FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

TechDawgMc said:

---

I find it interesting that people keep complaining that Mack hired a coach with no head coaching experience and that Mack didn't hire Joey Mc. Somehow, those two things don't fit well together.

Aranda has to go, but there's no benefit to doing it now. With the new rules, you have to be hiring a new coach on the same day you fire the old one. That gives the new coach a chance to hold onto the players that he wants. If you fire Aranda now, the coach you hire in December is looking at a complete rebuild. This may not be the most talented roster BU has ever had, but it's not so bad you want everyone to leave.

---

Promoting an internal assistant and hiring one from the outside are two completely different things.

If you're promoting an assistant, it's because the staff he was part of was successful at your school, eliminating many of the biggest variables from the equation (fit, buy in, staff building, recruiting, player development, etc.) right off the bat. A promoted assistant starts with an assistant and player core that has already bought into what he's doing and a fan base that already supports him.

At best, it's a continuation of the previous head coach and you keep the train rolling right down the tracks. At worst, it's a slow, gradual decline rather than a Thelma and Louise job right off the cliff like the one we've experienced with Dave.

In hiring an outside assistant, you're relying on a coach you don't have any experience with doing things he's never done to build a successful/sustainable program from scratch.

The only assistant I ever want to see hired by Baylor is an internal promotion, where a seamless transition mitigates most of the risk. I have no interest whatsoever in putting the fate of our program on a career assistant's ability to build a staff, build a roster and learn quickly enough on the job not to bottom out.

---

If you get rid of Aranda, you go outside, find someone with a record of success and clean house. Let the new guy bring his team and you start over. Continuing to fit pieces from past staffs creates a mess. If you get away from Aranda, get away from Aranda. No more half measures.

Mack better have identified someone he wants, even if from lower level, but someone that wins wherever they are.

---

In this case, I agree completely. You don't promote someone from a failed staff unless it's an interim who turns around a season after your head coach has been fired. And no one is going to get that chance here.

I'm talking in generalities. I don't mind promoting assistants from a successful staff. At Baylor specifically, I don't want to hire someone else's assistant as our head coach. The risk is too high.

The post you quoted was refuting the notion that it's logically inconsistent to have been for the hire of Joey McGuire in 2019 and against bringing in Aranda because neither had been a college head coach previously. I was explaining how those two situations would have been different.

---

Where we disagree is that Joey would have been appreciatively better. I give you he is a more Fiery guy, so maybe we are 1 game better a year. Is that where we want to go? In my mind, Rhule is the yardstick. Will Joey or Aranda get us there? Not that I can see.

---

Joey's not leaving Tech, so it's a moot point. This is all about the decision we made after Rhule left, not what we do from here.

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

TechDawgMc said:

---

I find it interesting that people keep complaining that Mack hired a coach with no head coaching experience and that Mack didn't hire Joey Mc. Somehow, those two things don't fit well together.

Aranda has to go, but there's no benefit to doing it now. With the new rules, you have to be hiring a new coach on the same day you fire the old one. That gives the new coach a chance to hold onto the players that he wants. If you fire Aranda now, the coach you hire in December is looking at a complete rebuild. This may not be the most talented roster BU has ever had, but it's not so bad you want everyone to leave.

---

Promoting an internal assistant and hiring one from the outside are two completely different things.

If you're promoting an assistant, it's because the staff he was part of was successful at your school, eliminating many of the biggest variables from the equation (fit, buy in, staff building, recruiting, player development, etc.) right off the bat. A promoted assistant starts with an assistant and player core that has already bought into what he's doing and a fan base that already supports him.

At best, it's a continuation of the previous head coach and you keep the train rolling right down the tracks. At worst, it's a slow, gradual decline rather than a Thelma and Louise job right off the cliff like the one we've experienced with Dave.

In hiring an outside assistant, you're relying on a coach you don't have any experience with doing things he's never done to build a successful/sustainable program from scratch.

The only assistant I ever want to see hired by Baylor is an internal promotion, where a seamless transition mitigates most of the risk. I have no interest whatsoever in putting the fate of our program on a career assistant's ability to build a staff, build a roster and learn quickly enough on the job not to bottom out.

