Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
Author Message
Almadenmike Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,573
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 161
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: San Jose, Calif.

DonatorsNew Orleans BowlDonators
Post: #181
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-14-2021 03:09 PM)Musicowl1965 Wrote:  Agree 100%. However, before the Rice Endowment ... The Rice Endowment is a step in the right direction ...

Typo for The Rice Investment?
04-15-2021 06:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gsloth Offline
perpetually tired
*

Posts: 6,654
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rice&underdogs
Location: Central VA

Donators
Post: #182
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-15-2021 05:27 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  Shepherd might not be the best point of comparison for Rice, either. It's comfortably a top 10, often top 5 program. A French horn from Rice is far more likely to get past the first hiring screen for an orchestra than one from somewhere like Texas Tech. Visual and Dramatic Arts is probably better illustrative at Rice.

Also, to calibrate the scale better, the League of American Orchestras counted 1,600 501©3 orchestras in the United States in 2017. About 2/3 of them have total budgets under $300k, reflecting the low average earning potential. I also found a citation on Statista (paywalled) that indicated music has the third worst mid-career median pay of all master's degrees, above counseling and social work but behind education and library science. I couldn't find anything specifically about how many graduates music schools produce any given year or how many jobs there are. Still, between 1,600 orchestras, I'd expect every top 10 school graduate to get a job relatively quickly (I know it's not easy, but something should fall into place).

I wonder how many of those smaller orchestras are community orchestras (or bands, though that obviously doesn't fit your direct comparison). I'd guess a lot (most?) of those with budgets under $300k are probably made up of community players of varying talent, but lots of desire.

This is still an interesting thought experiment.

Also, don't forget the military does get quite a few quality musicians to join up for their various bands. Not sure how many bands there are total, but it's not just the top tier ones we see in various national broadcasts.
04-15-2021 07:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,279
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #183
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-15-2021 07:16 PM)gsloth Wrote:  
(04-15-2021 05:27 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  Shepherd might not be the best point of comparison for Rice, either. It's comfortably a top 10, often top 5 program. A French horn from Rice is far more likely to get past the first hiring screen for an orchestra than one from somewhere like Texas Tech. Visual and Dramatic Arts is probably better illustrative at Rice.

Also, to calibrate the scale better, the League of American Orchestras counted 1,600 501©3 orchestras in the United States in 2017. About 2/3 of them have total budgets under $300k, reflecting the low average earning potential. I also found a citation on Statista (paywalled) that indicated music has the third worst mid-career median pay of all master's degrees, above counseling and social work but behind education and library science. I couldn't find anything specifically about how many graduates music schools produce any given year or how many jobs there are. Still, between 1,600 orchestras, I'd expect every top 10 school graduate to get a job relatively quickly (I know it's not easy, but something should fall into place).

I wonder how many of those smaller orchestras are community orchestras (or bands, though that obviously doesn't fit your direct comparison). I'd guess a lot (most?) of those with budgets under $300k are probably made up of community players of varying talent, but lots of desire.

This is still an interesting thought experiment.

Also, don't forget the military does get quite a few quality musicians to join up for their various bands. Not sure how many bands there are total, but it's not just the top tier ones we see in various national broadcasts.

I often use performing arts as an example especially when compared to athletics. You can get a degree in dance, but not basketball. I see both as artistic human performance... with one having a more clear 'competitive' outcome... but be serious... competitive dance is a huge business. I married a shp school music grad, who became a lawyer... vocal performance... but not signing. The skills still translate, but she is not a musician. She also (like lots of athletes) got a poli sci degree. Skills from athletics similarly translate to lots of industries. Lots of majors don't teach you how to 'be on a stage' or 'perform in front of others' or 'be part of a team' or 'sacrifice your performance for the team' (the star who plays decoy all game)... which can be invaluable skills.

This is where RICE is a huge advantage... because even if you're a music/french horn player and can't find fulfilling employment in that field... people still can take those performance skills and dedication, and look favorably on your other classes. You can get a great music degree at other places, but if you're not using it for music... the reputations of those other schools aren't as valuable.

