Patterson has a well deserved support from his school and fan base, and won't get fired for failing to win the conference.

RealLarryDon said:

---

I have no doubt Matt Rhule is a good man with a good heart. However, I'm starting to fear he is more a motivational speaker than an actual X's and O's coach.

---

He doesn't have to be, at least not completely.
I'm thinking a new OC solves a lot of CMR's problems. And a new DC, maybe.

Heck, just fire half the east coast coaches and elevate the Texas HS coaches on his staff to play calling. That takes us to six wins right there.

Jacques Strap said:

---

I really like CMR. I wish he ran the spread because it was so much fun to watch but I hope he finds success with his style. I know he is here to win games but he seems like a good guy and you can't say that about all college coaches.

---

I agree. If this were a "good guy" competition, we would be in the top 10 maybe... certainly ahead of TCU.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

ccbear said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

We all stand by the kids what people are upset about is he and his staff are coaching them out of their potential. A lot of these kids were part of championships here. They know they are good. They know they are better than they have been allowed to be. The coaches need to stand with our kids and stop trying to force square pegs into round holes. Coach to their strengths.

---

Well, actually, not a lot of these kids were part of championships here. I thought that, too. However, only 2-3 starters from last year's bowl game were starters last week. Between departures (draft and retirements) and injuries, much of the starting talent that was here is gone. Yes, still lots of experience but not many who contributed on championship teams. Like in most sports, veteran talent almost always trumps coaching.

---

This. This team was going to be notably worse than the 2016 6 regular season win team regardless as to who was coaching it.

---

Based on talent I thought 6 wins was all we could expect. I predicted 4-5. How do you explain 0?

YoakDaddy said:

---

Pale Rider said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Jacques Strap said:

---

I really like CMR. I wish he ran the spread because it was so much fun to watch but I hope he finds success with his style. I know he is here to win games but he seems like a good guy and you can't say that about all college coaches.

---

i agree. I just do not foresee Baylor being able to recruit the talent needed to overpower Texas and Oklahoma or some of the othe Big 12 Schools. I guess we will see if a Big 10 offense can work in the Big 12.

---

We won't and it won't. Period.

---

Yes. Mack Brown, Chollie Strong, and Gary Patterson tried it in this conference and failed. Patterson was the only one to switch and he's still around.

---

Even Patterson seems to have a losing season about every other year.

Big_Pumpin said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

We all stand by the kids what people are upset about is he and his staff are coaching them out of their potential. A lot of these kids were part of championships here. They know they are good. They know they are better than they have been allowed to be. The coaches need to stand with our kids and stop trying to force square pegs into round holes. Coach to their strengths.

---

Do you think the players have your back or the coaches back? If you have the players back and players have the coaches back then maybe you should reconsider your position.

---

All of Steele's players were supportive of him in public. Thankfully, we had a fan base more critical.

Quote:

---

However, only 2-3 starters from last year's bowl game were starters last week.

---

That's because of Rhule's depth chart, not graduation.

ccbear said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

We all stand by the kids what people are upset about is he and his staff are coaching them out of their potential. A lot of these kids were part of championships here. They know they are good. They know they are better than they have been allowed to be. The coaches need to stand with our kids and stop trying to force square pegs into round holes. Coach to their strengths.

---

Well, actually, not a lot of these kids were part of championships here. I thought that, too. However, only 2-3 starters from last year's bowl game were starters last week. Between departures (draft and retirements) and injuries, much of the starting talent that was here is gone. Yes, still lots of experience but not many who contributed on championship teams. Like in most sports, veteran talent almost always trumps coaching.

---

I find that stat hard to believe. The team has only 2-3 starters from the bowl game?

Anyone able to fact check this? I count 3 on the offensive line alone, the QB, one of the WR and about 7 on defense.

Mothra said:

---

ccbear said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

We all stand by the kids what people are upset about is he and his staff are coaching them out of their potential. A lot of these kids were part of championships here. They know they are good. They know they are better than they have been allowed to be. The coaches need to stand with our kids and stop trying to force square pegs into round holes. Coach to their strengths.

