10 wins per year is asinine. However 8 and the occasional 10 plus is not. This league is incredibly weak whether anyone wants to admit that or not. There's no reason BU shouldn't be hitting that 8 win bar on the regular barring unfortunate factors such as mass injuries.

Married A Horn said:

---

ccgutierrez said:

---

I was in the fire Aranda camp earlier this year but he's made me eat my words and I'm happy with that. Here's the scenario I see with Aranda. He's got potentially at least two years left before any changes would be made. Assuming he wins at least 6-8 wins next year, which I think he should than he's definitely coming back in 2026. That season would then be the one where we decide if we've reached a ceiling or not as program and a change is needed. And heck if next season he up and wins 10 games, he's not going anywhere for a long time.

I think the bigger thing like other posters have said is we have to realize what we are in college football now. We will probably never sniff a national title anymore. However I think our place if college football is to be a consistent 8-10 win program that challenges for conference titles a couple times a decade. If Aranda has a good season this year and next I don't see how finding a new coach would get us anymore success.

---

I refuse to accept this. I want at least 1 National Title in my lifetime. Basketball and CSD gave us one there. Football can too.

I dont expect National Titles. I dont expect CFP all the time. But I would enjoy and expect our program to be in the CFP discussion each November (conference champs contender). Its not like our conference is stuffed with perennial National Champions.

---

I love the ambition (and would love to see it happen), but you can't compare CBB and CFB.

You have to go back all the way to 1996 (Florida) for the last time a a college football team won its school's first national title. Every other champion since then has been a prior national champion.

In that same time period 6 schools have won their first MBB title. Clearly it is easier to climb the mountaintop in MBB.

IowaBear said:

---

I'm fine with him getting another year. But let's be honest. Spavs offense is what's winning us these games. If he gets another job I'll immediately be concerned. Dave's defense is utter garbage that's undeniable. That HAS to change going forward. I'm not sure if it's Dave's scheme or what but this off seasons agenda has to be bringing in better talent in the secondary. Guys like Bobby, Lemear, Jenkins need recruited over.

---

I think Dave would agree wholeheartedly with the bolded above. He has been very careful to say about as much as a coach can and should say that the talent and speed is not up to the level to which it needs to be to have an effective defense. I would expect to see the portal push this year to be more slanted to the defense. Hopefully the supply will meet the demand, but that is beyond our control.

And to the 10-win threshold on a consistent basis. All that does is give a basis for complaint. No one in the environment we have today should have such a ridiculous expectation. If you do, the problem can be seen in the mirror. In today's world with basically unrestricted free agency and donors and the large state schools being able to dump unlimited money into a program to buy championships such consistency is not only unrealistic for a school in our situation, IMO, but also is contrary to what a university's purpose should be about.

Clearly the aforementioned 10 wins isn't a realistic expectation. But "bowl eligibility" is a laughable acceptable standard imo.

Also, being happy with 1 conference championship a decade seems sad as well - given the state of the B12. Sure that could change, but if CDA had been on his game last year, we could have been leading the conference this year. Shoulda, woulda, couldas.

Anyway my belief is that we should be top quarter team nearly every year in the B12. Not every year, but very frequently. Winning the conference should happen more than once per decade, but I don't have a set timeline.

CDA stays if he can create a successful winning program clearly. Problem is some of your definitions of winning is just mediocre at the end of the day. Sure 6 or 7 wins is better than 3, but its not a success imo. An improvement yes, success, no.

And honestly I can be OK with a mediocre 5-7 win program if we just can't compete due to NIL. If that's ever the case, let's not try to pretend that we're serious though. Let's drop the massive coaching salaries and give it to basketball.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

Married A Horn said:

---

ccgutierrez said:

---

I was in the fire Aranda camp earlier this year but he's made me eat my words and I'm happy with that. Here's the scenario I see with Aranda. He's got potentially at least two years left before any changes would be made. Assuming he wins at least 6-8 wins next year, which I think he should than he's definitely coming back in 2026. That season would then be the one where we decide if we've reached a ceiling or not as program and a change is needed. And heck if next season he up and wins 10 games, he's not going anywhere for a long time.

