(05-02-2018 03:24 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  Any athletic director has three primary responsibilities, in no particular order:

1. Oversee fundraising;
2. Have the correct personnel in the correct positions;
3. Ensure that there are conference championships (and national rankings, if possible).

1. I don't have sufficient information.
2. Generally poor, as to hiring new coaches, at the present time. Men's basketball is a disaster, football has been awful, but women's basketball has been a bright light. The coaches that were in place before JK have done a credible job. I won't comment on baseball. The facts speak for themselves.
3. After his exhortation that Rice should strive for being top 25 in every sport, we arrive in the 2017-18 calendar year with 0 team championships in a third-rate, backwater conference.

Conclusion: if the bar is lowered so far as to give a grade of A (or, God forgive, an A+), that bar is 6 feet underground (reference intended).

If the coaches in place before JK have done a credible job, we should have had at least 1 conference title (and really several more than 1) already in 2017-18. The mere fact that we haven't (in a third-rate, backwater conference as you put it) means either the conference isn't as bad as you paint it to be, or our veteran coaches aren't doing that great of a job.

My guess is the answer is somewhere in the middle.

(05-02-2018 04:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  The secondary sports all seem to be doing pretty well despite the lack of a conference title.

I am not sure how this is possible in CUSA. Winning CUSA doesn't make you good and sometimes barely makes you decent, so not winning it definitely isn't pretty well, IMO.

Maybe the standard is they are not gargantuan dumpster fires like football, mbb, and soon to be baseball. They seem to be largely competitive in conference play and occasionally better than that. Men's golf had a few rough years, but these sports have not caused the institutional embarassment of football and mbb. Obviously these teams could be better, but they are all individual sports that have unique recruiting challenges that I am not confident we could figure out. Conference mediocrity would be a huge step up for the revenue sports.

(05-02-2018 04:00 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  The big three were either the same (basketball) or worse (football and baseball).

Big 3? As much as we love baseball around here it doesn't move the needle any more than golf. Football and/OR basketball are going to have to pull us out of our lowly position. Period.

Edited to add- And I like his hires in football and BB. Time will tell- and I think he is a C *at best* today, but he may still be able to pull that GPA up. Lots riding on Bloomgren

(05-02-2018 07:45 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  Big 3? As much as we love baseball around here it doesn't move the needle any more than golf.

Disagree. Baseball gets a ton more coverage on TV during both the regular season and the postseason. Not sure you can even watch any college golf on TV.

(05-02-2018 10:19 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 07:45 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  Big 3? As much as we love baseball around here it doesn't move the needle any more than golf.

Disagree. Baseball gets a ton more coverage on TV during both the regular season and the postseason. Not sure you can even watch any college golf on TV.

College golf gets essentially zero TV coverage. The national title team matches get shown on GolfChannel and that is about it. You can barely find any press on college golf outside of university releases and the live scoring apps. Unless you are a serious amateur golfer who played in college or knows people who did, I doubt you track a single college golf tournament.

Not that college baseball really moves the needle, but people who follow sports in general tend to at least have an interest in what goes on in Omaha and college sports fans definitely follow baseball at least in this part of the country. And there is that whole ESPN contract for whatever that is worth.

(05-02-2018 07:29 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  The secondary sports all seem to be doing pretty well despite the lack of a conference title.

I am not sure how this is possible in CUSA. Winning CUSA doesn't make you good and sometimes barely makes you decent, so not winning it definitely isn't pretty well, IMO.

Maybe the standard is they are not gargantuan dumpster fires like football, mbb, and soon to be baseball. They seem to be largely competitive in conference play and occasionally better than that. Men's golf had a few rough years, but these sports have not caused the institutional embarassment of football and mbb. Obviously these teams could be better, but they are all individual sports that have unique recruiting challenges that I am not confident we could figure out. Conference mediocrity would be a huge step up for the revenue sports.

And that's a scary standard to be discussing. Being better than a giant dumpster fire isnt an achievement. And it's even more amazing that some people want to call it a home run or hand out medals for not being a flaming dumpster fire.

Its akin to polling the residents of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea on the best leader the world has seen - the responses need a large asterisk, given the limited dataset and general overall quality of competition in play.