---

Well, actually, not a lot of these kids were part of championships here. I thought that, too. However, only 2-3 starters from last year's bowl game were starters last week. Between departures (draft and retirements) and injuries, much of the starting talent that was here is gone. Yes, still lots of experience but not many who contributed on championship teams. Like in most sports, veteran talent almost always trumps coaching.

---

I find that stat hard to believe. The team has only 2-3 starters from the bowl game?

Anyone able to fact check this? I count 3 on the offensive line alone, the QB, one of the WR and about 7 on defense.

---

Truth don't lie.

This whole "we don't have the talent" argument is insane. We have great talent compared to every year since 1986 at least other than maybe 2013-2015.

And we'd never lost to an FCS school before...

la1037 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Krieg said:

---

What I know right now for sure is that we're 0-3 against really bad competition, and that shouldn't ever happen.

---

I would disagree with this part a little bit. Look at UTSA's schedule this year, they are probably a top 35ish team and have an outside shot at finishing undefeated now. Duke probably deserves to be top 25 (especially if they take care of business against UNC next week), and they absolutely nailed a Northwestern team that I though 2 weeks ago was light years better than us. Even Liberty (whatever classification they are this year) should be favored in all of the rest of their games, plus that game had its own extenuating circumstances with injuries in the secondary. What I'm saying is, yeah this team isn't top tier by any stretch of the imagination right now and I would prefer W's over L's, but they haven't been losing to "bad competition". People get so caught up with P5 vs G5 and the names on the front of jerseys that they sometimes don't recognize good teams when they see them. I think Duke and UTSA are actually pretty good teams this year, and Liberty isn't what I would call "bad" either.

---

OMG. I don't even know where to start here.

---

You can start by explaining why you think it's wrong, because "OMG" by itself isn't very persuasive. Duke and UTSA aren't gonna make the Playoff, but that doesn't make them "bad competition". UTSA has the inside track to winning their conference outright and may not lose any games at all now. Duke should end up finishing in the top half of the ACC (probably in the neighborhood of 8 wins or more if they stay healthy, in the best football conference in the country this year). People on this board seem to have the idea that Baylor is some sort of 'Bama-lite that should be able to show up and win 8-10 games just because of some recruiting rankings and what they've done in the recent past, but that ain't how it works (ask UT). Dramatic scheme changes take time to implement (especially with players recruited to play a different, very niche, scheme), developing depth to replace the lost '16 class and higher than normal attrition (for us) takes time, scrubbing our reputation/perception clean after one of the biggest CFB scandals in recent memory takes time and effort. I would have liked for us to be 3-0 or 2-1 right now just like everybody else, but I'm not gonna call for Rhule to be run out of town only 3 games into a monumental rebuild like a lot of this board seems to be doing.

HuMcK said:

---

la1037 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Krieg said:

---

What I know right now for sure is that we're 0-3 against really bad competition, and that shouldn't ever happen.

---

I would disagree with this part a little bit. Look at UTSA's schedule this year, they are probably a top 35ish team and have an outside shot at finishing undefeated now. Duke probably deserves to be top 25 (especially if they take care of business against UNC next week), and they absolutely nailed a Northwestern team that I though 2 weeks ago was light years better than us. Even Liberty (whatever classification they are this year) should be favored in all of the rest of their games, plus that game had its own extenuating circumstances with injuries in the secondary. What I'm saying is, yeah this team isn't top tier by any stretch of the imagination right now and I would prefer W's over L's, but they haven't been losing to "bad competition". People get so caught up with P5 vs G5 and the names on the front of jerseys that they sometimes don't recognize good teams when they see them. I think Duke and UTSA are actually pretty good teams this year, and Liberty isn't what I would call "bad" either.

---

OMG. I don't even know where to start here.