Like sports, there is potentially much more to a music degree than simply learning how to play.

I'm not suggesting we create a football degree... that would be exploited so quickly its not funny... I'm merely suggesting that athletics is much more than a hobby. It IS a performing art... and D1 athletes are the 'elite' in their fields of performance.
04-16-2021 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Musicowl1965 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 441
Joined: Aug 2017
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #184
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-15-2021 03:30 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(04-15-2021 03:14 PM)Musicowl1965 Wrote:  
(04-15-2021 02:47 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(04-15-2021 02:28 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(04-15-2021 10:44 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  You're right that your example isn't what I'm talking about. In your example, I agree that the extra semester or year of tuition is NOT an investment in one's future. But why is that even a concern when it comes to affordability?

In that instance (which seems to be a really specific example and one that likely occurs infrequently), why should we care that Rice, a private university, is affordable in a way to avoid any loans, for a family whose student is going to it as a hobby?

People attending a school like Rice, which provides a top tier education, are investing in their future regardless of the major they choose - it just turns out some investments are either less risky or have a different ROI.

This isn't a defense of the increase in tuition across the board, and the burdens it adds to families. It's a comment on how relying on families taking out loans of a certain amount doesn't seem like a bad idea to an extent. I don't know how Rice does it, but it would be nice if they capped tuition responsibility in a more reasonable manner that didn't require a solidly middle class household to take out $50k loans each year. But $20k a year? That seems reasonable for the potential investment (but frankly, how people want to spend that investment is up to them).

That was only part of my comment... but it was certainly the only one that was really about RIce. Nobody would argue that a Rice education isn't worth more than most others... that is demonstrable... and Rice may have a few, but it doesn't have a lot of 'dead end' majors in terms of employment, partially because the quality of even a course you take as an elective... said differently, a BASIC Poli Sci course for non-majors at Rice is better than many 'for major' Poli Sci courses at many Universities.... not as in 'our 121 = their 401', but as in our 121 is better than their 101, and maybe better than their 201.

So an Art History major from Rice who finds limited outlets for their degree upon graduation can still likely leverage their business or Pol Sci courses, plus the general reputation of the University into a better position than an Art History major from many other schools.

So in terms of the frequency, I'd say that what I described happens more often at RIce than what happens at other schools, where they get a limited degree and can't find reasonable employment. It's one course at Rice that may extend you for one semester... it's potentially 4 years at 'the worst' schools.

You touched on specifically the reason why I didn't give a more common example... because it doesn't apply to an elite institution like RIce....

But there are THOUSANDS of universities, and many charge a whole lot for essentially worthless (from a value standpoint) majors

But we were talking about the cost of tuition at Rice and whether it was appropriate to charge that much. So I'm not sure why the fact that worse universities exist is super relevant to the conversation at hand.

But speaking broadly, I have a perspective that I'm not going to get too up in arms about any university offering degrees in fields that some define as "worthless" for a number of reasons. Those reasons range from the fact that this valuation is often based on a person's perspective (yes some degrees offer better ROIs/job opportunities, but we're talking about a secondary degree being worthless), to the fact that no one is being forced into paying a university to major in that degree, to the fact that these areas of studies are almost certainly not the driver in cost increases (but I could be wrong there). And as you said, even a degree that might be worth less than others across the board, can still be valuable coming from Rice.

So back to the original point I made, is the general perspective that Rice expects some families to take out loans an issue?

As a related aside to another comment (not made by you, but Musicowl), Rice's costs are almost certainly not increasing because we offer a BA in Women, Gender, and Sexuality (something that has been around since at least I was in school) - costs are increasing because of administrative bloat, capital projects, and frankly, because demand for higher ed is increasing (coupled with readily available loans).

i was being just a tad facetious on the gender studies but agree with your cost increasing comments (bloat, cap proj etc.). I also believe that the ease of federally backed school loans are the largest reasons why universities (including Rice, although Rice also has peer pressure!!) annually increase tuition. Why not, loans are backed up by the government what do we really have to lose. We (university) gets paid either way.