I think the bigger thing like other posters have said is we have to realize what we are in college football now. We will probably never sniff a national title anymore. However I think our place if college football is to be a consistent 8-10 win program that challenges for conference titles a couple times a decade. If Aranda has a good season this year and next I don't see how finding a new coach would get us anymore success.

---

I refuse to accept this. I want at least 1 National Title in my lifetime. Basketball and CSD gave us one there. Football can too.

I dont expect National Titles. I dont expect CFP all the time. But I would enjoy and expect our program to be in the CFP discussion each November (conference champs contender). Its not like our conference is stuffed with perennial National Champions.

---

I love the ambition (and would love to see it happen), but you can't compare CBB and CFB.

You have to go back all the way to 1996 (Florida) for the last time a a college football team won its school's first national title. Every other champion since then has been a prior national champion.

In that same time period 6 schools have won their first MBB title. Clearly it is easier to climb the mountaintop in MBB.

---

Agree. Sometimes as BU fans we just need to get over our Aggie-like delusions of grandeur. We are NOT a blueblood, nor will we ever be. We will always lose the money/brand wars. It is just the order of the college football world. Don't like it? Go to Wal Mart where all the UT fans shop. Otherwise, try to enjoy the games and appreciate the high times that come about every 3-4 years.

I was leaning towards the "fire Dave" camp at the start of the season. I felt okay with the way we played early because we were competitive against good teams but was strolling towards firing him at the end of the season. Our schedule got easier. We are beating the teams we should. We are one DB tripping over his feet away from competing for a conference championship. Three things point to him getting another year. 1) We are beating the teams we should and winning on the road. that is improvement. 2) The kids want to play for Dave. The fact that they didn't lay down after ISU speaks to what they think of him. Coaches that kids want to play for through adversity usually win more than they lose. 3) He has greatly improved on the recruiting front. That is a big part of college coaching and the immediate returns are an improvement. Those three things don't mean an extension but they do not point to getting fired.

Someone else said it, when Dave loses he sucks, when he wins we have a lot of "If, then" reasons why it is just a mirage. As Parcells said, "You are what your record says you are!" This year is a significant improvement.

I hope we can contend for a National Championship but it is not expected. Anyone who expects that is out of touch with CFB reality. TCU got incredibly lucky in 2022 and got absolutely slaughtered in the Championship game. Oregon has Nike behind them and they have only sniffed a CFB NC a few times. Briles is the best coach we have had as far as results and we know how that went when we were in position to contend.

We are a small school in the grand scheme of things. If we fire a coach in a year where he doubled his wins from the year before (maybe even triple them) then we will be turned down by every coach that would be on the "Fire Dave" camp's list. Win the next two games and we will be 4th at worst in the Big 12.

He's done enough that you ride with him for now and save your money for NIL.

He's obviously a flawed candidate because he is on his third Oc and functionally his third Dc in 5 years. That shows you that he did not show up with the ability to establish a workable identity for the team while attracting and managing a roster and a coaching staff. He's also learning on the job and showing some progress. Keep him for now, build the roster, monitor his progress, and watch the buyout decrease.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

Killing Floor said:

---

My dumb take

I do not think Aranda will get this team to a minimally acceptable win rate of 10 per year.

But I also recognize at this point we have won 2 more games than last year and still have 2 remaining. So there's no doubt to me the team is improved.

I've always been consistent in these 2 opinions, I don't trust him and if the team is improving and at least getting to play postseason he's doing his job.

I'd never root for him to fail because that's rooting against the team. Today things are looking up. Sic'em.

---

Minimally acceptable win rate of 10 per year!?!?!? Come on, let's just think about that for a second.

Over a 12-game schedule that's a win rate of .83333

Even if you spread that across 13 games that's still a win rate of .769.

The number 1 highest winning percentage in CFB history is a Michigan at .734.

Nick Saban's career winning percentage was .802.

So, your minimum acceptable win rate for Coach Dave Aranda at Baylor would require him to be better than or in the ballpark of the single greatest coach in College Football history. I humbly suggest recalibrating your standards.