---

You can start by explaining why you think it's wrong, because "OMG" by itself isn't very persuasive. Duke and UTSA aren't gonna make the Playoff, but that doesn't make them "bad competition". UTSA has the inside track to winning their conference outright and may not lose any games at all now. Duke should end up finishing in the top half of the ACC (probably in the neighborhood of 8 wins or more if they stay healthy, in the best football conference in the country this year). People on this board seem to have the idea that Baylor should be able to show up and win 8-10 games just because of some recruiting rankings and what they've done in the recent past, but that ain't how it works (ask UT). Dramatic scheme changes take time to implement (especially with players recruited to play a different, very niche, scheme), developing depth to replace the lost '16 class and higher than normal attrition (for us) takes time to achieve, scrubbing our reputation/perception clean after one of the biggest CFB scandals in recent memory takes time and effort. I would have liked for us to be 3-0 or 2-1 right now just like everybody else, but I'm not gonna call for Rhule to be run out of town only 3 games into a monumental rebuild like a lot of this board seems to be doing.

---

While I am not calling for Rhule's firing, I think the point is, regardless of how good Liberty and UTSA are, a Div. 1A school in a power 5 conference shouldn't lose to those teams unless their name is Kansas. We have a lot more talent than those schools, despite the attrition. I don't consider this a monumental rebuild, as there are still plenty of 4 star players on this roster, and Rhule's first recruiting class was Top 40.

Mothra said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

la1037 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Krieg said:

---

What I know right now for sure is that we're 0-3 against really bad competition, and that shouldn't ever happen.

---

I would disagree with this part a little bit. Look at UTSA's schedule this year, they are probably a top 35ish team and have an outside shot at finishing undefeated now. Duke probably deserves to be top 25 (especially if they take care of business against UNC next week), and they absolutely nailed a Northwestern team that I though 2 weeks ago was light years better than us. Even Liberty (whatever classification they are this year) should be favored in all of the rest of their games, plus that game had its own extenuating circumstances with injuries in the secondary. What I'm saying is, yeah this team isn't top tier by any stretch of the imagination right now and I would prefer W's over L's, but they haven't been losing to "bad competition". People get so caught up with P5 vs G5 and the names on the front of jerseys that they sometimes don't recognize good teams when they see them. I think Duke and UTSA are actually pretty good teams this year, and Liberty isn't what I would call "bad" either.

---

OMG. I don't even know where to start here.

---

You can start by explaining why you think it's wrong, because "OMG" by itself isn't very persuasive. Duke and UTSA aren't gonna make the Playoff, but that doesn't make them "bad competition". UTSA has the inside track to winning their conference outright and may not lose any games at all now. Duke should end up finishing in the top half of the ACC (probably in the neighborhood of 8 wins or more if they stay healthy, in the best football conference in the country this year). People on this board seem to have the idea that Baylor should be able to show up and win 8-10 games just because of some recruiting rankings and what they've done in the recent past, but that ain't how it works (ask UT). Dramatic scheme changes take time to implement (especially with players recruited to play a different, very niche, scheme), developing depth to replace the lost '16 class and higher than normal attrition (for us) takes time to achieve, scrubbing our reputation/perception clean after one of the biggest CFB scandals in recent memory takes time and effort. I would have liked for us to be 3-0 or 2-1 right now just like everybody else, but I'm not gonna call for Rhule to be run out of town only 3 games into a monumental rebuild like a lot of this board seems to be doing.

---

While I am not calling for Rhule's firing, I think the point is, regardless of how good Liberty and UTSA are, a Div. 1A school in a power 5 conference shouldn't lose to those teams unless their name is Kansas. We have a lot more talent than those schools, despite the attrition. I don't consider this a monumental rebuild, as there are still plenty of 4 star players on this roster, and Rhule's first recruiting class was Top 40.

---

The fact that almost 3/4ths of that top 40 class has already been pressed into action really speaks to the amount of rebuilding required from Rhule. Half of the '16 class that was supposed to be our best ever evaporated after Briles got ****canned (leaving gaping holes for us at OL, RB, and WR), at least 4 medical retirements on the OL (including 2 Centers) that I can think of off the top of my head, a 5* experienced young QB bolted for Auburn, 4* QB Chris Johnson left for UH before the '16 season, 1000yd RB Johnny Jefferson quit football altogether (plus T Williams has been out so far with an injury suffered last year), starting LB Raaquan Davis left Baylor. I'm probably forgetting some things, but the point is we have glaring deficiencies at several key position groups due to heightened attrition and injuries, to the point that we started a walk-on at Safety and a WR as a CB against Liberty. All I was saying in my original post btw was that Duke and UTSA aren't collectively a group of scrubs, those guys have talent and pride too, plus they aren't changing schemes or coaching staffs or dealing with a huge scandal that some people here for some reason seem to ignore in their analysis of this team.