Agreed on this point about ease of loans. Kinda of a double-edged sword, as they're readily available to help ensure that someone's financial status isn't an impediment to getting a post-secondary degree, which is still the best route to the middle class (or whatever is left of it).

I think one counter to that could be truly high-quality public universities that keep tuition low for all students. Find a way to make privates compete for talent that could get a similar degree for a fraction of the cost. That being said, it would likely require an increase in public funding to recruit and attract high quality faculty.

Agree on all points.
04-16-2021 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Musicowl1965 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 441
Joined: Aug 2017
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #185
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-15-2021 06:25 PM)bigowlsfan Wrote:  What happened to athletics relevance?

I was just getting fired up enough to get my pitchfork and torch and head over to the board of trustees Merlot and Brie tasting event.

Apologies. This was my doing as I went off on a tangent on the BOT mission and costs. Back to athletics and relevance!!!
04-16-2021 11:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,279
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #186
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
Quote:But we were talking about the cost of tuition at Rice and whether it was appropriate to charge that much. So I'm not sure why the fact that worse universities exist is super relevant to the conversation at hand.

But speaking broadly, I have a perspective that I'm not going to get too up in arms about any university offering degrees in fields that some define as "worthless" for a number of reasons. Those reasons range from the fact that this valuation is often based on a person's perspective (yes some degrees offer better ROIs/job opportunities, but we're talking about a secondary degree being worthless), to the fact that no one is being forced into paying a university to major in that degree, to the fact that these areas of studies are almost certainly not the driver in cost increases (but I could be wrong there). And as you said, even a degree that might be worth less than others across the board, can still be valuable coming from Rice.

So back to the original point I made, is the general perspective that Rice expects some families to take out loans an issue?

As a related aside to another comment (not made by you, but Musicowl), Rice's costs are almost certainly not increasing because we offer a BA in Women, Gender, and Sexuality (something that has been around since at least I was in school) - costs are increasing because of administrative bloat, capital projects, and frankly, because demand for higher ed is increasing (coupled with readily available loans).

As I've said on numerous occasions, the charging of high tuition creates an opportunity for what is essentially wealth redistribution... From those that Financial aid thinks can afford to attend to those whom they do not. The presence of this feature is apparently highly valued by the services that rank schools... where a school that charges everyone 20k is rated lower than an identical school that charges 50k, but gives so much aid that the 'average' is still the same 20k.

As to the impact from other universities... IMO, most of these universities exist as a result of a 50k price tag for a Rice education making the 20k of a less stringent University look like a bargain, combined with the societal shift from valuing labors to one where we value 'degrees'... or sometimes 'letters after your name'. Sort of like how in a restaurant, they always list a $300 bottle of wine, so that the $50 bottle looks like a bargain... and you forget that you can buy that same bottle for $15 at Trader Joe's.... or more to the point, that you're paying $50 for a bottle of wine that is only worth $15.

If someone wants to spend money on learning something new, no worries. Make your choices... but inherent in the modern vernacular is the idea that ANY education is worth its cost... and that simply isn't the case.

A simple example... my daughter is taking a digital marketing class... as it is part of her degree plan, it has value. For me, it wouldn't be worth spending what she pays for her education to add that one class to my knowledge base... but I would ABSOLUTELY take that class in a different format, like at Rice continuing studies or even Leisure Learning.
04-16-2021 05:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wiessguy Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,223
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Da Owls
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #187
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
I've been thinking about the recent successes of our women's programs vs the lack of traction from the men's side. I don't disagree with much of what's already been said here and don't have much else to offer on the topics of support, coaching, conference affiliation, etc. My take is in regard to the different expectations student athletes themselves have coming into college - men vs women in general - the expectation to play professionally and the financial lure to do so. This expectation, regardless of how far-fetched given the talent of an individual, factors into the calculus of a student athlete considering Rice vs another school.

