(03-29-2015 07:28 PM)SaintsOwl Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 12:10 PM)tramile12 Wrote:  Wow that was an "allovertheplace" rant. Or maybe a manifesto?

Please allow folks to express themselves. That's what boards are for. Go read the Longhorns board. You would be crying if you only heard what they were saying about Mack. He actually win them a championship. Relax and just accept that not everyone is happy beating the FIU and Wagner's

Allow folks to express themselves? People seem to be pretty capable on this board without you playing kindergarten teacher for them. Everyone is allowing you to express your obvious disdain for Bailiff, aren't they? The guy could go 15-0 next year and you'd find something to criticize. Since your handing out advice, here is some for you: get a sense of humor. Helps a lot.

(03-28-2015 08:34 PM)ArmChairOwl Wrote:  

(03-28-2015 07:31 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(03-28-2015 05:50 PM)ArmChairOwl Wrote:  

(03-28-2015 11:12 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  ??? You do realize that UT lost virtually all of it's top players from last year's squad-- on both sides of the ball.

Yes, I also realize that the talented players 4 star players they have this year have a full year under his system. You DO realize that don't you???

How come Texas' starters can be lost, and its backups and newbies are expected to come in and be better in Year 2 of a new coach, but at Rice, in season 9 of the same old coach, who has had all that time to establish and stock his system with exactly the players he recruited, he is given permission to regress or struggle when his backups have to step up and play more?

Rice should be the better team. Our coach is in year 9. We rebuilt last season. Other posts have shown that the recruiting stars don't mean as much as they are oft given credit for. The inconsistencies used to defend Bailiff's performance and lowered expectations are disappointing to see. Same old Rice? I thought we brought in JK to change that.

Basketball coach doesn't seem to care how hard it is here or how little he has to work with- he expects to overachieve anyway, and did a heck of a job in just his first season. Halfway through it he had significantly changed the culture and expectations. The better performances began to follow. Although he wanted to play a full press for 40 minutes, he adapted and up-coached his depleted, shrinking roster to exceed their abilities (they were last place and going nowhere under Braun, yet even Braun sees what a better coach Rhoades is).

At some point, Rice football has to win games against superior opponents with the talent it has with no excuses. In year 1 or 2 it's a pleasant surprise. In Year 9, that should be mandatory. If the coach didn't/couldn't recruit enough needed backups/replacements to get his job done, like apparently you are saying UT football coach has, then he should go. It is time.

You know, all I was saying was my opinion that the Texas football team is not vulnerable. It was in response to a post that said they are. I happen to disagree. Then Walt posted his information in what I took as sort of a derogatory fashion with the 3 question marks and the "you do know..." comment. Possibly I took that the wrong way. But, good grief, you went into all sorts of things, and even included basketball. My opinion again is that I think we face a big challenge in going to Austin. The Texas football team is not vulnerable. They will be a very tough team to beat. I did NOT say that it could not be done. And I do believe that we can win the game. BUT, it will not be as easy as some seem to think.

Seems that I saw that last year's starting QB for Texas is now running second or third on their depth chart behind a Freshman. Both teams will be playing their second game of the season. We play Wagner, they play Notre Dame. I gotta like our chances to not be beaten up when we play them.

I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

(03-30-2015 07:39 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

It's things like this that make me more hopeful that it will be reloading, and not rebuilding.

(03-30-2015 07:39 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

I'm a lot more worried about the defense than I am the offense. Our defensive backfield is not looking good at all at this point. I have faith in a couple of young guys to step up (Thomas, Ibe, Destri White) but I'm not sure if its enough. I can't handle watching us get long bombed again this year, there isn't enough beer in the Roost for that.

(03-30-2015 07:39 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

I agree, except I thought Taylor and Hull got the lion's share of targets because of ability.

(03-30-2015 08:35 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 07:39 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

I agree, except I thought Taylor and Hull got the lion's share of targets because of ability.

Eh, Taylor I would say yes... Mario is very replaceable. Dennis Parks is a VERY GOOD receiver, but was banged up for much of last year (He appeared in 12 games, but a few of those were very limited). Zach Wright proved to be a viable option in the slot, and Mayden caught a number of long bombs. Also, guys like Darrion Pollard, Temi Alaka, Cole Hunt, and Robby Wells have shown flashes. That doesn't even include guys like Lance Wright and Trevor Long. Trevor Long has been one of the best players this spring.