8.5-3.5 with a conference championship a decade and being in the running for two more in that time period should earn a Baylor football coach tenure.

---

DallasBear, thank you for this. You have echoed my thoughts completely. 10 wins per year is a ridiculous standard. I have maintained for years that as Bill Snyder K-State should be the goal for Baylor football as a program. A high-floor program that has a shot at winning the conference championship every few years and (in this new market) should be in the conversation for the expanded playoff every few years come November.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Clearly the aforementioned 10 wins isn't a realistic expectation. But "bowl eligibility" is a laughable acceptable standard imo.

Also, being happy with 1 conference championship a decade seems sad as well - given the state of the B12. Sure that could change, but if CDA had been on his game last year, we could have been leading the conference this year. Shoulda, woulda, couldas.

Anyway my belief is that we should be top quarter team nearly every year in the B12. Not every year, but very frequently. Winning the conference should happen more than once per decade, but I don't have a set timeline.

CDA stays if he can create a successful winning program clearly. Problem is some of your definitions of winning is just mediocre at the end of the day. Sure 6 or 7 wins is better than 3, but its not a success imo. An improvement yes, success, no.

And honestly I can be OK with a mediocre 5-7 win program if we just can't compete due to NIL. If that's ever the case, let's not try to pretend that we're serious though. Let's drop the massive coaching salaries and give it to basketball.

---

Dude. There are 15 other teams trying to win the conf title and they are not just going to let you have it.

The historical precedent of schools dominating their conference for the most part are examples of one or two schools beating up on lesser competition. Think Nebraska and OU back in the Big 8 days. Alabama rattling off conference titles in a deep conference is very ahistorical.

At two conference titles per decade you are ahead of LSU, Georgia, Penn State, and others. You're on par with Texas post-1980.

In a different phase of life I would have focused on the outcomes. But today, I'm with the poster up thread. Be grateful for the time spent watching our Bears and really enjoys the highs when they come around.

Yogi said:

---

4. There is going to be a huge rush on coaches in the market at the end of the season, and I am not sure what will be available will be an improvement on what we have.

---

I don't think there's going to be a huge coaching carousel this year, at least with really big programs. Maybe West Virginia. Maybe Oklahoma State and Gundy mutually part ways (which is crazy after one losing season in 19 years). But I think Florida State, TCU, Oklahoma, etc. will retain for another year. Schools like Baylor and Florida that looked all but ready to make a switch a few weeks ago, are seeing turnarounds.

has there been an in-season turnaround like what we are currently witnessing?! of course there is season to season upgrades (Indiana), but i dont recall in recent football memory a turnaround like this. Dave deserves another year. yes, its probably 90% spav, but dave is the one who hired the guy, so i think its a good thing that he got the extension.

He also has some great recruits coming in this next class- would suck to lose some of those guys

The 2012 BU in season turnaround was actually more impressive imo. But it's rare that a team does a complete 180 6 weeks into a season like the 24 BU squad has.

DallasBear9902 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Clearly the aforementioned 10 wins isn't a realistic expectation. But "bowl eligibility" is a laughable acceptable standard imo.

Also, being happy with 1 conference championship a decade seems sad as well - given the state of the B12. Sure that could change, but if CDA had been on his game last year, we could have been leading the conference this year. Shoulda, woulda, couldas.

Anyway my belief is that we should be top quarter team nearly every year in the B12. Not every year, but very frequently. Winning the conference should happen more than once per decade, but I don't have a set timeline.

CDA stays if he can create a successful winning program clearly. Problem is some of your definitions of winning is just mediocre at the end of the day. Sure 6 or 7 wins is better than 3, but its not a success imo. An improvement yes, success, no.

And honestly I can be OK with a mediocre 5-7 win program if we just can't compete due to NIL. If that's ever the case, let's not try to pretend that we're serious though. Let's drop the massive coaching salaries and give it to basketball.

---

Dude. There are 15 other teams trying to win the conf title and they are not just going to let you have it.

The historical precedent of schools dominating their conference for the most part are examples of one or two schools beating up on lesser competition. Think Nebraska and OU back in the Big 8 days. Alabama rattling off conference titles in a deep conference is very ahistorical.