If you look at salary comparisons between men's and women's pro leagues, it's pretty stark: WNBA average salary is just a tick above $100K while NBA average salary is roughly $7 million. MLB average salaries are $6 M while pro softball is $6K. NFL average salaries are $860K while NWSL salaries average $40K (comparing more apples to apples, MLS average salaries are $345K). Men's pro sports salaries are rapidly increasing at rates where women's salaries in comparable leagues cannot compete.
I think more women athletes than men see their college sport days to be the end of the line, that playing a sport serves as a means to an end of getting a quality education. Many times a highly recruited male athlete these days sees college athletics as the opposite - using the college program to raise his profile so he can be drafted into the next level.

This is where selling a Rice education in the recruiting process factors differently between men and women. Women might just be more likely to consider Rice knowing what a Rice diploma means in the job market as their best option after graduation. They're far more likely to get a high-paying job with a diploma from Rice or, have the Rice education open up broader opportunities in the academic arena as opposed to going pro in a women's league. In reality there is no difference between men and women when it comes to a Rice diploma and the opportunities it affords. Men see a better option, even if the chances are super slim. A Rice education to men might be a secondary consideration, a fallback if you will, to obtaining a greater prize of going pro in a men's league.

There are young men out there who see the value of a Rice education, and probably have more realistic perspectives on what their pro chances are. The question is, are these the caliber of athlete that will win CUSA championships and get us into NCAA tournaments? The women's programs have proven that selling Rice works and we are reaping the benefit of selling a Rice education to excellent women athletes. I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.
04-18-2021 12:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
waltgreenberg Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 33,146
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 138
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago

The Parliament Awards
Post: #188
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-18-2021 12:42 PM)wiessguy Wrote:  I've been thinking about the recent successes of our women's programs vs the lack of traction from the men's side. I don't disagree with much of what's already been said here and don't have much else to offer on the topics of support, coaching, conference affiliation, etc. My take is in regard to the different expectations student athletes themselves have coming into college - men vs women in general - the expectation to play professionally and the financial lure to do so. This expectation, regardless of how far-fetched given the talent of an individual, factors into the calculus of a student athlete considering Rice vs another school.

If you look at salary comparisons between men's and women's pro leagues, it's pretty stark: WNBA average salary is just a tick above $100K while NBA average salary is roughly $7 million. MLB average salaries are $6 M while pro softball is $6K. NFL average salaries are $860K while NWSL salaries average $40K (comparing more apples to apples, MLS average salaries are $345K). Men's pro sports salaries are rapidly increasing at rates where women's salaries in comparable leagues cannot compete.
I think more women athletes than men see their college sport days to be the end of the line, that playing a sport serves as a means to an end of getting a quality education. Many times a highly recruited male athlete these days sees college athletics as the opposite - using the college program to raise his profile so he can be drafted into the next level.

This is where selling a Rice education in the recruiting process factors differently between men and women. Women might just be more likely to consider Rice knowing what a Rice diploma means in the job market as their best option after graduation. They're far more likely to get a high-paying job with a diploma from Rice or, have the Rice education open up broader opportunities in the academic arena as opposed to going pro in a women's league. In reality there is no difference between men and women when it comes to a Rice diploma and the opportunities it affords. Men see a better option, even if the chances are super slim. A Rice education to men might be a secondary consideration, a fallback if you will, to obtaining a greater prize of going pro in a men's league.

There are young men out there who see the value of a Rice education, and probably have more realistic perspectives on what their pro chances are. The question is, are these the caliber of athlete that will win CUSA championships and get us into NCAA tournaments? The women's programs have proven that selling Rice works and we are reaping the benefit of selling a Rice education to excellent women athletes. I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.