(05-02-2018 11:13 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 07:29 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  The secondary sports all seem to be doing pretty well despite the lack of a conference title.

I am not sure how this is possible in CUSA. Winning CUSA doesn't make you good and sometimes barely makes you decent, so not winning it definitely isn't pretty well, IMO.

Maybe the standard is they are not gargantuan dumpster fires like football, mbb, and soon to be baseball. They seem to be largely competitive in conference play and occasionally better than that. Men's golf had a few rough years, but these sports have not caused the institutional embarassment of football and mbb. Obviously these teams could be better, but they are all individual sports that have unique recruiting challenges that I am not confident we could figure out. Conference mediocrity would be a huge step up for the revenue sports.

And that's a scary standard to be discussing. Being better than a giant dumpster fire isnt an achievement. And it's even more amazing that some people want to call it a home run or hand out medals for not being a flaming dumpster fire.

Its akin to polling the residents of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea on the best leader the world has seen - the responses need a large asterisk, given the limited dataset and general overall quality of competition in play.

I understand your point, but I would throw back your analogy of the quality of seats on the rust bucket DC-3 that is Rice athletics. I am stating that my opinion is that the seat quality is adequate for the impending journey smack into the middle of the forest once the engines burn out.

Certainly it would be nice to have more teams going to NCAA tournaments (we do have 2 golfers and women's tennis making the NCAAs, so that is solid), but I would hazard a guess that the secondary sports rank much higher on a national basis than the primary triumvirate of football-mbb-baseball. I am guessing most of these secondary sports have ~300 schools involved in D1; it would be cool to see how we would rank in a sagarin/warrennolan type of analysis in each sport so we could see higher resolution data than just a digital conference title yes/no. I have no idea how strong CUSA is for any of these sports either...is it like baseball where CUSA is on the periphery of P5, or like football where CUSA is simply the worst?

I agree the status of these secondary sports probably aren't "homeruns" or "A"s, but I think they are adequate when assessing JK's performance. Even if we had two top25 teams in our secondary sports, it wouldn't cover up 10% of the despair associated with the 3 primaries. It would take nothing short of a national title in the secondaries or a deep NCAA run for women's bb to add some shine to the primaries at the moment.

(05-03-2018 01:14 AM)flash3200 Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 11:13 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 07:29 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:52 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  The secondary sports all seem to be doing pretty well despite the lack of a conference title.

I am not sure how this is possible in CUSA. Winning CUSA doesn't make you good and sometimes barely makes you decent, so not winning it definitely isn't pretty well, IMO.

Maybe the standard is they are not gargantuan dumpster fires like football, mbb, and soon to be baseball. They seem to be largely competitive in conference play and occasionally better than that. Men's golf had a few rough years, but these sports have not caused the institutional embarassment of football and mbb. Obviously these teams could be better, but they are all individual sports that have unique recruiting challenges that I am not confident we could figure out. Conference mediocrity would be a huge step up for the revenue sports.

And that's a scary standard to be discussing. Being better than a giant dumpster fire isnt an achievement. And it's even more amazing that some people want to call it a home run or hand out medals for not being a flaming dumpster fire.

Its akin to polling the residents of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea on the best leader the world has seen - the responses need a large asterisk, given the limited dataset and general overall quality of competition in play.

I understand your point, but I would throw back your analogy of the quality of seats on the rust bucket DC-3 that is Rice athletics. I am stating that my opinion is that the seat quality is adequate for the impending journey smack into the middle of the forest once the engines burn out.

Certainly it would be nice to have more teams going to NCAA tournaments (we do have 2 golfers and women's tennis making the NCAAs, so that is solid), but I would hazard a guess that the secondary sports rank much higher on a national basis than the primary triumvirate of football-mbb-baseball. I am guessing most of these secondary sports have ~300 schools involved in D1; it would be cool to see how we would rank in a sagarin/warrennolan type of analysis in each sport so we could see higher resolution data than just a digital conference title yes/no. I have no idea how strong CUSA is for any of these sports either...is it like baseball where CUSA is on the periphery of P5, or like football where CUSA is simply the worst?