At two conference titles per decade you are ahead of LSU, Georgia, Penn State, and others. You're on par with Texas post-1980.

In a different phase of life I would have focused on the outcomes. But today, I'm with the poster up thread. Be grateful for the time spent watching our Bears and really enjoys the highs when they come around.

---

This. Baylor is a competent program but so is much of the rest of the conference. To that end and given the changes in the market (NIL, transfer portal, conference realignment, unequal media and CFP distributions, etc.), Baylor would be fortunate to, on average, win a conference title every 10-12 years moving forward. That doesn't mean that Baylor should be out there winning 3 games a season, but -really- bad years like last year will happen from time to time for various reasons - look at Oklahoma State, which has been the model of on the field consistency for the legacy Big 12 teams, and how it's winless in conference this year.

I'm just going with the flow. Last season was a disaster, and a repeat of some weaknesses I had seen for a good while, some cracks that showed much larger gaps in a revealing season. I had hoped for improvement in a lot of areas in order to keep moving forward in a good way.

This season is very much a mystery. The wins lately are certainly not a mystery as they are on paper as wins. The team is performing much better, undoubtedly, and we're all happy about that. But there are so many close calls that I'm still just watching and hoping for good decisions, good strategies and better overall play to become expected. I still see some of the same cracks, yet growing more faint with each win.

I still really don't know what to expect from this team. But it looks like they are trending the right way, so I'm glad about that.

That's about all I can do.

Sic' em!

Dia del DougO said:

---

I'm just going with the flow. Last season was a disaster, and a repeat of some weaknesses I had seen for a good while, some cracks that showed much larger gaps in a revealing season. I had hoped for improvement in a lot of areas in order to keep moving forward in a good way.

This season is very much a mystery. The wins lately are certainly not a mystery as they are on paper as wins. The team is performing much better, undoubtedly, and we're all happy about that. But there are so many close calls that I'm still just watching and hoping for good decisions, good strategies and better overall play to become expected. I still see some of the same cracks, yet growing more faint with each win.

I still really don't know what to expect from this team. But it looks like they are trending the right way, so I'm glad about that.

That's about all I can do.

Sic' em!

---

I don't understand what you mean by close calls. We won on a last second field goal against TCU, but we beat Tech by 24 (with a garbage TD by them), we beat OSU by 10, we beat WVA by 14 (with a garbage TD by them). We have as many double digit wins as BYU (granted they won their other games by one score while we lost). But we're not slipping by these teams. And as shaky as the defense has been, we basically shut out WVA in the second half.

You play the teams in front of you, and if we're getting dinged by some of the people on this board for playing the lower half of the conference, so what? A win is a win, and a double digit win means we're controlling the game.

guadalupeoso said:

---

DallasBear9902 said:

---

Killing Floor said:

---

My dumb take

I do not think Aranda will get this team to a minimally acceptable win rate of 10 per year.

But I also recognize at this point we have won 2 more games than last year and still have 2 remaining. So there's no doubt to me the team is improved.

I've always been consistent in these 2 opinions, I don't trust him and if the team is improving and at least getting to play postseason he's doing his job.

I'd never root for him to fail because that's rooting against the team. Today things are looking up. Sic'em.

---

Minimally acceptable win rate of 10 per year!?!?!? Come on, let's just think about that for a second.

Over a 12-game schedule that's a win rate of .83333

Even if you spread that across 13 games that's still a win rate of .769.

The number 1 highest winning percentage in CFB history is a Michigan at .734.

Nick Saban's career winning percentage was .802.

So, your minimum acceptable win rate for Coach Dave Aranda at Baylor would require him to be better than or in the ballpark of the single greatest coach in College Football history. I humbly suggest recalibrating your standards.

8.5-3.5 with a conference championship a decade and being in the running for two more in that time period should earn a Baylor football coach tenure.

---

DallasBear, thank you for this. You have echoed my thoughts completely. 10 wins per year is a ridiculous standard. I have maintained for years that as Bill Snyder K-State should be the goal for Baylor football as a program. A high-floor program that has a shot at winning the conference championship every few years and (in this new market) should be in the conversation for the expanded playoff every few years come November.

