(10-03-2014 04:21 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  1. The ESPN contract, which is the remnants of the old Big East contract, expires this season. I very much doubt ESPN is going to re-up, especially with Louisville and Syracuse now in the ACC.

2. Since when does UCF, South Florida, UH, Memphis, Tulane, Cincy and ECU have greater name recognition. Yes, most are bigger schools than Rice with far bigger alumni bases, but none of them (save for perhaps ECU) attracts large attendence figures and none of them boast big TV audiences. Yes, they are a far superior basketball conference, but basketball really doesn't drive conference alignment despite being the #2 revenue sport with the #2 TV market.

The AAC's deal with ESPN was a multiyear deal only signed last year?

Those schools have greater name recognition the moment they're compared to the FCS startups and SunBelt teams that now dominate CUSA.

Several of those schools are among the largest drawing for attendance in the G5.

Basketball $$ is a big deal for the have-nots.

(10-03-2014 12:38 PM)Pimpa Wrote:  If true, that would bring the Big 12 up to 14 teams (on par with the SEC, ACC and B1G) and completely decimate the AAC, leaving it with 7 schools - 4 private schools (SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and Temple) and 3 big publics (UH, Memphis, USF). The question would then become, where does that leave Rice? Is CUSA, as constituted, a better fit than what would remain of the AAC if this were to happen? Would the AAC even want to add Rice? Would Rice want to leave CUSA for that version of AAC? Would any other conferences want to add teams? Is the Big 12 an option at all for Rice? Its commissioner, Bob Bowlsby, worked with Dr. Karlgaard when both were at Stanford.

Lots of uncertainty there. What I am certain of is that with Dr. Karlgaard's vision out in the open, Rice's recent athletic success, academic pedigree, and a stated willingness from the AD to improve our athletic lot, Rice will not be relegated to derisively commenting on others' use of "sandwich boards" to improve their lot. Rice will be active. We may not be successful, but I have faith that Dr. K will try to get Rice into the best situation possible.

This makes a very good point. As long as Dr. K is at the reins, I think we are in good hands. It will take him some time to overcome the hole previous ADs have dug us in to. My only concern is that Dr K leaves for greener pastures before his efforts bear fruit. He is clearly a guy destined for really big things.

(10-03-2014 02:16 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Hasn't UH sworn to oppose any attempt to add Rice to the AAC? But if they do drop to seven teams not much point in going there unless one of several schools.

I didn't know that happened. Do you know why?

(10-03-2014 05:30 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 04:21 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  1. The ESPN contract, which is the remnants of the old Big East contract, expires this season. I very much doubt ESPN is going to re-up, especially with Louisville and Syracuse now in the ACC.

2. Since when does UCF, South Florida, UH, Memphis, Tulane, Cincy and ECU have greater name recognition. Yes, most are bigger schools than Rice with far bigger alumni bases, but none of them (save for perhaps ECU) attracts large attendence figures and none of them boast big TV audiences. Yes, they are a far superior basketball conference, but basketball really doesn't drive conference alignment despite being the #2 revenue sport with the #2 TV market.

The AAC's deal with ESPN was a multiyear deal only signed last year?

Those schools have greater name recognition the moment they're compared to the FCS startups and SunBelt teams that now dominate CUSA.

Several of those schools are among the largest drawing for attendance in the G5.

Basketball $$ is a big deal for the have-nots.

You do realize both UCF and South Florida are former Sun Belt teams, as well?

And I believe the ESPN 5-year contract expires this year.

UConn and Memphis have name recognition in basketball only. The others don't have name recognition any moreso than current CUSA team, and you're kidding yourself if you think they do.

I find it VERY hard to believe the Big 12 (let alone UT) would vote in favor of expanding with UCF, Cincy, UConn an ECU, as they do absolutely nothing to their brand or their revenue in take. In fact, doing so would diminish per school revenue and tarnish the brand, not to mention significantly increase traveling expenses. Sorry, makes no sense whatsoever.

(10-03-2014 03:30 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 02:16 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Hasn't UH sworn to oppose any attempt to add Rice to the AAC? But if they do drop to seven teams not much point in going there unless one of several schools.

Again I'll ask the question-- why in the world would Rice want to join the AAC? For the umteenth time-- it's NOT an upgrade...and NEVER was!

Walt, being in a league with the likes of Florida International, Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee State, etc., etc. is more than an embarrassment; it drags down the national perception of the school.

I thought you had an interesting point referring to a potential negative halo effect on Rice's being located in Texas...at least among East Coast and West Coast school admins and guidance counselors.

In similar fashion, did you see the minor bit of research I did on Rice's conference affiliation and USNWR standing? (When in SWC, 8-12; when in old WAC/mid CUSA, 12-17; when in currently constituted C-USA, 19.)

