According to ESPN's Adam Rittenberg, Karlgaard interviewed for the open Northwestern AD job.

(04-19-2021 08:51 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  According to ESPN's Adam Rittenberg, Karlgaard interviewed for the open Northwestern AD job.

I think a 15 year old could probably do a good job as the next Northwestern AD. Your next men's basketball coach can't possibly be worse than the previous guy, and the football facilities might actually make it more attractive than Stanford for kids looking for power conference football and a good degree. Every olympic sport has the potential to be great because it's freaking Northwestern. Has to be one of the most attractive gigs out there - I bet they've received massive amounts of interest.

And it's fine for JK to interview as long as it's not getting in the way of the WBB hire.

(04-19-2021 08:51 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  According to ESPN's Adam Rittenberg, Karlgaard interviewed for the open Northwestern AD job.

Let us hope the snake oil salesman can do his thing and get the gig.

The sooner he is gone the better.

In doing a quick web search on the thread topic, I ran across this.

https://www.change.org/p/president-of-ri...rect=false

Has this been discussed here? If so, I missed it.

(04-19-2021 08:51 AM)RiceFootball2K5 Wrote:  According to ESPN's Adam Rittenberg, Karlgaard interviewed for the open Northwestern AD job.

Karlgaard's first question in his interview ought to be what the administration's support for athletics is. If the answer is "full support", his second question ought to be a view of the resume of the current president. If it reads 2 years in the non-academic world, and experience only at schools that at best tolerate athletics, he ought to leave the room immediately, because they are almost certainly not telling the truth on question 1.

Hire him Wildcats! You won’t regret it! Cant recommend him enough!

(04-19-2021 10:15 AM)RiceOwls2019 Wrote:  Hire him Wildcats! You won’t regret it! Cant recommend him enough!

LOL I'm about to create a "We love JK" account on twitter

I'd be concerned if JK leaves Rice before naming a new women's basketball coach. That would really push back that process.

But maybe we could hire Tina Langley to replace JK as AD, and then she'd be able to name her own replacement as a basketball coach lol

Northwestern's AD job has been open since January so that's been an even longer process than our basketball coaching opening. It appears that both the Cal and Washington State AD's have also interviewed for the job although the Washington State guy has already said he's not going there?

(04-19-2021 09:18 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  In doing a quick web search on the thread topic, I ran across this.

https://www.change.org/p/president-of-ri...rect=false

Has this been discussed here? If so, I missed it.

This is from May 2020?

Take Lebroon also.

(04-19-2021 10:15 AM)RiceOwls2019 Wrote:  Hire him Wildcats! You won’t regret it! Cant recommend him enough!

(04-19-2021 04:50 PM)Texasowl Wrote:  Take Lebroon also.

(04-19-2021 10:15 AM)RiceOwls2019 Wrote:  Hire him Wildcats! You won’t regret it! Cant recommend him enough!

Not one tear here if they (or anybody) take Leebron

(04-19-2021 04:59 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(04-19-2021 04:50 PM)Texasowl Wrote:  Take Lebroon also.

(04-19-2021 10:15 AM)RiceOwls2019 Wrote:  Hire him Wildcats! You won’t regret it! Cant recommend him enough!

Not one tear here if they (or anybody) take Leebron

Here, here! But first an honest discussion with the board of trustees or at least the search committee to discuss what they are looking for in a president (and honestly I would fear the answer). I will say this: looking at Leebron’s background and resume, no one can be surprised with how he has performed as president and what his accomplishments and failings have been. What you see is what you get with him; he is doing what he was hired to do.

(04-12-2021 09:54 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(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?

My point in that paragraph could not have been clearer, with the point about institutional support. Athletic program success isn’t bottom up, it is top down, and at the top of our pyramid is a gifted academician who by life, experience and world view considers college sports as, at best, a nuisance.

Schools led like that are tied in ropes unless one or 2 trustees, with gravitas, courage and wisdom force a new direction.

(04-19-2021 06:50 PM)bigowlsfan Wrote:  

(04-12-2021 09:54 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(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?

My point in that paragraph could not have been clearer, with the point about institutional support. Athletic program success isn’t bottom up, it is top down, and at the top of our pyramid is a gifted academician who by life, experience and world view considers college sports as, at best, a nuisance.

Schools led like that are tied in ropes unless one or 2 trustees, with gravitas, courage and wisdom force a new direction.

Look, much of what you've been saying is spot on, but stop exaggerating things. Leebron does NOT consider college sports as a nuisance. That is just blatantly untrue. No, he has never been into athletics himself, and he's not an avid sports fan as the majority of us here are. However, he is an enthusiastic supporter of Rice athletics-- more so than any President we have had since Hackerman in the 1970s-- and he absolutely understands the importance of Rice athletics to building strong alumni ties and future donation streams.

As for the BOT, as I and others have said, the majority on the Board are strong supporters of Rice athletics, and more than a few were student-athletes themselves, including both the former (Tudor) and current (Rob Ladd) Board chairmen.

(04-19-2021 11:42 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'd be concerned if JK leaves Rice before naming a new women's basketball coach. That would really push back that process.

But maybe we could hire Tina Langley to replace JK as AD, and then she'd be able to name her own replacement as a basketball coach lol

Northwestern's AD job has been open since January so that's been an even longer process than our basketball coaching opening. It appears that both the Cal and Washington State AD's have also interviewed for the job although the Washington State guy has already said he's not going there?

FWIW. A site on the web with AD salaries said that the Northwestern AD makes more than $ 2 million in total compensation, second only to CDC at UT.