All true, and it doesn't hurt to have the #1 ranked sports management department in the country for those who want to have a career within the sports world.
04-18-2021 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
interwebowl Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 92
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 13
I Root For: rice coastal
Location:
Post: #189
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
Women's sports will never make men's sports better. Period. Private, highly rated institutions always attract more women than men across the board. A baseball pitcher throwing 95 in high school is not coming to Rice because of our women's tennis team! Men have gravitated to big state schools with successful athletic departments where women have preferred smaller academic campuses. This is true everywhere and has been for decades which is why it is easier for a man to gain admission to rice than a woman. With the lack of big money pro sports for women, that college degree matters more. Over the last decade it has become clear that the vast majority of male athletes are not motivated by degrees as much as winning and minimal workloads. Wayne was able to attract really bright kids because he won and at the same time offered the quality degree to recruits. In spite of that, Rice never beats the other private academic schools in head to head competitions for recruits. Stanford and Vanderbilt are much better options because of the leagues they play in (exposure) and traditions of treating staff and players right (Insert a discussion of the black eye JK has given Rice baseball here). Without the stupid pipe dream and failures of JK, Rice could have excelled at all women's sports and baseball while fielding a occasionally decent mens hoops team. Now potential male recruits see nothing but disfunction and bunch of losers. The only hope for us is to punt trying to be relevant and accept our fate in men's sports. We will suck and we will always suck so lets play people who are worse than us and win a few.
04-18-2021 07:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
wiessguy Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,223
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Da Owls
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #190
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-18-2021 07:43 PM)interwebowl Wrote:  Women's sports will never make men's sports better. Period. Private, highly rated institutions always attract more women than men across the board. A baseball pitcher throwing 95 in high school is not coming to Rice because of our women's tennis team! Men have gravitated to big state schools with successful athletic departments where women have preferred smaller academic campuses. This is true everywhere and has been for decades which is why it is easier for a man to gain admission to rice than a woman. With the lack of big money pro sports for women, that college degree matters more. Over the last decade it has become clear that the vast majority of male athletes are not motivated by degrees as much as winning and minimal workloads. Wayne was able to attract really bright kids because he won and at the same time offered the quality degree to recruits. In spite of that, Rice never beats the other private academic schools in head to head competitions for recruits. Stanford and Vanderbilt are much better options because of the leagues they play in (exposure) and traditions of treating staff and players right (Insert a discussion of the black eye JK has given Rice baseball here). Without the stupid pipe dream and failures of JK, Rice could have excelled at all women's sports and baseball while fielding a occasionally decent mens hoops team. Now potential male recruits see nothing but disfunction and bunch of losers. The only hope for us is to punt trying to be relevant and accept our fate in men's sports. We will suck and we will always suck so lets play people who are worse than us and win a few.

My point was not about using the success of women's sports to attract a higher quality of male athlete. If that's part of JK's plan then he's an idiot. I was merely pointing out differences of what male and female athletes consider in choosing a school like Rice. We do agree that motivations of male athletes are different and the tactics used to attract them should be different. If what you say is true about "minimal workload" then we really have a disconnect between a Rice degree and student athlete expectations.
04-18-2021 11:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MerseyOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,184
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 37
I Root For: The Blue & Gray
Location: Land of Dull Skies
Post: #191
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-18-2021 12:42 PM)wiessguy Wrote:  I think more women athletes than men see their college sport days to be the end of the line, that playing a sport serves as a means to an end of getting a quality education. Many times a highly recruited male athlete these days sees college athletics as the opposite - using the college program to raise his profile so he can be drafted into the next level.

This is where selling a Rice education in the recruiting process factors differently between men and women. Women might just be more likely to consider Rice knowing what a Rice diploma means in the job market as their best option after graduation. They're far more likely to get a high-paying job with a diploma from Rice or, have the Rice education open up broader opportunities in the academic arena as opposed to going pro in a women's league. In reality there is no difference between men and women when it comes to a Rice diploma and the opportunities it affords. Men see a better option, even if the chances are super slim. A Rice education to men might be a secondary consideration, a fallback if you will, to obtaining a greater prize of going pro in a men's league.

