(12-05-2022 08:02 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-05-2022 07:16 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-05-2022 05:09 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(12-05-2022 04:35 PM)Ourland Wrote:  How about just admitting more Americans? Why are we educating students from countries that hate us? I bet there are students at Rice whose parents are members of the Chinese Communist Party. Why are we admitting these students? There are literally millions of American kids who can do the work at Rice, and do it well. America first.

Putting aside the political part of your argument and focusing on the merits, do you actually believe that Rice football sucks as compared to Tulane because Rice admits too many students from China? Because that stretch seems further than either Gumby or Inspector Gadget could manage. Rice football sucks for many reasons, and too many students from any specific group seems like a laughably stupid and completely unsupportable reason to assign even an iota of causative blame. Other than the obvious ... not enough students from the sub-group of "elite football players"!

The question was why student attendance sucks, not why Rice football sucks.

If Rice started winning, we would attract enough attendance that nobody would care about the stay-at-homes or their national origins.

Bingo. Put a good team on the field - one that wins, is exciting, and in contention, and students will come.

2008 home opener vs SMU was a great example of that. Stands were full of students who were excited to see what Clement, JD, and Thor could do against June Jones.

https://riceowls.com/galleries/football/...287/101791

Students showed up quite well despite the wet and cold temps in 2013.

https://riceowls.com/galleries/football/.../496/88106

American students who love football won't show up to watch a poorly coached team lose game, after game, after game. I think it has almost nothing to do with the student body makeup, despite the claims by some here.

Just win.

Let's say you were a potential Rice fan who attended one game in 2007--Nicholls. You decide you're not going back to witness another disaster like that.

A year later, you go to the Texas Bowl. Now that's more like it, maybe you could become a fan after all.

The next game you attend, the following year, is Rice 14, Navy 63. And Navy as 12 Texans on their team, not one of whom was offered by Rice--including at least one legacy, I sat with his father.

That's why consistency is so important. You can't build a fan base with Bailiff's up-and-down inconsistency.

No one else will ever come in and do better than Bailiff. Rice isn't an athletics environment that's conducive to consistent winning. It never will be.

I say boo to Tulane and boo to the loser Fritz.

Sure they are having a good season but even if they beat USC he’ll still have a losing record over 7 years.

They didn’t fire him and they wouldn’t even let GaTech poach him.

I hope Rice doesn’t end up on that path.

Luckily we are more *consistent* than that

(12-07-2022 06:21 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I say boo to Tulane and boo to the loser Fritz.

Sure they are having a good season but even if they beat USC he’ll still have a losing record over 7 years.

They didn’t fire him and they wouldn’t even let GaTech poach him.

I hope Rice doesn’t end up on that path.

Luckily we are more *consistent* than that

I don't know if this is tongue in cheek or not...

But Willie took over a 3-9 program and has had only one year 'worse' than that... Which was preceded by 3 bowl years in a row and followed up by an 11-2 season (this year) and a Cotton Bowl bid. 7-1 in a tougher conference. Prior to the odd season last year, his worst year was his first at 4-8.

Compare that to ours... where our BEST season has been 5-7. 3-5 in a very weak conference.....

and you're saying 'even if they beat USC'?? We would all be celebrating Rice's resurgence if we even SNIFFED beating USC. Even if they get blown out 44-7, they will STILL have a better record this year than we have

So PLEASE tell me this was tongue in cheek!

(12-07-2022 06:21 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I say boo to Tulane and boo to the loser Fritz.

Sure they are having a good season but even if they beat USC he’ll still have a losing record over 7 years.

They didn’t fire him and they wouldn’t even let GaTech poach him.

I hope Rice doesn’t end up on that path.

Luckily we are more *consistent* than that

Anyone who coaches at Tulane will have a losing record after seven years. Same at Rice. Fritz is a good coach.

(12-06-2022 01:55 PM)Ourland Wrote:  No one else will ever come in and do better than Bailiff. Rice isn't an athletics environment that's conducive to consistent winning. It never will be.

(12-07-2022 06:21 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I say boo to Tulane and boo to the loser Fritz.