For Joe’s benefit and for Rice’s benefit, appropriate Dr. Seuss phrase here is ‘Go Joe Go’

Have said this on other threads but best thing that can happen for both sides is for Joe to find an AD job that is ‘keep the car on the road’ job vs. ‘get the car out of the ditch’ job. Rice is in the ditch, NW is on the road. Joe is a steady set of professional AD hands that would be great in this NW situation. Joe is not a change agent guy that can get the car out of the ditch. Results in the major sports speak for themselves. No additional analysis required.

Different leadership required for Rice specific situation. That is not Joe’s fault. It is Leebron and BoT’s fault for not putting right guy/gal in for the change agent job required. We all have toolboxes and different tools are required for different jobs. Joe's tools are a mismatch for this specific/dire situation.

I do wish Joe the best, hope he gets the gig and hope Leebron/BoT can find a change agent person vs. a ‘keep car on road’ person. Joe is a good man but wrong man for Rice's situation.

I think Karlgaard is an okay AD, not a great AD but an okay AD. He has made some good hires and some bad ones. This happens at every university. However. I really don't know how much support he gets from Leebron, the Board of Directors, and/or major donors.if he wants to get rid of a coach who didnt work out before he/she contract expires.

(04-19-2021 10:59 PM)owl40 Wrote:  For Joe’s benefit and for Rice’s benefit, appropriate Dr. Seuss phrase here is ‘Go Joe Go’

Have said this on other threads but best thing that can happen for both sides is for Joe to find an AD job that is ‘keep the car on the road’ job vs. ‘get the car out of the ditch’ job. Rice is in the ditch, NW is on the road. Joe is a steady set of professional AD hands that would be great in this NW situation. Joe is not a change agent guy that can get the car out of the ditch. Results in the major sports speak for themselves. No additional analysis required.

Different leadership required for Rice specific situation. That is not Joe’s fault. It is Leebron and BoT’s fault for not putting right guy/gal in for the change agent job required. We all have toolboxes and different tools are required for different jobs. Joe's tools are a mismatch for this specific/dire situation.

I do wish Joe the best, hope he gets the gig and hope Leebron/BoT can find a change agent person vs. a ‘keep car on road’ person. Joe is a good man but wrong man for Rice's situation.

This is where we depart. I have seen nothing at the BOT level or within the current president that would suggest there is any desire to upgrade athletics. I believe athletic success at universities comes from top down (commitment at the top levels), not bottom up.

This is like firing the GM of the Pittsburgh Pirates because they are not winning. When you spend the least, it is tough to overcome.

In this case, for Rice, spending is but one part of the problem at the top. There is culture; there is messaging; there is commitment.

Rice brought in a brilliant academician to run their ship several years ago, and they are getting from him what his world view and capacity can generate.

Until I see written statements with some assertiveness associated with them, I think we are just bailing with a thimble a badly leaking ship. I say with assertiveness, because a unified statement by the board with pabulum ("Rice has always believed that success in athletics is a critical part of the school's mission") will be an engineered attempt to throw bread and circuses at the masses.

(04-20-2021 07:12 AM)bigowlsfan Wrote:  

(04-19-2021 10:59 PM)owl40 Wrote:  For Joe’s benefit and for Rice’s benefit, appropriate Dr. Seuss phrase here is ‘Go Joe Go’

Have said this on other threads but best thing that can happen for both sides is for Joe to find an AD job that is ‘keep the car on the road’ job vs. ‘get the car out of the ditch’ job. Rice is in the ditch, NW is on the road. Joe is a steady set of professional AD hands that would be great in this NW situation. Joe is not a change agent guy that can get the car out of the ditch. Results in the major sports speak for themselves. No additional analysis required.

Different leadership required for Rice specific situation. That is not Joe’s fault. It is Leebron and BoT’s fault for not putting right guy/gal in for the change agent job required. We all have toolboxes and different tools are required for different jobs. Joe's tools are a mismatch for this specific/dire situation.

I do wish Joe the best, hope he gets the gig and hope Leebron/BoT can find a change agent person vs. a ‘keep car on road’ person. Joe is a good man but wrong man for Rice's situation.

This is where we depart. I have seen nothing at the BOT level or within the current president that would suggest there is any desire to upgrade athletics. I believe athletic success at universities comes from top down (commitment at the top levels), not bottom up.

This is like firing the GM of the Pittsburgh Pirates because they are not winning. When you spend the least, it is tough to overcome.

In this case, for Rice, spending is but one part of the problem at the top. There is culture; there is messaging; there is commitment.

Rice brought in a brilliant academician to run their ship several years ago, and they are getting from him what his world view and capacity can generate.

Until I see written statements with some assertiveness associated with them, I think we are just bailing with a thimble a badly leaking ship. I say with assertiveness, because a unified statement by the board with pabulum ("Rice has always believed that success in athletics is a critical part of the school's mission") will be an engineered attempt to throw bread and circuses at the masses.

You're joking, right? Seriously. As much as I love college sports there is no way success in athletics is or should be "a critical part" of Rice's mission....and I guarantee you it's not part of Stanford's, Northwestern's or Vandy's mission either. Let's get real here.

The president and BOT can support athletics as strongly as possible, or they can be opposed, and it doesn't really matter if you don't have an AD with a plan. Joe is good at getting his paperwork done and his reports in on time, but he has no vision.

We have officers like that in the military. In peacetime they progress very nicely to the top leadership positions. Then a war starts and we get our butts beat and people killed because those leaders don't know how to lead. Abe Lincoln had to fire a whole lot of very competent paper-shufflers before he found a leader in Grant. Grant's peacetime career had suffered because he was a bit of a drinker. When Lincoln was asked what he thought of Grant's drinking, he replied to the effect of, "Find out what he's drinking and send some to my other generals."