There are young men out there who see the value of a Rice education, and probably have more realistic perspectives on what their pro chances are. The question is, are these the caliber of athlete that will win CUSA championships and get us into NCAA tournaments? The women's programs have proven that selling Rice works and we are reaping the benefit of selling a Rice education to excellent women athletes. I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.

Sorry, but some women are looking at competing athletically at a high level during their university careers and not every 18/19 year old is looking at the future job market.

My sister was offered a full ride to play volleyball, but declined as at that time Rice had a "losing tradition and mentality" and "no plan for improvement". So my sister went to a 'lesser' school, played softball, and went to the women's college world series.

I'm glad to see the recent improvement in women's athletics, but would like to see more institutional support. Just try and find a YouTube video or news article about the Lady Owls WNIT championship. Instead you'll find videos and articles about the teams they defeated. And being in Conference USA generally means you're in a one bid conference. Small wonder why Coach Langley left for Washington and the PAC12.
04-19-2021 07:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MerseyOwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,184
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 37
I Root For: The Blue & Gray
Location: Land of Dull Skies
Post: #192
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-15-2021 05:27 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  Shepherd might not be the best point of comparison for Rice, either. It's comfortably a top 10, often top 5 program. A French horn from Rice is far more likely to get past the first hiring screen for an orchestra than one from somewhere like Texas Tech. Visual and Dramatic Arts is probably better illustrative at Rice.

Also, to calibrate the scale better, the League of American Orchestras counted 1,600 501©3 orchestras in the United States in 2017. About 2/3 of them have total budgets under $300k, reflecting the low average earning potential. I also found a citation on Statista (paywalled) that indicated music has the third worst mid-career median pay of all master's degrees, above counseling and social work but behind education and library science. I couldn't find anything specifically about how many graduates music schools produce any given year or how many jobs there are. Still, between 1,600 orchestras, I'd expect every top 10 school graduate to get a job relatively quickly (I know it's not easy, but something should fall into place).

Well maybe things have changed since I was a recent graduate? Back then when an opening occurred at any orchestra it was basically a cattle call. (I never heard of a "first hiring screen".) I knew a conservatory trained musician who graduated from Rice and after several tryouts across the US landed a job for $14,400. I was working at a local accounting firm for £18k base and about $20k with overtime. My fiancée couldn't fathom how I was 'worth' more than a dedicated and trained musician who continuously practiced their craft. I had to explain the simple concept of supply and demand and working at a 'for profit' organization. Also, Orchestral music isn't a growth industry and has little staff turnover. But there's always a market for schlepp accountants who can charge and bill at multiples of their cost.
04-19-2021 08:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bigowlsfan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 312
Joined: Nov 2017
Reputation: 16
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #193
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-18-2021 07:43 PM)interwebowl Wrote:  Women's sports will never make men's sports better. Period. Private, highly rated institutions always attract more women than men across the board. A baseball pitcher throwing 95 in high school is not coming to Rice because of our women's tennis team! Men have gravitated to big state schools with successful athletic departments where women have preferred smaller academic campuses. This is true everywhere and has been for decades which is why it is easier for a man to gain admission to rice than a woman. With the lack of big money pro sports for women, that college degree matters more. Over the last decade it has become clear that the vast majority of male athletes are not motivated by degrees as much as winning and minimal workloads. Wayne was able to attract really bright kids because he won and at the same time offered the quality degree to recruits. In spite of that, Rice never beats the other private academic schools in head to head competitions for recruits. Stanford and Vanderbilt are much better options because of the leagues they play in (exposure) and traditions of treating staff and players right (Insert a discussion of the black eye JK has given Rice baseball here). Without the stupid pipe dream and failures of JK, Rice could have excelled at all women's sports and baseball while fielding a occasionally decent mens hoops team. Now potential male recruits see nothing but disfunction and bunch of losers. The only hope for us is to punt trying to be relevant and accept our fate in men's sports. We will suck and we will always suck so lets play people who are worse than us and win a few.

While I think what you are saying is generally true, I hope the value of a Rice degree is not lost on the males, and as difficult as it is to sooth the male ego, the kids coming here to play basketball should not have making a living at the sport as a career goal.