I agree the status of these secondary sports probably aren't "homeruns" or "A"s, but I think they are adequate when assessing JK's performance. Even if we had two top25 teams in our secondary sports, it wouldn't cover up 10% of the despair associated with the 3 primaries. It would take nothing short of a national title in the secondaries or a deep NCAA run for women's bb to add some shine to the primaries at the moment.

Ask, and maybe you shall receive. In this case, you're lucky, in that Massey has attempted something just along those lines. I'm not sure if he's doing the actual analysis on some of the non-Big 3 sports (which are on his front page always), but when I follow the links, it appears he might be doing it.

It doesn't have things like swimming and track and field and cross-country, but it does give some type of snapshot on sports that can be more easily measured/compared.

https://www.masseyratings.com/college.php

For those who want it quick, these are the rankings for Rice.

Overall #144
Football #168
Mens Basketball #299
Womens Basketball #126
Baseball #120
Womens Soccer #56
Womens Volleyball #108
Mens Tennis #118
Womens Tennis #44

He also includes Softball and Mens Soccer.

(05-03-2018 01:14 AM)flash3200 Wrote:  I understand your point, but I would throw back your analogy of the quality of seats on the rust bucket DC-3 that is Rice athletics. I am stating that my opinion is that the seat quality is adequate for the impending journey smack into the middle of the forest once the engines burn out.

Certainly it would be nice to have more teams going to NCAA tournaments (we do have 2 golfers and women's tennis making the NCAAs, so that is solid), but I would hazard a guess that the secondary sports rank much higher on a national basis than the primary triumvirate of football-mbb-baseball. I am guessing most of these secondary sports have ~300 schools involved in D1; it would be cool to see how we would rank in a sagarin/warrennolan type of analysis in each sport so we could see higher resolution data than just a digital conference title yes/no. I have no idea how strong CUSA is for any of these sports either...is it like baseball where CUSA is on the periphery of P5, or like football where CUSA is simply the worst?

I agree the status of these secondary sports probably aren't "homeruns" or "A"s, but I think they are adequate when assessing JK's performance. Even if we had two top25 teams in our secondary sports, it wouldn't cover up 10% of the despair associated with the 3 primaries. It would take nothing short of a national title in the secondaries or a deep NCAA run for women's bb to add some shine to the primaries at the moment.

I agree that in the overall scheme, yes we need to deal with the DC-3 thats about to mow the treetops before the interior. But given that we kicked the can down the road for most of JKs tenure on football and seemingly weren't prepared for Rhoades leaving in MBB, it isn't like he has made the DC3 airworthy yet either. Am just holding JK to the standard HE set, which was top 25 in all sports. And by that metric (which he set), it has been a disaster.

I still cannot see anyone handing out an A (not directed at you). I think the DPRK analogy is spot on - if you don't know any better, then sure this is an A worthy performance compared to some of the yahoos we have had in the past. Look beyond the myopic view of the hedges, not so much.

(05-02-2018 02:27 PM)BSWBRice Wrote:  I was a big fan when he was hired (had the pedigree, said all the right things), and he's far from a Greenspan-level atrocity, but as time moves on I've come to terms with the fact that he's not the "savior" I'd hoped for.

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  Just based on this board, I think people ride the AD too hard and do not place enough blame at the feet of Leebron and the BoT for not committing appropriate resources (ie money) to D1 sports. We are building a $100million opera house than only seats 1,000 people (just think of that in terms of what the $/sqft construction cost is and $/seat cost)...not like we can't launch gobs of money out the window for frivolous pursuits of notoriety because that is happening all over campus for the last 10 years. If they can't commit to an appropriate funding level for D1 athletics and participate in athletics at a level that our peers do (Stanford, Northwestern) we should shut the athletics down and spend the money and real estate on something else. This poor boy approach just looks bad.

Cosign both of these. Rice is frustratingly unique amongst its private and public Div. I peers in both actively disdaining the very real and positive institutional benefits that can come from having a healthy and highly visible (read: in a P5 conference) athletics program, and yet also declining to associate with a just-as-renowned group of peers in Div. III at far lesser cost. Instead we opt, whether by commission or omission, for this limbo of Div. I in-name-only with high cost and no return.