HuMcK said:

---

Mothra said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

la1037 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Krieg said:

---

What I know right now for sure is that we're 0-3 against really bad competition, and that shouldn't ever happen.

---

I would disagree with this part a little bit. Look at UTSA's schedule this year, they are probably a top 35ish team and have an outside shot at finishing undefeated now. Duke probably deserves to be top 25 (especially if they take care of business against UNC next week), and they absolutely nailed a Northwestern team that I though 2 weeks ago was light years better than us. Even Liberty (whatever classification they are this year) should be favored in all of the rest of their games, plus that game had its own extenuating circumstances with injuries in the secondary. What I'm saying is, yeah this team isn't top tier by any stretch of the imagination right now and I would prefer W's over L's, but they haven't been losing to "bad competition". People get so caught up with P5 vs G5 and the names on the front of jerseys that they sometimes don't recognize good teams when they see them. I think Duke and UTSA are actually pretty good teams this year, and Liberty isn't what I would call "bad" either.

---

OMG. I don't even know where to start here.

---

You can start by explaining why you think it's wrong, because "OMG" by itself isn't very persuasive. Duke and UTSA aren't gonna make the Playoff, but that doesn't make them "bad competition". UTSA has the inside track to winning their conference outright and may not lose any games at all now. Duke should end up finishing in the top half of the ACC (probably in the neighborhood of 8 wins or more if they stay healthy, in the best football conference in the country this year). People on this board seem to have the idea that Baylor should be able to show up and win 8-10 games just because of some recruiting rankings and what they've done in the recent past, but that ain't how it works (ask UT). Dramatic scheme changes take time to implement (especially with players recruited to play a different, very niche, scheme), developing depth to replace the lost '16 class and higher than normal attrition (for us) takes time to achieve, scrubbing our reputation/perception clean after one of the biggest CFB scandals in recent memory takes time and effort. I would have liked for us to be 3-0 or 2-1 right now just like everybody else, but I'm not gonna call for Rhule to be run out of town only 3 games into a monumental rebuild like a lot of this board seems to be doing.

---

While I am not calling for Rhule's firing, I think the point is, regardless of how good Liberty and UTSA are, a Div. 1A school in a power 5 conference shouldn't lose to those teams unless their name is Kansas. We have a lot more talent than those schools, despite the attrition. I don't consider this a monumental rebuild, as there are still plenty of 4 star players on this roster, and Rhule's first recruiting class was Top 40.

---

The fact that almost 3/4ths of that top 40 class has already been pressed into action really speaks to the amount of rebuilding required from Rhule. Half of the '16 class that was supposed to be our best ever evaporated after Briles got ****canned (leaving gaping holes for us at OL, RB, and WR), at least 4 medical retirements on the OL (including 2 Centers) that I can think of off the top of my head, a 5* experienced young QB bolted for Auburn, 4* QB Chris Johnson left for UH before the '16 season, 1000yd RB Johnny Jefferson quit football altogether (plus T Williams has been out so far with an injury suffered last year), starting LB Raaquan Davis left Baylor. I'm probably forgetting some things, but the point is we have glaring deficiencies at several key position groups due to heightened attrition and injuries, to the point that we started a walk-on at Safety and a WR as a CB against Liberty. All I was saying in my original post btw was that Duke and UTSA aren't collectively a group of scrubs, those guys have talent and pride too, plus they aren't changing schemes or coaching staffs or dealing with a huge scandal that some people here for some reason seem to ignore in their analysis of this team.

---

No doubt, Rhule was not playing with a full deck (I will point out, many lost due to practice injuries). I don't discount anything you've said. Now that he's gotten some of his talent back, it will be interesting to see what happens.