Fritz has done better at Tulane, in a similar environment, than Bailiff did at Rice.
- Better won/loss percentage
- More bowls in fewer years
- Champion of a much tougher conference

Except for 2021 which was a complete one-off because of the hurricane, he has shown fairly consistent results, instead of the Bailiff yo-yo. And he took over a team that was 3-9 whereas Bailiff took over a team that was 7-6 with a bowl appearance.

So yes, it can be done.

(12-06-2022 01:55 PM)Ourland Wrote:  No one else will ever come in and do better than Bailiff. Rice isn't an athletics environment that's conducive to consistent winning. It never will be.

So your position is IT CAN'T BE DONE AT RICE!


Sorry, just found a little humor in the juxtaposition of your comment and the thread title...

(12-07-2022 10:12 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-06-2022 01:55 PM)Ourland Wrote:  No one else will ever come in and do better than Bailiff. Rice isn't an athletics environment that's conducive to consistent winning. It never will be.

(12-07-2022 06:21 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I say boo to Tulane and boo to the loser Fritz.

Fritz has done better at Tulane, in a similar environment, than Bailiff did at Rice.
- Better won/loss percentage
- More bowls in fewer years
- Champion of a much tougher conference

Except for 2021 which was a complete one-off because of the hurricane, he has shown fairly consistent results, instead of the Bailiff yo-yo. And he took over a team that was 3-9 whereas Bailiff took over a team that was 7-6 with a bowl appearance.

So yes, it can be done.

Good points.

I just have to wonder why we are making excuses for somebody else's coach having a bad year (2-10) but we cut no slack for Rice coaches having similar bad years.

I see two one-off years for Fritz: 2021 and 2022. The other five years were decidedly mediocre. The bowls they went to were the kind of bowl that most Rice fans have dismissed as dog food bowls.

Of course, if he maintains his ten+ win level next year, and the year after...then it was not a one off at all. But if he doesn't...then he is doing a Bailiff yo-yo.

If it is so important to anybody to say that Fritz > Bailiff, fine. Go ahead. BFD. Not the hill I want to die on. But I will point out that Bailiff had TWO ten win years.

The thing I wonder that has not been addressed, is whether Fritz had the benefit of of one or more special immediate impact transfers. If so, are those guys staying or moving on? Comparing Fritz to Bailiff or any other pre 2020 coach is a bit of apples to oranges, due to the transfer rules and kids with 5,6,7 years eligibility.

I think the thing both Bailiff and Fritz have demonstrated is that coaches at Rice and similar schools can have good years. What neither has demonstrated (yet) is that they can move the team to a higher plateau and stay there.

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I just have to wonder why we are making excuses for somebody else's coach having a bad year (2-10) but we cut no slack for Rice coaches having similar bad years.

For one thing, Rice football hasn't had to leave town because of a hurricane. For another, there is a huge difference between Fritz's one off and Bailiff's or Bloomgren's three-off or four-off or five-off.

Quote:I see two one-off years for Fritz: 2021 and 2022. The other five years were decidedly mediocre. The bowls they went to were the kind of bowl that most Rice fans have dismissed as dog food bowls.

The kind of bowl that Rice hasn't sniffed for 8 years, and got into only through a most exceptional loophole in 2022. I still say Rice should fire Bloomgren and let Julie Griswold coach the bowl game, because she is the reason that Rice is even playing there. She certainly deserves a hell of a lot more recognition than she gets.

Quote:Of course, if he maintains his ten+ win level next year, and the year after...then it was not a one off at all. But if he doesn't...then he is doing a Bailiff yo-yo.

Yo-yoing between 10 wins and 5, 6, or 7 is vastly different from yo-yoing between 10 wins and 1, 2, or 3.

Quote:If it is so important to anybody to say that Fritz > Bailiff, fine. Go ahead. BFD. Not the hill I want to die on. But I will point out that Bailiff had TWO ten win years.

He also had an 11 loss year, a 10 loss year, two 9 loss years, and two 8 loss years. Fritz has had one 8 loss year (his first, taking over a team that had been 3-9 the prior year) and one 10 loss year (where the whole season was totally disrupted by a hurricane evacuation). Bailiff's huge loss years came without any such exceptional circumstances. Like the little girl with the curl, when Bailiff was good he was very, very good, but when he was bad he was horrid. Fritz is more when he was good he was very, very good and when he was bad he was average.