How many Rice kids (can't count Murphy) end up with a pro basketball career coming out of Rice? Shoot, how many kids out of all of conference USA make it to the pros? If you are accepting a scholarship to a school of this basketball stature or a school in this conference, you have about a 1% chance of having the skill set to make a living playing basketball, and while our coaches do not have to rub it into our players' faces about that stat, I hope they are not recruiting kids to train them "for the next level", because the next level for our players ought to be business school or med school or some like endeavor.
04-19-2021 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,279
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #194
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-18-2021 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(04-18-2021 12:42 PM)wiessguy Wrote:  I've been thinking about the recent successes of our women's programs vs the lack of traction from the men's side. I don't disagree with much of what's already been said here and don't have much else to offer on the topics of support, coaching, conference affiliation, etc. My take is in regard to the different expectations student athletes themselves have coming into college - men vs women in general - the expectation to play professionally and the financial lure to do so. This expectation, regardless of how far-fetched given the talent of an individual, factors into the calculus of a student athlete considering Rice vs another school.

If you look at salary comparisons between men's and women's pro leagues, it's pretty stark: WNBA average salary is just a tick above $100K while NBA average salary is roughly $7 million. MLB average salaries are $6 M while pro softball is $6K. NFL average salaries are $860K while NWSL salaries average $40K (comparing more apples to apples, MLS average salaries are $345K). Men's pro sports salaries are rapidly increasing at rates where women's salaries in comparable leagues cannot compete.
I think more women athletes than men see their college sport days to be the end of the line, that playing a sport serves as a means to an end of getting a quality education. Many times a highly recruited male athlete these days sees college athletics as the opposite - using the college program to raise his profile so he can be drafted into the next level.

This is where selling a Rice education in the recruiting process factors differently between men and women. Women might just be more likely to consider Rice knowing what a Rice diploma means in the job market as their best option after graduation. They're far more likely to get a high-paying job with a diploma from Rice or, have the Rice education open up broader opportunities in the academic arena as opposed to going pro in a women's league. In reality there is no difference between men and women when it comes to a Rice diploma and the opportunities it affords. Men see a better option, even if the chances are super slim. A Rice education to men might be a secondary consideration, a fallback if you will, to obtaining a greater prize of going pro in a men's league.

There are young men out there who see the value of a Rice education, and probably have more realistic perspectives on what their pro chances are. The question is, are these the caliber of athlete that will win CUSA championships and get us into NCAA tournaments? The women's programs have proven that selling Rice works and we are reaping the benefit of selling a Rice education to excellent women athletes. I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.

All true, and it doesn't hurt to have the #1 ranked sports management department in the country for those who want to have a career within the sports world.

This to you both. It's worth noting that in addition to the athletes themselves, there are many very high paying jobs in men's sports (which are not gender specific like being a player)... even down to coaching and officiating. That is where having quality teams would pair so well here.


(04-18-2021 12:42 PM)wiessguy Wrote:  I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.

THIS

(04-19-2021 07:17 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  I'm glad to see the recent improvement in women's athletics, but would like to see more institutional support. Just try and find a YouTube video or news article about the Lady Owls WNIT championship. Instead you'll find videos and articles about the teams they defeated. And being in Conference USA generally means you're in a one bid conference. Small wonder why Coach Langley left for Washington and the PAC12.

I've been suggesting this for years. and how it could involve students doing the production. Having our TV marketing require us to be put 'on par' with other CUSA schools is crippling, but we could make up for it with YouTube... or other outlets like that... and we seem to have at best a tepid audience.