But as others have repeatedly pointed out, it's Liberty. Even Kevin Steele was able to beat the Liberty's of the world, and he wasn't able to beat anybody.

HuMcK said:

---

Mothra said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

la1037 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Krieg said:

---

What I know right now for sure is that we're 0-3 against really bad competition, and that shouldn't ever happen.

---

I would disagree with this part a little bit. Look at UTSA's schedule this year, they are probably a top 35ish team and have an outside shot at finishing undefeated now. Duke probably deserves to be top 25 (especially if they take care of business against UNC next week), and they absolutely nailed a Northwestern team that I though 2 weeks ago was light years better than us. Even Liberty (whatever classification they are this year) should be favored in all of the rest of their games, plus that game had its own extenuating circumstances with injuries in the secondary. What I'm saying is, yeah this team isn't top tier by any stretch of the imagination right now and I would prefer W's over L's, but they haven't been losing to "bad competition". People get so caught up with P5 vs G5 and the names on the front of jerseys that they sometimes don't recognize good teams when they see them. I think Duke and UTSA are actually pretty good teams this year, and Liberty isn't what I would call "bad" either.

---

OMG. I don't even know where to start here.

---

You can start by explaining why you think it's wrong, because "OMG" by itself isn't very persuasive. Duke and UTSA aren't gonna make the Playoff, but that doesn't make them "bad competition". UTSA has the inside track to winning their conference outright and may not lose any games at all now. Duke should end up finishing in the top half of the ACC (probably in the neighborhood of 8 wins or more if they stay healthy, in the best football conference in the country this year). People on this board seem to have the idea that Baylor should be able to show up and win 8-10 games just because of some recruiting rankings and what they've done in the recent past, but that ain't how it works (ask UT). Dramatic scheme changes take time to implement (especially with players recruited to play a different, very niche, scheme), developing depth to replace the lost '16 class and higher than normal attrition (for us) takes time to achieve, scrubbing our reputation/perception clean after one of the biggest CFB scandals in recent memory takes time and effort. I would have liked for us to be 3-0 or 2-1 right now just like everybody else, but I'm not gonna call for Rhule to be run out of town only 3 games into a monumental rebuild like a lot of this board seems to be doing.

---

While I am not calling for Rhule's firing, I think the point is, regardless of how good Liberty and UTSA are, a Div. 1A school in a power 5 conference shouldn't lose to those teams unless their name is Kansas. We have a lot more talent than those schools, despite the attrition. I don't consider this a monumental rebuild, as there are still plenty of 4 star players on this roster, and Rhule's first recruiting class was Top 40.

---

The fact that almost 3/4ths of that top 40 class has already been pressed into action really speaks to the amount of rebuilding required from Rhule. Half of the '16 class that was supposed to be our best ever evaporated after Briles got ****canned (leaving gaping holes for us at OL, RB, and WR), at least 4 medical retirements on the OL (including 2 Centers) that I can think of off the top of my head, a 5* experienced young QB bolted for Auburn, 4* QB Chris Johnson left for UH before the '16 season, 1000yd RB Johnny Jefferson quit football altogether (plus T Williams has been out so far with an injury suffered last year), starting LB Raaquan Davis left Baylor. I'm probably forgetting some things, but the point is we have glaring deficiencies at several key position groups due to heightened attrition and injuries, to the point that we started a walk-on at Safety and a WR as a CB against Liberty. All I was saying in my original post btw was that Duke and UTSA aren't collectively a group of scrubs, those guys have talent and pride too, plus they aren't changing schemes or coaching staffs or dealing with a huge scandal that some people here for some reason seem to ignore in their analysis of this team.

---

We lost to a team with 22 fewer scholarships, yet you want to pretend numbers are in their favor? Seriously? We have talent, we're just choosing not to use it effectively. We should've been able to start a paraplegic at safety and still won that game with the massive talent gap in that field.

Also, everyone agrees that it takes time to install a system. That's why you teach it in stages so that whatever you do call in a game, the players know their assignments.