Limbo, if you remember your Dante, is actually a part of hell, not separate from it. There is no earning your way out of hell, and there is no winning our way from CUSA back to respectability. This level is nothing but a negative feedback loop. Think you can create a powerhouse football team from here? Well, the structure of the system literally would prevent even a 13-0 CUSA team from making the playoff, so talent will always gravitate toward higher levels and we will forever simply oscillate around mediocrity. Think you can jumpstart things with basketball? Not when this level will always be a net loser in transfers, a de facto farm system. And baseball (to say nothing of the other sports), no matter how successful, simply cannot move the needle in terms of conference alignment.

We've let the P5 train go so far off down the tracks that it would take our equivalent of a Manhattan Project to go chase it down, and yet even now it's actually not the money that would be lacking for that but the will. This place is so deeply ambivalent about how to "do" athletics. And really, it has been so for a long time -- even when I was in school (1987-91), pre-SWC breakup and the nuclear winter that has ensued for us, there was something almost counter-cultural about going to games and generally caring about sports. It certainly wasn't something a majority of kids did, and clearly it's gotten worse over time. And frankly, I don't blame today's kids for not giving a flip about whether we beat schools they never heard of and have no connection with.

What we really have always needed was somebody to grab this place by the lapels and shake it out of its stupor and make it see the light. One way is for a billionaire alum to do it but we haven't gotten lucky in that regard (yet - hope springs eternal). The BOT is divided. Leebron isn't that guy -- "supportive," yes, but not a passionate advocate.

Then along came the young go-getter from Stanford, the absolute paradigm of what we could hope to achieve, and I hoped he brought the secret sauce recipe with him but at almost 5 years in I think we can call it and say he didn't.

And maybe it was always unfair to expect any AD to be "that guy" given the AD's relatively low place in the power structure for Rice University -- since our problem is only solvable at the Rice University level, not the Rice Athletics level -- but at any rate he just is not a transformative figure. He is at best tinkering around the margins and otherwise is destined for a legacy as nothing more than a caretaker. (Cue the Simpsons "caretaker presidents" song! "Adequate, forgettable, occasionally regrettable...")

(05-03-2018 01:12 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 02:27 PM)BSWBRice Wrote:  I was a big fan when he was hired (had the pedigree, said all the right things), and he's far from a Greenspan-level atrocity, but as time moves on I've come to terms with the fact that he's not the "savior" I'd hoped for.

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  Just based on this board, I think people ride the AD too hard and do not place enough blame at the feet of Leebron and the BoT for not committing appropriate resources (ie money) to D1 sports. We are building a $100million opera house than only seats 1,000 people (just think of that in terms of what the $/sqft construction cost is and $/seat cost)...not like we can't launch gobs of money out the window for frivolous pursuits of notoriety because that is happening all over campus for the last 10 years. If they can't commit to an appropriate funding level for D1 athletics and participate in athletics at a level that our peers do (Stanford, Northwestern) we should shut the athletics down and spend the money and real estate on something else. This poor boy approach just looks bad.

Cosign both of these. Rice is frustratingly unique amongst its private and public Div. I peers in both actively disdaining the very real and positive institutional benefits that can come from having a healthy and highly visible (read: in a P5 conference) athletics program, and yet also declining to associate with a just-as-renowned group of peers in Div. III at far lesser cost. Instead we opt, whether by commission or omission, for this limbo of Div. I in-name-only with high cost and no return.

Limbo, if you remember your Dante, is actually a part of hell, not separate from it. There is no earning your way out of hell, and there is no winning our way from CUSA back to respectability. This level is nothing but a negative feedback loop. Think you can create a powerhouse football team from here? Well, the structure of the system literally would prevent even a 13-0 CUSA team from making the playoff, so talent will always gravitate toward higher levels and we will forever simply oscillate around mediocrity. Think you can jumpstart things with basketball? Not when this level will always be a net loser in transfers, a de facto farm system. And baseball (to say nothing of the other sports), no matter how successful, simply cannot move the needle in terms of conference alignment.