(12-07-2022 11:42 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I just have to wonder why we are making excuses for somebody else's coach having a bad year (2-10) but we cut no slack for Rice coaches having similar bad years.

For one thing, Rice football hasn't had to leave town because of a hurricane. For another, there is a huge difference between Fritz's one off and Bailiff's or Bloomgren's three-off or four-off or five-off.

Like I said, making excuses.

true, Rice has not had to leave town for a Hurricane. OTOH, I don't think if we had and then won only 2 games, that the Rice fans would have accepted that excuse.

Quote:

Quote:I see two one-off years for Fritz: 2021 and 2022. The other five years were decidedly mediocre. The bowls they went to were the kind of bowl that most Rice fans have dismissed as dog food bowls.

The kind of bowl that Rice hasn't sniffed for 8 years, and got into only through a most exceptional loophole in 2022. I still say Rice should fire Bloomgren and let Julie Griswold coach the bowl game, because she is the reason that Rice is even playing there. She certainly deserves a hell of a lot more recognition than she gets.

Your point?

Quote:

Quote:Of course, if he maintains his ten+ win level next year, and the year after...then it was not a one off at all. But if he doesn't...then he is doing a Bailiff yo-yo.

Yo-yoing between 10 wins and 5, 6, or 7 is vastly different from yo-yoing between 10 wins and 1, 2, or 3.

Ah, good, more excuses.

TBF, Fritz has only yo-yoed in each direction once so far - the two one off years I mentioned. We will need a couple of more years of results to determine if he has taken Tulane permanently into the elite or if he will return to the 4-7 win mediocrity he was at before - or worse. I wish him well.

Quote:

Quote:If it is so important to anybody to say that Fritz > Bailiff, fine. Go ahead. BFD. Not the hill I want to die on. But I will point out that Bailiff had TWO ten win years.

He also had an 11 loss year, a 10 loss year, two 9 loss years, and two 8 loss years. Fritz has had one 8 loss year (his first, taking over a team that had been 3-9 the prior year) and one 10 loss year (where the whole season was totally disrupted by a hurricane evacuation). Bailiff's huge loss years came without any such exceptional circumstances. Like the little girl with the curl, when Bailiff was good he was very, very good, but when he was bad he was horrid. Fritz is more when he was good he was very, very good and when he was bad he was average.

OK, Fritz is 100X the coach that Bailiff was. Bailiff was crap. Fritz is pure gold. Now what? Go for coffee and donuts? You're buying.

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the thing both Bailiff and Fritz have demonstrated is that coaches at Rice and similar schools can have good years. What neither has demonstrated (yet) is that they can move the team to a higher plateau and stay there.

Arbuckle had three winning seasons in a row, 1915-1917.
He had one other winning season.
Half of his eight seasons were winning.
Meagher had a winning streak of 3, 1930-1932.
Kitts had three winning seasons, with a streak of 2, 1934 and 1935.

Neely started with a streak of 3, '40-'42.
Next a streak of 5 winning seasons, '46-'50.
Next a 2-win streak, '53 and '54.
One more 2-win streak, '60 and '61.
From '46 to '61, Neely's teams...
• had 10 winning seasons (out of 16)
• went 3-6 in bowls
• were ranked at some point in 13 seasons
• finished the season in the rankings 6 times.

Neely lost his last three seasons, so from '64 to '91 (inclusive) there wasn't a winning season.
The Neely years are clearly the gold standard for Rice.
But it was a very different era.

Goldsmith had a winning season streak of 2, '92 and '93.
Hatfield had a winning season streak of 2, '96 and '97, and one other winning season in '01.
Bailiff had a winning season streak of 3, '12-'14, and one other winning season - all went to bowls.
That's out of 11 seasons, with two 3-season losing streaks tossed in.
This against much weaker opponents than Neely, albeit the disparity between the haves and the have-nots was nowhere near extreme as it is today.

We're moving to a stronger conference in the modern era.
Can what has been proposed in this thread close the everything-gap to move the team to that higher plateau and stay there?