Positions in order of my confidence in their ability and depth:

RB
QB
LB
WR
P
OL
CB
DL
S
K/LS

You are forgetting one major factor of winning and loosing. We will have the top quarterback in the conference this year. That is worth at least 2 or 3 additional wins. :)

(03-30-2015 07:56 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 07:39 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:21 PM)Antarius Wrote:  I saw the words "rebuilding year" above somewhere. This is not even close to a rebuilding year. We are in good shape and have a solid team returning and good incoming players as well.

I expect 10 wins - don't see any reason why we wont get there.

While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

It's things like this that make me more hopeful that it will be reloading, and not rebuilding.

(03-30-2015 08:44 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 08:35 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 07:39 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 06:00 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 05:43 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  While I agree that we have a solid team, it is rebuilding in the sense of the number of players we are losing. However, I am much more confident in the players filling in the roles that the departed have left, than I have been in the recent past. Previously, you noticed a significant drop off during the year when first team players were not on the field, and for the past two years that hasn't been the case.

Plus, returning a proven QB helps out a lot.

On D, the players that accounted for 73% of tackles, and 71% of TFL from last year are gone. On offense, 60% of our receiving TDs from last year are gone. Maybe, and hopefully, we will "reload" instead of "rebuild", but that's far from certain, and I wouldn't say that we are certainly on one end of that spectrum or the other.

Your comment about our receiver corp may be true, but it is awfully disceiving. Sure, our two Senior wideouts (Taylor and Hull) who got the lions share of targets because of seniority, IMHO, are gone, but we return four wideouts who saw considerable action, as well as our #1 TE who missed virtually all of last season. We actually have more speed at WR this year, and plenty of upperclass experience.

I agree, except I thought Taylor and Hull got the lion's share of targets because of ability.

Eh, Taylor I would say yes... Mario is very replaceable. Dennis Parks is a VERY GOOD receiver, but was banged up for much of last year (He appeared in 12 games, but a few of those were very limited). Zach Wright proved to be a viable option in the slot, and Mayden caught a number of long bombs. Also, guys like Darrion Pollard, Temi Alaka, Cole Hunt, and Robby Wells have shown flashes. That doesn't even include guys like Lance Wright and Trevor Long. Trevor Long has been one of the best players this spring.

Positions in order of my confidence in their ability and depth:

RB
QB
LB
WR
P
OL
CB
DL
S
K/LS

Glad you put the running game first. It makes our offense go. Our passing game is not strong enough to carry us for four quarters. I would say LB would be two for me.

dang it; wish we had Covington and Nordstrom back....arguably our two best defensive players. looks like we're going to be light at DE.

(03-31-2015 09:44 AM)davidw Wrote:  dang it; wish we had Covington and Nordstrom back....arguably our two best defensive players. looks like we're going to be light at DE.

Neither was as good as Callahan, but I get your general point. Still, DE was a huge question mark heading into 2014 and it ended up being a strength. I like the guys returning and think they showed a lot of talent in the reps they were given (Peterson, Schantz, Luvender, Johnson, and talented RS freshmen like Hanusa and Wright). I agree that DE is unproven, but I think it will ultimately be a team strength.

I am most worried about the secondary (aren't we all?!?). I think the secondary will be even more athletic, and this is an area that really improved the last few years with Hill and White as safeties. But experience matters, and Rice's secondary just will not have a lot of it next year. The talent is there, Moondog seems excited if you follow him on twitter, but whether the guys can transfer that athleticism and talent onto the field while working as a cohesive unit remains to be seen. I think it will be a big help starting the season against 3 teams not necessarily expected to have great passing offenses (Wagner, UT, NT). Hopefully the secondary will be more seasoned by the Baylor and WKU games.

(03-31-2015 12:03 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 09:44 AM)davidw Wrote:  dang it; wish we had Covington and Nordstrom back....arguably our two best defensive players. looks like we're going to be light at DE.

Neither was as good as Callahan, but I get your general point. Still, DE was a huge question mark heading into 2014 and it ended up being a strength. I like the guys returning and think they showed a lot of talent in the reps they were given (Peterson, Schantz, Luvender, Johnson, and talented RS freshmen like Hanusa and Wright). I agree that DE is unproven, but I think it will ultimately be a team strength.

I am most worried about the secondary (aren't we all?!?). I think the secondary will be even more athletic, and this is an area that really improved the last few years with Hill and White as safeties. But experience matters, and Rice's secondary just will not have a lot of it next year. The talent is there, Moondog seems excited if you follow him on twitter, but whether the guys can transfer that athleticism and talent onto the field while working as a cohesive unit remains to be seen. I think it will be a big help starting the season against 3 teams not necessarily expected to have great passing offenses (Wagner, UT, NT). Hopefully the secondary will be more seasoned by the Baylor and WKU games.

+1 that's a good way to look at it.