We've let the P5 train go so far off down the tracks that it would take our equivalent of a Manhattan Project to go chase it down, and yet even now it's actually not the money that would be lacking for that but the will. This place is so deeply ambivalent about how to "do" athletics. And really, it has been so for a long time -- even when I was in school (1987-91), pre-SWC breakup and the nuclear winter that has ensued for us, there was something almost counter-cultural about going to games and generally caring about sports. It certainly wasn't something a majority of kids did, and clearly it's gotten worse over time. And frankly, I don't blame today's kids for not giving a flip about whether we beat schools they never heard of and have no connection with.

What we really have always needed was somebody to grab this place by the lapels and shake it out of its stupor and make it see the light. One way is for a billionaire alum to do it but we haven't gotten lucky in that regard (yet - hope springs eternal). The BOT is divided. Leebron isn't that guy -- "supportive," yes, but not a passionate advocate.

Then along came the young go-getter from Stanford, the absolute paradigm of what we could hope to achieve, and I hoped he brought the secret sauce recipe with him but at almost 5 years in I think we can call it and say he didn't.

And maybe it was always unfair to expect any AD to be "that guy" given the AD's relatively low place in the power structure for Rice University -- since our problem is only solvable at the Rice University level, not the Rice Athletics level -- but at any rate he just is not a transformative figure. He is at best tinkering around the margins and otherwise is destined for a legacy as nothing more than a caretaker. (Cue the Simpsons "caretaker presidents" song! "Adequate, forgettable, occasionally regrettable...")

Great post, and I think it's all true.
Perhaps discounting his apparent introversion (mentioned by those closer to the program than I am) I think JK's doing the best that could be expected with the hand he's been dealt. All of the detractors here simply have the unreasonable expectation that the hand should be won, whether you hold a pair of deuces or a straight flush.

So yeah, I guess an A+ would be awarded to the savior who could convince the President and BOT to undertake the institutional equivalent of a Marshall Plan for Athletics....something that of course even CDC didn't come close to accomplishing....

(05-03-2018 03:03 PM)Barney Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 01:12 PM)illiniowl Wrote:  

(05-02-2018 02:27 PM)BSWBRice Wrote:  I was a big fan when he was hired (had the pedigree, said all the right things), and he's far from a Greenspan-level atrocity, but as time moves on I've come to terms with the fact that he's not the "savior" I'd hoped for.

(05-02-2018 04:33 PM)flash3200 Wrote:  Just based on this board, I think people ride the AD too hard and do not place enough blame at the feet of Leebron and the BoT for not committing appropriate resources (ie money) to D1 sports. We are building a $100million opera house than only seats 1,000 people (just think of that in terms of what the $/sqft construction cost is and $/seat cost)...not like we can't launch gobs of money out the window for frivolous pursuits of notoriety because that is happening all over campus for the last 10 years. If they can't commit to an appropriate funding level for D1 athletics and participate in athletics at a level that our peers do (Stanford, Northwestern) we should shut the athletics down and spend the money and real estate on something else. This poor boy approach just looks bad.

Cosign both of these. Rice is frustratingly unique amongst its private and public Div. I peers in both actively disdaining the very real and positive institutional benefits that can come from having a healthy and highly visible (read: in a P5 conference) athletics program, and yet also declining to associate with a just-as-renowned group of peers in Div. III at far lesser cost. Instead we opt, whether by commission or omission, for this limbo of Div. I in-name-only with high cost and no return.

Limbo, if you remember your Dante, is actually a part of hell, not separate from it. There is no earning your way out of hell, and there is no winning our way from CUSA back to respectability. This level is nothing but a negative feedback loop. Think you can create a powerhouse football team from here? Well, the structure of the system literally would prevent even a 13-0 CUSA team from making the playoff, so talent will always gravitate toward higher levels and we will forever simply oscillate around mediocrity. Think you can jumpstart things with basketball? Not when this level will always be a net loser in transfers, a de facto farm system. And baseball (to say nothing of the other sports), no matter how successful, simply cannot move the needle in terms of conference alignment.

