many of you set a minimum expectation that Rice consistently exceed the hiring successes of schools that have a lot more to offer. I get the sentiment, but it isn’t realistic.
I agree. This is almost by definition, unsustainable.
Quote:Some of you talk about the need to hire coaches who “get Rice”. That doesn’t always work. Bailiff “got Rice” to an exceptional degree. That might be something that will improve chances of success, but it’s not a magic talisman.
I don't know that this is true. I know he tried more than many/most, but his goal was still to beat other teams by trying to do precisely what you say above... consistently out-recruit schools without our limitations... consistently replace successful coaches who leave with good/better ones.
To me, 'getting' Rice means something different. Bailiff did better than other coaches have by a long shot, but he was still in a completely different zip code from Rice (the University). He was perhaps more like Rice in the 1960s or 70's.
Quote:And then there’s those of you who say that if we can’t be champions we should just drop the program. That’s what quitters and losers say. That’s the attitude of someone who throws his golf bag into a water hazard and walks away from the game because he’s never broken par for the course.
And that’s all I have to say on the subject.
This. This is what 'getting Rice' means to me. You do it BECAUSE it is hard... and 'winning' is actually somewhat secondary. Said differently, Rice people value the tougher challenge. For Rice people, it is better to come in second in a competition against the best than to win against the weakest competition. It is better to try and do the impossible and come up short than to do the everyday.
If you want to win the current crop of Rice students and academs... you don't do it by trying to teach them to enjoy football. You do it by trying to get them to understand and support the same sort of 'great challenges' that drove them to choose Rice themselves.
(04-09-2021 04:41 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote: (04-09-2021 04:35 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: Could the replacement of Tina play a part in this??
Karlgaard hired the best WBB coach Rice has ever had.
But the job description as well as the goals he personally stated for himself require repeating that... and doing it in multiple sports.
Quote:Football was 2 and 3 last year; do we give them credit for a prorated 5 and 7 on a 12 game season? If not and if you say we only won 2 games, fine. We also only lost 3. We were in every game last year and crushed (yes, a 20 point margin is a crushing) a ranked team last year. You can claim small sample size, but you cannot fairly say the 2020 season was not better than 2019 or 2018 or 2017.
Virtually by definition, you can't take a limited sample and extrapolate it. If you could, we'd pretty frequently 'project' 0-11 seasons, since we've often started off the season with losses. Anything from 2-10 to 10-3 was possible based on last years sample.
Marshal has (with some regularity) captured some top 25 votes by playing and beating NOBODY and then losing games that on paper, they shouldn't.... AT least twice to us. That's their model/gameplan.
Quote:So let’s see how 2021 turns out. What is your CUSA minimum wins? A football coach at a high academics, under resourced school with an either indifferent or ineffective BOV when it comes to sports. What is a coach to do?
I have the same goal I've been stating for 15+ years. I want us to be nationally relevant... top 75.
What does it tell you that Rice stomped Marshall last year and we still finished ranked around 85 while Marshall, the team we stomped AT HOME with a backup QB STILL finished in the top 40??
It's because we demonstrated zero consistency. The Defense against Marshall appeared STOUT, and then we followed that with a virtual 'no show' at home... where almost any defense at all would have resulted in a win. Our offense was also Jekyll/Hyde...
Basically what the rankings show me is that people think Marshall was pretty good and happened to have ONE crappy game against a relatively weak team that at the same moment, happened to have they stars align. That's what they think.
What's a coach to do? Fix that.
Quote:And before you quote me Northwestern (brand new top of the line football practice facility); Duke (best off court basketball facilities in the country); Stanford (where would I begin, on resources and facilities); and Vandy (no clue but I do know they warehouse quite a few players at the lesser academic school in Nashville and transfer the credits), beware of the tremendous institutional support provided by the schools. It isn’t even close.
Neither is the level of in-conference competition even close.
I don't really understand your point though... what is YOUR expectation?? Are you suggesting that we should simply be satisfied with one conference championship every 15-20 years? With one ranking inside the top 50 every 15-20 years? And of doing this while playing 70% of our games each year against teams that are ranked among the bottom 25 and being compared on a weekly basis to schools consistently ranked 300 places below us in the ranking systems??
When we speak about women's basketball and volleyball in 2021, do we talk about their great accomplishment being winning CUSA?? Or about beating UT and A&M? Which got more attention? Which is credited with the teams high rankings?