As far as nationwide perception is concerned, we'd be more highly regarded if we went to division 3 and played U Chicago or for that matter if we didn't play at all.

Being in this current league .... is suicidal. SMU, Tulane, Tulsa aren't any better in their Massey ratings, but they are somewhat better in the national perception than our current unions with FIU, FAU, MTSU, etc.

We lost the only other American Association of Universities (AAU)member when Tulane left the conference. The AAU consists of the top 60 research universities in the US and Canada. Tulane is the only AAU member in the American Athletic Conference so it is no big advantage to switch. Chicago and Washington of St. Louis will now be affiliate members of the Southern Athletic Conference for football and will be the only AAU members of that conference. The Big 12 has 3 AAU members-UT, Kansas and Iowa State. The SEC has 4-Texas A&M, Missouri, Florida and Vanderbilt.

(10-03-2014 07:39 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 03:30 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 02:16 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  Hasn't UH sworn to oppose any attempt to add Rice to the AAC? But if they do drop to seven teams not much point in going there unless one of several schools.

Again I'll ask the question-- why in the world would Rice want to join the AAC? For the umteenth time-- it's NOT an upgrade...and NEVER was!

Walt, being in a league with the likes of Florida International, Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee State, etc., etc. is more than an embarrassment; it drags down the national perception of the school.

I thought you had an interesting point referring to a potential negative halo effect on Rice's being located in Texas...at least among East Coast and West Coast school admins and guidance counselors.

In similar fashion, did you see the minor bit of research I did on Rice's conference affiliation and USNWR standing? (When in SWC, 8-12; when in old WAC/mid CUSA, 12-17; when in currently constituted C-USA, 19.)

As far as nationwide perception is concerned, we'd be more highly regarded if we went to division 3 and played U Chicago or for that matter if we didn't play at all.

Being in this current league .... is suicidal. SMU, Tulane, Tulsa aren't any better in their Massey ratings, but they are somewhat better in the national perception than our current unions with FIU, FAU, MTSU, etc.

(10-03-2014 04:49 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Oh yeah and one more thing for the UH crowd, I have been wildly overwhelmed with the sellout crowds at whatever the name of that new stadium is.....

Wow, according to Wikipedia, they're averaging 30k in their 40k-seat stadium. I had just assumed that they were going to get one season worth of sellouts at their new place. But so far it's one sellout in four games.

To anyone who thinks stadium enhancements are going to fix our attendance problems, UH's experience has to be... sobering.

(10-03-2014 07:39 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Walt, being in a league with the likes of Florida International, Western Kentucky, Middle Tennessee State, etc., etc. is more than an embarrassment; it drags down the national perception of the school.

In similar fashion, did you see the minor bit of research I did on Rice's conference affiliation and USNWR standing? (When in SWC, 8-12; when in old WAC/mid CUSA, 12-17; when in currently constituted C-USA, 19.)

Being in this current league .... is suicidal. SMU, Tulane, Tulsa aren't any better in their Massey ratings, but they are somewhat better in the national perception than our current unions with FIU, FAU, MTSU, etc.

+1000

I don't care if it's a depleted AAC, Rice should affiliate with SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa over CUSA 3.0. Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane are significantly better in national perception than LaTech, UTSA, FIU, etc.

(10-03-2014 09:44 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 04:49 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Oh yeah and one more thing for the UH crowd, I have been wildly overwhelmed with the sellout crowds at whatever the name of that new stadium is.....

Wow, according to Wikipedia, they're averaging 30k in their 40k-seat stadium. I had just assumed that they were going to get one season worth of sellouts at their new place. But so far it's one sellout in four games.

To anyone who thinks stadium enhancements are going to fix our attendance problems, UH's experience has to be... sobering.

UH's loss to UTSA killed casual fan interest. Sound familiar?

(10-03-2014 03:49 PM)Converted Rice Wrote:  Will not happen unless the Big 12 is forced to have a conference championship game. The teams mentioned don't bring extra TV dollars and Big 12 members will not vote for a salary decrease. A lot of people think the ACC may implode at some point due to far lower TV payout than the other conferences and the Big 12 will pick up Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech and one other.

Of all the suggested scenarios for Big 12 expansion, I think this is the most likely. In this era, the thing driving conference re-alignment is revenue, and revenue derives mainly from TV markets. No conference is going to add any school unless it believes that school can improve the overall revenue flow to its current members. Grabbing those ACC teams (maybe along with Miami) would do that much better than the AAC teams would (and, inter alia, would make Rice to the ACC a more distinct possibility...).

The one wild card in this scenario is Texas. With the establishment of the Longhorn Network, UT is positioning itself for a possible move to being a football independent, as the other two schools with their own networks to broadcast football games are also football independents. The main impediment to doing this is the status of the non-revenue sports, but Texas earns so much revenue overall in athletics that it might be rich enough to pull off independence in all sports. Take UT out of the Big 12, and things get really interesting....