We've let the P5 train go so far off down the tracks that it would take our equivalent of a Manhattan Project to go chase it down, and yet even now it's actually not the money that would be lacking for that but the will. This place is so deeply ambivalent about how to "do" athletics. And really, it has been so for a long time -- even when I was in school (1987-91), pre-SWC breakup and the nuclear winter that has ensued for us, there was something almost counter-cultural about going to games and generally caring about sports. It certainly wasn't something a majority of kids did, and clearly it's gotten worse over time. And frankly, I don't blame today's kids for not giving a flip about whether we beat schools they never heard of and have no connection with.

What we really have always needed was somebody to grab this place by the lapels and shake it out of its stupor and make it see the light. One way is for a billionaire alum to do it but we haven't gotten lucky in that regard (yet - hope springs eternal). The BOT is divided. Leebron isn't that guy -- "supportive," yes, but not a passionate advocate.

Then along came the young go-getter from Stanford, the absolute paradigm of what we could hope to achieve, and I hoped he brought the secret sauce recipe with him but at almost 5 years in I think we can call it and say he didn't.

And maybe it was always unfair to expect any AD to be "that guy" given the AD's relatively low place in the power structure for Rice University -- since our problem is only solvable at the Rice University level, not the Rice Athletics level -- but at any rate he just is not a transformative figure. He is at best tinkering around the margins and otherwise is destined for a legacy as nothing more than a caretaker. (Cue the Simpsons "caretaker presidents" song! "Adequate, forgettable, occasionally regrettable...")

Great post, and I think it's all true.
Perhaps discounting his apparent introversion (mentioned by those closer to the program than I am) I think JK's doing the best that could be expected with the hand he's been dealt. All of the detractors here simply have the unreasonable expectation that the hand should be won, whether you hold a pair of deuces or a straight flush.

So yeah, I guess an A+ would be awarded to the savior who could convince the President and BOT to undertake the institutional equivalent of a Marshall Plan for Athletics....something that of course even CDC didn't come close to accomplishing....

What was that phrase Owl #s keeps using? Losing is okay as long as you have a good enough excuse?

Nail, meet hammer.

As an outsider (non-alum) who has followed Rice athletics fairly closely from the Bobby May AD days I think that the work that JK has accomplished has been significant as an Athletic Director.

We have seen upgraded facilities (Football facility, new turf for the outside practice field thru the NFL Superbowl agreement), upgraded locker rooms (and I think weight room) at Tudor/Autry and renovations for other sports in the building. New Tennis facilities and upgrades to Reckling Park have all been accomplished under his administration.

Non-revenue sports have been competitive and several have won conference championships over the past 4+ years. His hire of Coach Langley seems to have worked wonders for woman's basketball, who could compete for an NCAA bid next year. I personally believe he made a poor choice with Coach Rhoades, as he (thru his agent) actively looked for another coaching job each of the 3 years he was at South Main. That does not create a stable team environment. I think Coach Pera did an admirable job this past year, winning 7 and having the team in position to possibly win an 7 additional games, without a great amount of talent. We saw tremendous development of Freshmen Osborne and Hunter, but I am concerned about the transfers in the program still....so the jury is out on men's basketball. He set a goal for the football program and he terminated the coaching staff when they could not achieve success. I understand many thought it took too long. I thought he treated the former coaching staff fairly. Further, he is finding increased resources to allow the new coaching staff the ability to recruit nationally for football talent. Coach Bailiff's believed that he could win by investing his recruiting resources almost exclusively in Texas.

The student athletes continue to graduate at rates well above other schools in D-1 Sports and the teams continue to win academic achievement awards from the NCAA and CUSA. This is a continuation of a strong tradition at Rice for their student athletes, but it has continued under JK's leadership.

It is my understanding that the department has continued to improve in fund raising and (according to my conversations with some of the AD staff) season ticket sales have improved every year over the past 4 years for both football and men's basketball. That is not stating that sales are where they need to be, but they have continually improved. Game day experience at the sporting events I have attended (primarily basketball and a few baseball and football games) is much improved from the previous administration. I think the department has improved the quality and professionalism of their administrative and marketing staff as well. Marketing is much improved during his tenure as well as overall communication. JK is clearly not the gregarious Chris DelConte, but I think he has been a good listener and has methodically upgraded much of the Athletic program. Also, JK's audio blog is actually interesting to listen to, and it seems to provide a great deal of information.