(12-07-2022 12:10 PM)Grungy Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the thing both Bailiff and Fritz have demonstrated is that coaches at Rice and similar schools can have good years. What neither has demonstrated (yet) is that they can move the team to a higher plateau and stay there.

Arbuckle had three winning seasons in a row, 1915-1917.
He had one other winning season.
Half of his eight seasons were winning.
Meagher had a winning streak of 3, 1930-1932.
Kitts had three winning seasons, with a streak of 2, 1934 and 1935.

Neely started with a streak of 3, '40-'42.
Next a streak of 5 winning seasons, '46-'50.
Next a 2-win streak, '53 and '54.
One more 2-win streak, '60 and '61.
From '46 to '61, Neely's teams...
• had 10 winning seasons (out of 16)
• went 3-6 in bowls
• were ranked at some point in 13 seasons
• finished the season in the rankings 6 times.

Neely lost his last three seasons, so from '64 to '91 (inclusive) there wasn't a winning season.
The Neely years are clearly the gold standard for Rice.
But it was a very different era.

Goldsmith had a winning season streak of 2, '92 and '93.
Hatfield had a winning season streak of 2, '96 and '97, and one other winning season in '01.
Bailiff had a winning season streak of 3, '12-'14, and one other winning season - all went to bowls.
That's out of 11 seasons, with two 3-season losing streaks tossed in.
This against much weaker opponents than Neely, albeit the disparity between the haves and the have-nots was nowhere near extreme as it is today.

We're moving to a stronger conference in the modern era.
Can what has been proposed in this thread close the everything-gap to move the team to that higher plateau and stay there?

I don't think Neely would be satisfactory to Rice fans today. 144-124 is not good enough. 53.73% - equivalent to a 6.44 wins/yr average in a 12 game season.

And while 6-4 may be a "winning season", in 1963 it was also a disappointing season.

(12-07-2022 11:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  OTOH, I don't think if we had and then won only 2 games, that the Rice fans would have accepted that excuse.

If Rice had been to bowls each of the three preceding years, and won 11 and a conference championship and got invited to a major bowl the following year, I think tey would. They've certainly accepted worse for 60 years.

Quote:Your point?

That Julie is one of the truly underappreciated members of the Rice athletic staff.

Quote:OK, Fritz is 100X the coach that Bailiff was. Bailiff was crap. Fritz is pure gold. Now what? Go for coffee and donuts? You're buying.

Nice try at reductio ad absurdiam. Fritz has a better record at a comparable position than Bailiff did, by any objective measure. I don't know whether that makes him 100x or 1.1x or what. But it does strongly support the proposition that he was better.

(12-07-2022 11:56 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  OTOH, I don't think if we had and then won only 2 games, that the Rice fans would have accepted that excuse.

We’ve been accepting dropping to 2 wins for over 40 years now. And, with Bailiff we accepted it multiple times. Not quite sure I understand your question considering how often we have accepted exactly this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(12-07-2022 12:28 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I don't think Neely would be satisfactory to Rice fans today. 144-124 is not good enough. 53.73% - equivalent to a 6.44 wins/yr average in a 12 game season.
And while 6-4 may be a "winning season", in 1963 it was also a disappointing season.

Neely would smell like a rose compared to Hagan, Peterson, Conover, Rice, Alborn, Brown, Berndt, Goldsmith, Hatfield, Graham, Bailiff, and Bloomgren. None of whom achieved even a 50% winning record (except Graham, for one year, and he was a flaming a-hole). The combined record for that cast of characters is 209-404-6, or a winning percentage of 34.2%.

Last I checked 53.7% > 34.2%.

(12-07-2022 12:28 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 12:10 PM)Grungy Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the thing both Bailiff and Fritz have demonstrated is that coaches at Rice and similar schools can have good years. What neither has demonstrated (yet) is that they can move the team to a higher plateau and stay there.

Arbuckle had three winning seasons in a row, 1915-1917.
He had one other winning season.
Half of his eight seasons were winning.
Meagher had a winning streak of 3, 1930-1932.
Kitts had three winning seasons, with a streak of 2, 1934 and 1935.