---

If you get rid of Aranda, you go outside, find someone with a record of success and clean house. Let the new guy bring his team and you start over. Continuing to fit pieces from past staffs creates a mess. If you get away from Aranda, get away from Aranda. No more half measures.

Mack better have identified someone he wants, even if from lower level, but someone that wins wherever they are.

---

In this case, I agree completely. You don't promote someone from a failed staff unless it's an interim who turns around a season after your head coach has been fired. And no one is going to get that chance here.

I'm talking in generalities. I don't mind promoting assistants from a successful staff. At Baylor specifically, I don't want to hire someone else's assistant as our head coach. The risk is too high.

The post you quoted was refuting the notion that it's logically inconsistent to have been for the hire of Joey McGuire in 2019 and against bringing in Aranda because neither had been a college head coach previously. I was explaining how those two situations would have been different.

---

Where we disagree is that Joey would have been appreciatively better. I give you he is a more Fiery guy, so maybe we are 1 game better a year. Is that where we want to go? In my mind, Rhule is the yardstick. Will Joey or Aranda get us there? Not that I can see.

---

Joey's not leaving Tech, so it's a moot point. This is all about the decision we made after Rhule left, not what we do from here.

---

I will give you that, Tech is a good fit for Joey. He is much more West Texas, than Dallas/Austin in personality!

FLBear5630 said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

Bearfan1998 said:

---

How about a realistic option

---

Have a hot shot coach lined up before you fire the existing one, and announce that hire immediately after you announce the firing.

---

You think Baylor can get a "hot shot" coach in this NIL environment in Waco?

I see it being someone moving up Divisions, a retread looking for a 2nd chance OR a Coordinator taking this job. After Aranda, NO Coordinators.

---

I said "hot shot" not blue blood.
There are no guarantees.
We've proven that.

The Nobody that has Accomplished Nothing is really taking it to Baylor today in all 3 phases. Maybe he will even make it to the Big 12 title game this season?

/s

The sad part is that there are some here that actually wanted Tech to win today.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

The Nobody that has Accomplished Nothing is really taking it to Baylor today in all 3 phases. Maybe he will even make it to the Big 12 title game this season?

/s

The sad part is that there are some here that actually wanted Tech to win today.

---

Bingo, the "Joey Cult". But, it's Joey...

You guys that were saying Joey is better. Does Dave get the nod winning 2 out of 3?

Or is it now 4 out of 7? Or change the metric, H2H means nothing now.

FLBear5630 said:

---

You guys that were saying Joey is better. Does Dave get the nod winning 2 out of 3?

Or is it now 4 out of 7? Or change the metric, H2H means nothing now.

---

As with all other levels and aspects of sports, head-to-head only serves as a tiebreaker. At their current trajectories, Dave would need another double-digit-win season to get make it a factor. He's that far behind after the last three seasons.

Wrong!!! Only H2H matters on here!! Dave is king!! At least that's the logic used on here

I really think McGuire needs your PR services on Tech boards. No one here wants McGuire fired. No one here has bad feelings about him. (Stating McGuire is not one of the best HCs is not expressing ill will nor is disagreeing with the repeated nauseating ass kissing prop from some here, nor is not wanting McGuire to be the HC here). The Tech people need to hear non stop propaganda about how advanced they are compared to Baylor. They need some cheering up over there.

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

You guys that were saying Joey is better. Does Dave get the nod winning 2 out of 3?

Or is it now 4 out of 7? Or change the metric, H2H means nothing now.

---

As with all other levels and aspects of sports, head-to-head only serves as a tiebreaker. At their current trajectories, Dave would need another double-digit-win season to get make it a factor. He's that far behind after the last three seasons.

---

Gottcha.

But, too bad Dave doesn't get to face Joey every week. Our problems would be over...

IowaBear said:

---

Wrong!!! Only H2H matters on here!! Dave is king!! At least that's the logic used on here

---

King? Only versus Joey...

2-1 is king? Yikes. I'm as happy as anyone for the dub that we desperately needed. But the takes are rather laughable. He actually have people arguing 12-20 is better than 20-13 let that sink in a bit

IowaBear said:

---

2-1 is king? Yikes. I'm as happy as anyone for the dub that we desperately needed. But the takes are rather laughable. He actually have people arguing 12-20 is better than 20-13 let that sink in a bit

---

Nah, just like having fun with the JOEY!!!!! Crowd.