Mack Rhoades: I Have Complete Faith in Coach Dave Aranda

Should've gone to the internal improvement parade. It was lights out.

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

But probably run better for the community.

Funny UT with all its money is good with that math and we aren't.

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

But probably run better for the community.

Funny UT with all its money is good with that math and we aren't.

---

Been there involved in several P3s. They can be beneficial, but not necessarily for the community. Usually it is the shareholders, most P3s are run based on profit. There can only be a P3 if there is revenue.

FLBear5630 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

Mack has gotten everything he wants.

---

Except a cure for his impotence…

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

But probably run better for the community.

Funny UT with all its money is good with that math and we aren't.

---

Been there involved in several P3s. They can be beneficial, but not necessarily for the community. Usually it is the shareholders, most P3s are run based on profit. There can only be a P3 if there is revenue.

---

They're beneficial for the community because a developer has to utilize the venue for revenue - e.g. concerts and various and sundry other events that take place constantly at the Moody Center.

I know Waco stepped up and funded a small part of this and there will be some use of it as a public venue, but nowhere near to the extent.

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

But probably run better for the community.

Funny UT with all its money is good with that math and we aren't.

---

Been there involved in several P3s. They can be beneficial, but not necessarily for the community. Usually it is the shareholders, most P3s are run based on profit. There can only be a P3 if there is revenue.

---

They're beneficial for the community because a developer has to utilize the venue for revenue - e.g. concerts and various and sundry other events that take place constantly at the Moody Center.

I know Waco stepped up and funded a small part of this and there will be some use of it as a public venue, but nowhere near to the extent.

---

But there has to be revenue. In a P3 you are using the private sector's capital to build a public facility because the public agency does not have the Cap Ex to build it. If they did, they wouldn't do it, the public agency would take the 15% profit built in and the future revenues to pay off the revenue bonds typically used. If the revenue is not there to support the venture, no developer is going to do it. Private companies don't do it out of the goodness of their heart, it is a profitable business venture. If the revenue does not cover the cost, be prepared for higher prices and other concessions to get to that number. You run the risk of the customer experience being bare bones. UT, probably has a much different revenue picture than Baylor...

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

But probably run better for the community.

Funny UT with all its money is good with that math and we aren't.

---

Been there involved in several P3s. They can be beneficial, but not necessarily for the community. Usually it is the shareholders, most P3s are run based on profit. There can only be a P3 if there is revenue.

---

They're beneficial for the community because a developer has to utilize the venue for revenue - e.g. concerts and various and sundry other events that take place constantly at the Moody Center.

I know Waco stepped up and funded a small part of this and there will be some use of it as a public venue, but nowhere near to the extent.

---

But there has to be revenue. In a P3 you are using the private sector's capital to build a public facility because the public agency does not have the Cap Ex to build it. If they did, they wouldn't do it, the public agency would take the 15% profit built in and the future revenues to pay off the revenue bonds typically used. If the revenue is not there to support the venture, no developer is going to do it. Private companies don't do it out of the goodness of their heart, it is a profitable business venture. If the revenue does not cover the cost, be prepared for higher prices and other concessions to get to that number. You run the risk of the customer experience being bare bones. UT, probably has a much different revenue picture than Baylor...

---

Dude. I just explained to you where the revenue comes from. Baylor was pitched a P3 structure by people who could provide one and didn't want it. My problem is that results in the Baylor alumni base getting hit harder for that particular project, and it's less of an advantage to Waco.

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

I'm confused Mack said he expects BU to compete for titles yearly. Yet he's fully supporting a coach whose nose dived the program in remarkable time? Will he feel the same way after this 2-10 season ? If so he needs to go as well

---

I suspect that the comment the other poster made about Rhoades not receiving much support from the big money donors is true. It's likely that Baylor has exhausted its big money reserves with the basketball arena and fudge center. SMU raised 100 million in a couple weeks just based off of the pure excitement for the program moving conferences, and our program is crapping itself worrying about where it's going to find 40 million. The inverse of that is that the money is out there, but the big money folks don't trust Mack to use it correctly. That is the closest thing you will find in a college athletic department to a vote of no confidence in the athletic director, and if what I posted is indeed the case, people above Mack need to have the cojones to step in and make a decisive decision. Making decisive smart decisions is not Baylor's forte though

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

But probably run better for the community.