If they don't have a package down yet, don't put it in the game plan. If they don't have a package down at all (what appeared to be the case against Liberty) then you've taught way too many different things too quickly, or you can't teach.

bosquebear2012 said:

---

Stranger said:

---

Did he just quote Joe Paterno . . . again?

---

I was thinking the same thing!! haha

---

Add me to the list.

Someone use some of this man's $28 mil that hw will bw making over the next 7 uears to get him some coaching from a publicist.

HuMcK said:

---

la1037 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Krieg said:

---

What I know right now for sure is that we're 0-3 against really bad competition, and that shouldn't ever happen.

---

I would disagree with this part a little bit. Look at UTSA's schedule this year, they are probably a top 35ish team and have an outside shot at finishing undefeated now. Duke probably deserves to be top 25 (especially if they take care of business against UNC next week), and they absolutely nailed a Northwestern team that I though 2 weeks ago was light years better than us. Even Liberty (whatever classification they are this year) should be favored in all of the rest of their games, plus that game had its own extenuating circumstances with injuries in the secondary. What I'm saying is, yeah this team isn't top tier by any stretch of the imagination right now and I would prefer W's over L's, but they haven't been losing to "bad competition". People get so caught up with P5 vs G5 and the names on the front of jerseys that they sometimes don't recognize good teams when they see them. I think Duke and UTSA are actually pretty good teams this year, and Liberty isn't what I would call "bad" either.

---

OMG. I don't even know where to start here.

---

You can start by explaining why you think it's wrong, because "OMG" by itself isn't very persuasive. Duke and UTSA aren't gonna make the Playoff, but that doesn't make them "bad competition". UTSA has the inside track to winning their conference outright and may not lose any games at all now. Duke should end up finishing in the top half of the ACC (probably in the neighborhood of 8 wins or more if they stay healthy, in the best football conference in the country this year). People on this board seem to have the idea that Baylor is some sort of 'Bama-lite that should be able to show up and win 8-10 games just because of some recruiting rankings and what they've done in the recent past, but that ain't how it works (ask UT). Dramatic scheme changes take time to implement (especially with players recruited to play a different, very niche, scheme), developing depth to replace the lost '16 class and higher than normal attrition (for us) takes time, scrubbing our reputation/perception clean after one of the biggest CFB scandals in recent memory takes time and effort. I would have liked for us to be 3-0 or 2-1 right now just like everybody else, but I'm not gonna call for Rhule to be run out of town only 3 games into a monumental rebuild like a lot of this board seems to be doing.

---

You can paint it however you want.

But we lost to LIBERTY.

LIBERTY!

ABSOLUTELY PATHETIC!

There arent many FBS teams that would do that. Maybe not any, besides us. But keep telling yourself whatevet makes you feel better about losing to severely less talented teams.

He's getting paid millions of dollars, if he had said he didn't believe in BU football, he'd get fired the next day.

You should really not believe anything he says. I would probably rate his honesty far below Briles'. He seems to be quite full of himself, trying to get us into these complex schemes. I think to him, doing things his way is far more important than winning, and as a coach, that is a fatal flaw. For sure though, one shared by many who think they're great, and not just in football..

Anyways, the idea that he's coming out and trying to pump up the fans after 3 horrific losses, is absurd. He clearly has not been coaching well, and our players have not really been playing well. I'd rather him direct his efforts into the win/loss column, not into moral support for the fans. No matter how much you talk to the fans, you keep losing like this, and the fans won't show up.

I'm starting to think he's a bit delusional. I knew nothing about him coming into this, but what I can't believe is how many of you were pumping sunshine up his rear. Very interesting, though what is this forum good for if not to come and make things up on subjects we're wholly ignorant of?

la1037 said:

---

Jacques Strap said:

---

I really like CMR. I wish he ran the spread because it was so much fun to watch but I hope he finds success with his style. I know he is here to win games but he seems like a good guy and you can't say that about all college coaches.

---

I agree. If this were a "good guy" competition, we would be in the top 10 maybe... certainly ahead of TCU.

---

"Good guy" kind of sounds familiar. Were you using "good guy" as a synonym for "nice guys finish last?"