Said simply... an article about sports has one audience, and we aren't a priority for that audience. An article about sports and academics has a much more broad appeal, and we are very highly respected in one of those two, and all but singular in the 'crossover'.
04-19-2021 10:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Musicowl1965 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 441
Joined: Aug 2017
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #195
RE: Recipe for Rice Athletic Relevance
(04-19-2021 10:57 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(04-18-2021 04:41 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  
(04-18-2021 12:42 PM)wiessguy Wrote:  I've been thinking about the recent successes of our women's programs vs the lack of traction from the men's side. I don't disagree with much of what's already been said here and don't have much else to offer on the topics of support, coaching, conference affiliation, etc. My take is in regard to the different expectations student athletes themselves have coming into college - men vs women in general - the expectation to play professionally and the financial lure to do so. This expectation, regardless of how far-fetched given the talent of an individual, factors into the calculus of a student athlete considering Rice vs another school.

If you look at salary comparisons between men's and women's pro leagues, it's pretty stark: WNBA average salary is just a tick above $100K while NBA average salary is roughly $7 million. MLB average salaries are $6 M while pro softball is $6K. NFL average salaries are $860K while NWSL salaries average $40K (comparing more apples to apples, MLS average salaries are $345K). Men's pro sports salaries are rapidly increasing at rates where women's salaries in comparable leagues cannot compete.
I think more women athletes than men see their college sport days to be the end of the line, that playing a sport serves as a means to an end of getting a quality education. Many times a highly recruited male athlete these days sees college athletics as the opposite - using the college program to raise his profile so he can be drafted into the next level.

This is where selling a Rice education in the recruiting process factors differently between men and women. Women might just be more likely to consider Rice knowing what a Rice diploma means in the job market as their best option after graduation. They're far more likely to get a high-paying job with a diploma from Rice or, have the Rice education open up broader opportunities in the academic arena as opposed to going pro in a women's league. In reality there is no difference between men and women when it comes to a Rice diploma and the opportunities it affords. Men see a better option, even if the chances are super slim. A Rice education to men might be a secondary consideration, a fallback if you will, to obtaining a greater prize of going pro in a men's league.

There are young men out there who see the value of a Rice education, and probably have more realistic perspectives on what their pro chances are. The question is, are these the caliber of athlete that will win CUSA championships and get us into NCAA tournaments? The women's programs have proven that selling Rice works and we are reaping the benefit of selling a Rice education to excellent women athletes. I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.

All true, and it doesn't hurt to have the #1 ranked sports management department in the country for those who want to have a career within the sports world.

This to you both. It's worth noting that in addition to the athletes themselves, there are many very high paying jobs in men's sports (which are not gender specific like being a player)... even down to coaching and officiating. That is where having quality teams would pair so well here.


(04-18-2021 12:42 PM)wiessguy Wrote:  I just don't think selling Rice is enough of a draw for the men, unless we are not looking in the right places.

THIS

(04-19-2021 07:17 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  I'm glad to see the recent improvement in women's athletics, but would like to see more institutional support. Just try and find a YouTube video or news article about the Lady Owls WNIT championship. Instead you'll find videos and articles about the teams they defeated. And being in Conference USA generally means you're in a one bid conference. Small wonder why Coach Langley left for Washington and the PAC12.

I've been suggesting this for years. and how it could involve students doing the production. Having our TV marketing require us to be put 'on par' with other CUSA schools is crippling, but we could make up for it with YouTube... or other outlets like that... and we seem to have at best a tepid audience.

Said simply... an article about sports has one audience, and we aren't a priority for that audience. An article about sports and academics has a much more broad appeal, and we are very highly respected in one of those two, and all but singular in the 'crossover'.

Agree 100% with this. Media (YouTube, streaming, twitter, Facebook etc.) is horrendous compared to other CUSA schools and P5. IMO this is an easy fix as you noted. It would be great if I could go to ESPN+ and find any Rice event (VB. Baseball, Basketball etc.) like I can for other schools. Heck, I watched Butler baseball the other evening...BUTLER!!! and can't find Rice anywhere unless they are playing an SEC, Big12, Southland (yes SOUTHLAND!!) etc. This is pathetic marketing..But, hey, I can always purchase the CUSA package and get grainy video from the press box that I can't even tell which team is batting!!! ARGHHH!!!
04-19-2021 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.