Rice

[50's PONY]

Cutting back on athletics last thing Rice should do
By RICHARD JUSTICE
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle
Some years ago when someone asked Penn State coach Joe Paterno about retirement, he said there was no way he was going to leave college football in the hands of people like Jackie Sherrill.

That's the way I feel about the possibility of Rice downsizing its athletics department.

What a terrible loss this would be. What a bad message it would send. What an awful idea.

Rice is one of the places that tries to do things right, that takes as much pride in team GPAs and graduation rates as won-lost records.

Rice has never allowed sports to twist the larger mission of the university. Rice coaches make no apology for recruiting a certain kind of kid and then requiring him to make academics part of his college experience.

Rice's national championship in baseball last summer stands as a bright and shining example that the good guys sometimes win, too.

Maybe not for much longer.

Rice's trustees are discussing the future of sports at the university and have apparently considered everything from dropping football to dropping all scholarship sports.

How sad.

If Rice goes, that's one less school willing to fight the good fight.

Who cares if Rice can't beat Texas or play in a bowl game or do any of those things that provide some schools with their measuring sticks for success?

Rice should keep playing because its football team contributes to the fabric of campus life and because Rice prides itself on attracting the best and brightest students, whether they want to study architecture or play in the NFL.

Rice football gives kids from lower- and middle-class backgrounds the opportunity to get the kind of education they might not otherwise get.

And those kids contribute to Rice's diversity. They mix with kids from prep schools, with English students and all the rest, and they're all better off for the experience.

Many of those football players leave Rice and become the absolute best representatives the school will ever have.

From Bert Emanuel and Bobby Dixon to Ndukwe Kalu and Larry Izzo, former Rice football players show the world how a college athlete is supposed to walk and talk.

Rice is a better place for having had them. Rice's reputation is enhanced because of them.

One of the arguments against continuing Division I sports at Rice is that the cost has become too much of a burden to the university.

Sports at Rice represent about 3.2 percent of the school's budget.

Yes, the program is losing around $8 million a year excluding tuition costs.

I say it's worth it.

If anything, Rice needs to spend more, not less.

If the trustees decide to continue Division I sports at Rice, they also must move forward with long-stalled plans for a new basketball facility.

Given a chance, Rice basketball might have some of the same success that coach Wayne Graham's baseball team has had.

Stanford, Princeton, Vanderbilt and Air Force all were in the NCAA Tournament this past season, so why can't Rice get in the Big Dance?

I'm hoping the men and women who run the NCAA would be profoundly embarrassed if Rice drops scholarship sports.

All the usual debates about college sports resurfaced this week when the NCAA approved a package of reforms designed to force schools to pay more attention to academics.

Beginning in 2006, schools could lose scholarships and postseason appearances if they don't make their jocks go to class.

Sounds pretty logical, right?

Well, no.

Some believe the guidelines simply will lead to more cheating. Teachers will be under more pressure to pass athletes, and athletic departments will hire more tutors to do more and more of the work that kids are supposed to be doing.

Kind of sickening, isn't it?

That's another reason the NCAA should hope Rice stays.

Rice doesn't have to be told that athletes should go to class.

Rice graduated 82 percent of its football players in the NCAA's last four-class reporting period.

By comparison, Texas has graduated just 38 percent and Oklahoma 33 percent.

And some would argue Rice is not competitive.

In the things that ought to count most, Rice always has been competitive.

One thing that always has struck me about the people associated with sports at Rice is how emotionally invested they are in the place.

They are more like disciples than employees. They believe in Rice and are proud to be working at a school that believes in doing things a certain way.

The Rice baseball team was the best in the country while maintaining a 3.2 GPA. Graham didn't construct the best team in the country by simply signing all the best players. Instead, he got guys who had good grades and came to Rice understanding what was expected of them.

He got two sons of former Astro Jose Cruz, who'd lived in Houston long enough to know the power of a Rice degree.