All of the talk about this league is terrible, or that league would be better, or debating whether we should go here or there, overlooks one important fact--right now, this is the only league on the planet that wants us.

We are not dominating this league. In our ninth year in this league, we've won exactly one championship in the major revenue sports that drive things (football, men's basketball). That's also the first championship in those sports in any league in 19 years, and the first outright championship in 43 years. That resume does not create options. Change that first, then complain about our conference.

(10-03-2014 05:19 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  117. SMU (0-4)

Wow. SMU's not last? Who is worse than the Ponies this year?

Sorry I think this is a bunch of garbage. No way this will happen


Hasn't UH sworn to oppose any attempt to add Rice to the AAC? But if they do drop to seven teams not much point in going there unless one of several schools.
[/quote]

Again I'll ask the question-- why in the world would Rice want to join the AAC? For the umteenth time-- it's NOT an upgrade!
[/quote]

I agree with you.
[/quote]

(10-03-2014 09:44 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 04:49 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  Oh yeah and one more thing for the UH crowd, I have been wildly overwhelmed with the sellout crowds at whatever the name of that new stadium is.....

Wow, according to Wikipedia, they're averaging 30k in their 40k-seat stadium. I had just assumed that they were going to get one season worth of sellouts at their new place. But so far it's one sellout in four games.

To anyone who thinks stadium enhancements are going to fix our attendance problems, UH's experience has to be... sobering.

We saw this with Apogee as well. EZF or new stadium would be nice, but is likely to do diddly squat to fix our issues.

I think this is simple in the same sense that baseball is simply game of hitting the ball, catching the ball, and throwing the ball. We just need to win. The rest comes along with it. Believe it or not, I think it may be starting. When I talk to outsiders, ie non-Rice affiliated folks, because we've been to bowls 2 years in a row and won one of them, these folks actually think our program is on the rise. If we keep winning, then Dr. K needs to be ready to capitalize on this success, both with marketing to get our brand out there and to get more people in our stadium, and trying to improve our position in the NCAA landscape. However, I think for now, ie the next 1-3 years, the only thing we can do is keep winning. Would also help if Coach Rhoades can make a turnaround in basketball.

(10-04-2014 02:59 PM)owl95 Wrote:  I think this is simple in the same sense that baseball is simply game of hitting the ball, catching the ball, and throwing the ball. We just need to win. The rest comes along with it. Believe it or not, I think it may be starting. When I talk to outsiders, ie non-Rice affiliated folks, because we've been to bowls 2 years in a row and won one of them, these folks actually think our program is on the rise. If we keep winning, then Dr. K needs to be ready to capitalize on this success, both with marketing to get our brand out there and to get more people in our stadium, and trying to improve our position in the NCAA landscape. However, I think for now, ie the next 1-3 years, the only thing we can do is keep winning. Would also help if Coach Rhoades can make a turnaround in basketball.

Agree. It will take more than just winning, but winning is the key ingredient.

(10-04-2014 03:49 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Change that first, then complain about our conference.

This. And today is one step on that long road. Go Owls.




Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(10-04-2014 03:05 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-04-2014 02:59 PM)owl95 Wrote:  I think this is simple in the same sense that baseball is simply game of hitting the ball, catching the ball, and throwing the ball. We just need to win. The rest comes along with it. Believe it or not, I think it may be starting. When I talk to outsiders, ie non-Rice affiliated folks, because we've been to bowls 2 years in a row and won one of them, these folks actually think our program is on the rise. If we keep winning, then Dr. K needs to be ready to capitalize on this success, both with marketing to get our brand out there and to get more people in our stadium, and trying to improve our position in the NCAA landscape. However, I think for now, ie the next 1-3 years, the only thing we can do is keep winning. Would also help if Coach Rhoades can make a turnaround in basketball.

Agree. It will take more than just winning, but winning is the key ingredient.

We also need to make sure that our losses don't come against teams that have no business beating us. Like a first-year FBS team or something.

Oh, whoops... Too late.

(10-04-2014 09:51 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 05:19 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  117. SMU (0-4)

Wow. SMU's not last? Who is worse than the Ponies this year?

SMU played a respectable game @,East Carolina today, losing 45-24.

(10-04-2014 05:03 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(10-04-2014 09:51 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(10-03-2014 05:19 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  117. SMU (0-4)

Wow. SMU's not last? Who is worse than the Ponies this year?

SMU played a respectable game @,East Carolina today, losing 45-24.

Helps getting the boat anchor removed from around their necks. Now if the money folks who paid June (& Larry) don't do the unthinkable and hire Mack Brown and instead go for a young assistant they may rebound in five or so years.