Neely started with a streak of 3, '40-'42.
Next a streak of 5 winning seasons, '46-'50.
Next a 2-win streak, '53 and '54.
One more 2-win streak, '60 and '61.
From '46 to '61, Neely's teams...
• had 10 winning seasons (out of 16)
• went 3-6 in bowls
• were ranked at some point in 13 seasons
• finished the season in the rankings 6 times.

Neely lost his last three seasons, so from '64 to '91 (inclusive) there wasn't a winning season.
The Neely years are clearly the gold standard for Rice.
But it was a very different era.

Goldsmith had a winning season streak of 2, '92 and '93.
Hatfield had a winning season streak of 2, '96 and '97, and one other winning season in '01.
Bailiff had a winning season streak of 3, '12-'14, and one other winning season - all went to bowls.
That's out of 11 seasons, with two 3-season losing streaks tossed in.
This against much weaker opponents than Neely, albeit the disparity between the haves and the have-nots was nowhere near extreme as it is today.

We're moving to a stronger conference in the modern era.
Can what has been proposed in this thread close the everything-gap to move the team to that higher plateau and stay there?

I don't think Neely would be satisfactory to Rice fans today. 144-124 is not good enough. 53.73% - equivalent to a 6.44 wins/yr average in a 12 game season.

Completely disagree. I believe most would be THRILLED if we averaged 6.44 wins/season.

(12-05-2022 08:02 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  2008 home opener vs SMU was a great example of that. Stands were full of students who were excited to see what Clement, JD, and Thor could do against June Jones.

https://riceowls.com/galleries/football/...287/101791

Ah yes, the highly touted, televised June Jones game! According to the press coverage at the time, the June Jones team, coached by June Jones, came to Houston and played an important and much-anticipated game. The June Jones team, coached by June Jones, did not win. It was not clear form the media reports if another team -- or even other human beings -- were involved.

But we knew!

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The thing I wonder that has not been addressed, is whether Fritz had the benefit of of one or more special immediate impact transfers. If so, are those guys staying or moving on? Comparing Fritz to Bailiff or any other pre 2020 coach is a bit of apples to oranges, due to the transfer rules and kids with 5,6,7 years eligibility.

Makes one wonder what the Bailiff years would have looked like without Clement, Dillard and Casey, none of which Bailiff recruited. I suspect not nearly as good.

(12-07-2022 12:53 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 12:28 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 12:10 PM)Grungy Wrote:  

(12-07-2022 11:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think the thing both Bailiff and Fritz have demonstrated is that coaches at Rice and similar schools can have good years. What neither has demonstrated (yet) is that they can move the team to a higher plateau and stay there.

Arbuckle had three winning seasons in a row, 1915-1917.
He had one other winning season.
Half of his eight seasons were winning.
Meagher had a winning streak of 3, 1930-1932.
Kitts had three winning seasons, with a streak of 2, 1934 and 1935.

Neely started with a streak of 3, '40-'42.
Next a streak of 5 winning seasons, '46-'50.
Next a 2-win streak, '53 and '54.
One more 2-win streak, '60 and '61.
From '46 to '61, Neely's teams...
• had 10 winning seasons (out of 16)
• went 3-6 in bowls
• were ranked at some point in 13 seasons
• finished the season in the rankings 6 times.

Neely lost his last three seasons, so from '64 to '91 (inclusive) there wasn't a winning season.
The Neely years are clearly the gold standard for Rice.
But it was a very different era.

Goldsmith had a winning season streak of 2, '92 and '93.
Hatfield had a winning season streak of 2, '96 and '97, and one other winning season in '01.
Bailiff had a winning season streak of 3, '12-'14, and one other winning season - all went to bowls.
That's out of 11 seasons, with two 3-season losing streaks tossed in.
This against much weaker opponents than Neely, albeit the disparity between the haves and the have-nots was nowhere near extreme as it is today.

We're moving to a stronger conference in the modern era.
Can what has been proposed in this thread close the everything-gap to move the team to that higher plateau and stay there?

I don't think Neely would be satisfactory to Rice fans today. 144-124 is not good enough. 53.73% - equivalent to a 6.44 wins/yr average in a 12 game season.

Completely disagree. I believe most would be THRILLED if we averaged 6.44 wins/season.

Rice would build a golden statue to any football coach that could win six games a year, and I would pay homage to it before every home game.