Funny UT with all its money is good with that math and we aren't.

---

Been there involved in several P3s. They can be beneficial, but not necessarily for the community. Usually it is the shareholders, most P3s are run based on profit. There can only be a P3 if there is revenue.

---

They're beneficial for the community because a developer has to utilize the venue for revenue - e.g. concerts and various and sundry other events that take place constantly at the Moody Center.

I know Waco stepped up and funded a small part of this and there will be some use of it as a public venue, but nowhere near to the extent.

---

But there has to be revenue. In a P3 you are using the private sector's capital to build a public facility because the public agency does not have the Cap Ex to build it. If they did, they wouldn't do it, the public agency would take the 15% profit built in and the future revenues to pay off the revenue bonds typically used. If the revenue is not there to support the venture, no developer is going to do it. Private companies don't do it out of the goodness of their heart, it is a profitable business venture. If the revenue does not cover the cost, be prepared for higher prices and other concessions to get to that number. You run the risk of the customer experience being bare bones. UT, probably has a much different revenue picture than Baylor...

---

Dude. I just explained to you where the revenue comes from. Baylor was pitched a P3 structure by people who could provide one and didn't want it. My problem is that results in the Baylor alumni base getting hit harder for that particular project, and it's less of an advantage to Waco.

---

I know where the revenue comes from. I am saying that P3s are not the sweetheart deals people think they are. You have to be damn sure your revenue is secure for 30 years to make it work and not fail. The Agency/School loses all the control, the private sector gets to control it to maintain the revenue stream. I guess you could do it with availability payments, but than Baylor is back to taking the risk.

This is how Atlantic City and other Cities got into trouble with the sweetheart deal gambling, was supposed to be to solve all our tax issues. The parameters of the deal changed when the revenue wasn't there. As SMU learned on 30 for 30, you have no choice you have a payment to make. UT has a much higher cushion than a Baylor. The concessionaire can change, can change terms and Baylor/Waco has no say. P3s work well with toll roads and utilities because there is a stable revenue stream. Taking sports viewing/entertainment to the credit authorities, your cost of money would be horrible.

We may be saying the same thing, but if the P3 didn't happen there are probably reasons from the public side to walk away.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

If they had done a P-3 maybe Waco could demand beer sales

Truthfully, I don't see much disrespect from Smoak. Perhaps I'm not watching the same interviews or we have different interpretations of "rude."

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

We could've gotten a free basketball arena if we went with a P3 structure. Not sure why we were so against that. You can only hit your alums up for so much. Heck, that's what UT did to get a free basketball arena, and look at their alumni base and endowment.

---

Problem with P3 is that it costs you more, profit is built into the private sector and you lose control over pricing. If you are good with paying a premium to get it built and not controlling pricing to pay the debt P3 is a good option. But, the private sector would run it much differently, not necessarily better for the fan or alumni.

---

If they had done a P-3 maybe Waco could demand beer sales

---

That is the truth! That would have been an upside of a P3, the private sector would not pass on that revenue stream, big money there...

Probably one reason it isn't a p3

boykin_spaniel said:

---

Probably one reason it isn't a p3

---

Good point... Religious leaders do love control...

As long as nobody murders or rapes anyone else Mack will be content for us to be the new Kansas. So long as our players are choir boys.

You mean the 4-0 Kansas who have beaten a Big10, Big12 and MW opponent this season? Yeah, that would be awful.

boykin_spaniel said:

---

Probably one reason it isn't a p3

---

Probably THE reason it isn't a P3

You must have missed where I said "the NEW Kansas"

New is a very key word there that I guess you missed.