---

My take as well. We should be a high floor program that is in the thick of winning the B12 frequently and make the expanded playoffs once every 5 years or so. Bring me home a national championship before I die. I still don't know if Dave is the guy to do that but Scott Drew did it under worse conditions.

This resurgence we are experiencing has bought Dave some more patience in my opinion.

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

I'm just going with the flow. Last season was a disaster, and a repeat of some weaknesses I had seen for a good while, some cracks that showed much larger gaps in a revealing season. I had hoped for improvement in a lot of areas in order to keep moving forward in a good way.

This season is very much a mystery. The wins lately are certainly not a mystery as they are on paper as wins. The team is performing much better, undoubtedly, and we're all happy about that. But there are so many close calls that I'm still just watching and hoping for good decisions, good strategies and better overall play to become expected. I still see some of the same cracks, yet growing more faint with each win.

I still really don't know what to expect from this team. But it looks like they are trending the right way, so I'm glad about that.

That's about all I can do.

Sic' em!

---

I don't understand what you mean by close calls. We won on a last second field goal against TCU, but we beat Tech by 24 (with a garbage TD by them), we beat OSU by 10, we beat WVA by 14 (with a garbage TD by them). We have as many double digit wins as BYU (granted they won their other games by one score while we lost). But we're not slipping by these teams. And as shaky as the defense has been, we basically shut out WVA in the second half.

You play the teams in front of you, and if we're getting dinged by some of the people on this board for playing the lower half of the conference, so what? A win is a win, and a double digit win means we're controlling the game.

---

I was about to post something similar. We've actually, for the first time since 2021, done a pretty good job of playing complementary football during this run we're on. We're stacking scores and stops in a way we haven't for a long time to play from ahead in this games instead of chasing as we have in so many of our gut-punch losses the past few years.

Before the Tech game, I said the thing that made the Dave Aranda Baylor era so frustrating is that every loss felt inevitable and every win felt like a Houdini act. This stretch has been so much fun because the opposite has been true.

We've been getting leads and then growing them enough to put serious game pressure on our opponents in the second half. Having been on the other end of that game pressure so often the past few years, this side is so much better.

bear2be2 said:

---

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

---

Dia del DougO said:

---

I'm just going with the flow. Last season was a disaster, and a repeat of some weaknesses I had seen for a good while, some cracks that showed much larger gaps in a revealing season. I had hoped for improvement in a lot of areas in order to keep moving forward in a good way.

This season is very much a mystery. The wins lately are certainly not a mystery as they are on paper as wins. The team is performing much better, undoubtedly, and we're all happy about that. But there are so many close calls that I'm still just watching and hoping for good decisions, good strategies and better overall play to become expected. I still see some of the same cracks, yet growing more faint with each win.

I still really don't know what to expect from this team. But it looks like they are trending the right way, so I'm glad about that.

That's about all I can do.

Sic' em!

---

I don't understand what you mean by close calls. We won on a last second field goal against TCU, but we beat Tech by 24 (with a garbage TD by them), we beat OSU by 10, we beat WVA by 14 (with a garbage TD by them). We have as many double digit wins as BYU (granted they won their other games by one score while we lost). But we're not slipping by these teams. And as shaky as the defense has been, we basically shut out WVA in the second half.

You play the teams in front of you, and if we're getting dinged by some of the people on this board for playing the lower half of the conference, so what? A win is a win, and a double digit win means we're controlling the game.

---

I was about to post something similar. We've actually, for the first time since 2021, done a pretty good job of playing complementary football during this run we're on. We're stacking scores and stops in a way we haven't for a long time to play from ahead in this games instead of chasing as we have in so many of our gut-punch losses the past few years.

Before the Tech game, I said the thing that made the Dave Aranda Baylor era so frustrating is that every loss felt inevitable and every win felt like a Houdini act. This stretch has been so much fun because the opposite has been true.

We've been getting leads and then growing them enough to put serious game pressure on our opponents in the second half. Having been on the other end of that game pressure so often the past few years, this side is so much better.

---

Colorado was so much that inevitable feeling. That loss gets worse every week as we have started winning.