He got guys like Jeff Niemann and Lance Berkman, who became more in college than they were in high school.

Graham showed the NCAA that a program could be built on hard work, expert coaching and kids who want to be the best both in the field and the classroom.

Here's to Niemann and Berkman and many more like them. Here's to sports at Rice -- a lighthouse for every other program.

[Water Pony]

I hope Rice's Board of Trustees is investigating how to be more competitive not withdraw from Division 1 Athletics. I hope they continue to excel baseball and not move to Division 3. I hope they remain in CUSA and demonstrate how to compete the right way.

If we lose Rice or Vanderbilit or Northwestern or Stanford, we will all lose more. If the standard is only the strong survive, then it is truly semi-pro and not a college sport.

If Tulane can recommit, hopefully Rice can. Good luck, Owls!!

[DallasDiehard]

Right you are. Rice not only is a good opponent for SMU, but it's also a school that sets a high standard academically for its students, including student-athletes. We need MORE -- not fewer -- programs like Rice.
Here's hoping the Rice administration makes the right decision and keeps athletics. Perhas there's some re-structuring needed within the athletic program, but getting rid of it would be a loss for college athletics.

[Cheesesteak]

Rice University is one of Texas' treasures.

Rice has some exceptional academic qualities not found anywhere else in the lone star state or contiguous states.

Dallas Diehard is right -

We need MORE -- not fewer -- programs like Rice.

Rice raises the bar for what should be the most important activity on campus - educating individuals who want to learn.

When SMU defeats a Rice team, I respect the Rice team. When SMU loses to a Rice team, I respect the Rice team.

Despite its tremendous endowment (which is restricted as is the case at most universities), Rice needs upgrades in most of its varsity athletics facilities. Facing mounting athletics budget deficits and limited in its ability to put bodies in the seats (small student body / small alumni association / Houston pro teams / U. of H. / only 100 miles from College Station / Gulf Coast leisure activities, etc.) Rice D1A athletics is a target.

Some administrators/faculty members are constantly challenging varsity athletics programs at their respective universities.

Rice D1A athletics has been and hopefully will continue to be an antidote for the sleazy programs of college athletics.

I'm cheering for many more decades with Rice competing at the highest level.

Everything else at Rice aims high...sports should too.

[Stallion]

Yep they aim HIGH as in the longest period of No bowls (44 years) and NCAA tourney appearances (34 years).

[Letterman]

Your disdain for programs that try to do it the right way (i.e. keeping the "student" in student-athlete) is unbelievable. Maybe that could appease you by adding a ton of JUCOs who can't even spell "Rice" and maybe adding a major in basketweaving for athletes?

[Stallion]

In fact the only major sport in which they have accomplished anything is Baseball where not coincidently they have a LARGE percentage of JUCO players. Let's face it-if schools(especially non Tier 1 schools in non-BCS conferences) want to COMPETE without costing their university 8-10 million dollars a year then they must create a reasonable model to remain competitive. SMU obviously has begun to realize just that as do the 90% of other programs in America. I don't apologize for wanting SMU to have a realistic chance to compete at the highest possible level. And I certainly don't feel like Rice has accomplished anything in FB or BB to laud their program as some short of shining example of a Division 1A program-other than perhaps dominating SMU over the last 15 years.

[PlanoStang]

Rice signed with the C-USA just 4 or 5 months ago. That cost them about 2 mil +.

Either their leadership body is much dumber than the students, or the idea of dropping from div 1a is propaganda, and scare tactics to get their alumni to donate more to the cause .

P.S. Hopefully none of our rich alumni actually read this garbage.

[EastStang]

Stallion, Rice has been bowl eligible several times in the last decade. They are a small school and do not travel well. One of the reasons Rice was dissatisfied with the WAC is because they DIDN'T get invited to bowls when they were eligible to go. Using their lack of bowls as an indictment of their football program is disingenuous. Fact is Rice had more success in the SWC over its last 20 years than TCU and perhaps Texas Tech.