That said, it does not mean that things can be improved or that everything is excellent in the program under JK's watch. National and local (earned) media exposure for the various programs is an area I think the current AD and department have failed to improve. The decision to no longer broadcast basketball games over the radio airwaves is the wrong one in my opinion and the on-line audio and video product execution have been mediocre. I also think the lack of focus on the Spanish speaking market in Houston is a huge missed opportunity. I know many supporters that chide other schools for their "Wal-Mart" fans (non students or non former students). Rice does not have that luxury. Rice needs thousands of "Wal-Mart Owl;" fans to come to the games and create an electric atmosphere at Tudor/Autry and Rice Stadium, as well as providing much needed revenue. It means positioning Rice as an Aspirational Brand (something you will want to be), not an Exclusive/Exclusionary Brand in the market. Rice Athletics marketing has a long way to go to create that level of brand relevancy.

The Rice AD has not been able to improve the current conference affiliation and/or positively influence CUSA and their members to improve their overall conference standings as a non P-5 conference. The new national TV Contract is horrible for CUSA men's hoops and football and the decision by several CUSA schools not to participate in the CBI or CIT post season basketball tournaments in 2017 was awful. Conference exposure is essential to growth and CUSA is doing a poor job. I would want my AD to be the vocal leader among the AD's pushing the conference to improve and make sure other schools don't make decisions like the schools did with those tournaments. I don't have any evidence that JK is positioned himself as a "leader" among the conference AD's or CUSA administration (I also have no evidence that he has not done so either....).

Despite these areas to improve I believe that JK has done a good job overall. I am glad he is at Rice.

Nice assessment

(05-03-2018 04:55 PM)Barney Wrote:  Nice assessment

Agree. Completely.

(05-03-2018 04:40 PM)Kayjay Wrote:  I would want my AD to be the vocal leader among the AD's pushing the conference to improve ...

What do you think about President Leebron not being a publicly vocal leader/advocate for improving the plight of the D1-majority non-P5 schools when he was recently on the D1 Board of Directors? An unwinnable battle not worth fighting -- or a missed opportunity?

(05-03-2018 05:04 PM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 04:55 PM)Barney Wrote:  Nice assessment

Agree. Completely.

+1

(05-03-2018 05:38 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 04:40 PM)Kayjay Wrote:  I would want my AD to be the vocal leader among the AD's pushing the conference to improve ...

What do you think about President Leebron not being a publicly vocal leader/advocate for improving the plight of the D1-majority non-P5 schools when he was recently on the D1 Board of Directors? An unwinnable battle not worth fighting -- or a missed opportunity?

That is a great, great question. David Leebron is not the "force of nature" that the late Dr. Gillis was within academic leadership circles or within the NCAA, but I do not know the challenges/opportunities he faced when he was on the D-1 BOD. That would be a great question to ask Dr. K and David on JK's podcast.

(05-03-2018 04:40 PM)Kayjay Wrote:  I would want my AD to be the vocal leader among the AD's pushing the conference to improve ...

Most of the stated dissatisfaction with the conference seems to less about the other schools' programs and more that they are simply schools we would rather not be associated with. It's hard to see how that point would get much traction as a rallying cry for the other members.

The challenge he probably faced was that the P5 want to hog almost all the money and recognition. The P5 schools will take their ball and go elsewhere if they do not get what they want. The trend since the 1980s has been that fewer schools have been allowed to compete on the top level.

(05-07-2018 09:46 AM)Kayjay Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 05:38 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 04:40 PM)Kayjay Wrote:  I would want my AD to be the vocal leader among the AD's pushing the conference to improve ...

What do you think about President Leebron not being a publicly vocal leader/advocate for improving the plight of the D1-majority non-P5 schools when he was recently on the D1 Board of Directors? An unwinnable battle not worth fighting -- or a missed opportunity?

That is a great, great question. David Leebron is not the "force of nature" that the late Dr. Gillis was within academic leadership circles or within the NCAA, but I do not know the challenges/opportunities he faced when he was on the D-1 BOD. That would be a great question to ask Dr. K and David on JK's podcast.