Stefano DiMera said:

---

There's some arguments on this board I just don't get.. and this is one .

What is it about McGuire that people wanna piss on his record? Best seasons since Leach. First time to beat OU and Texas in same year in school history.

Why this double standard? I don't see anyone criticizing Ryan Day or Kirby Smart for having huge NIL war chests.

It's ok for a blue blood to spend but one of "own" (conference mate) does it and it's like it doesn't count.

---

Kirby and Day were winners before NIL. They are a true blue blood programs as you know. I think people are just shietting on Tech/joey because they're Tech and frustration were in the dumpster. He has turned that program around with his guys and now they got a great BMD to make them a top 10 program as long as the funding is there. I'm jelly and I wish we had that kind of support.

For a long time the crticism of Kirby was "he cant beat Alabama" and Day "can't beat Michigan."

dycbaylor02 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

There's some arguments on this board I just don't get.. and this is one .

What is it about McGuire that people wanna piss on his record? Best seasons since Leach. First time to beat OU and Texas in same year in school history.

Why this double standard? I don't see anyone criticizing Ryan Day or Kirby Smart for having huge NIL war chests.

It's ok for a blue blood to spend but one of "own" (conference mate) does it and it's like it doesn't count.

---

Kirby and Day were winners before NIL. They are a true blue blood programs as you know. I think people are just shietting on Tech/joey because they're Tech and frustration were in the dumpster. He has turned that program around with his guys and now they got a great BMD to make them a top 10 program as long as the funding is there. I'm jelly and I wish we had that kind of support.

---

I think Joey did a great job. Where I think he made a difference is that he was visionary enough to know what the final product looked like and gave the AD the shopping list. That is HUGE in this environment and there are 2 lessons I see that are relevant to Baylor -

1- He knew what he was building. I can't say that we have that. I don't think Dave has any idea what the final product looks like at Baylor that can get us in the Playoff. He has pieced together teams with the best he can get, that is not the same as building with the end vision as that goal. Joey gets top marks for that. Read about how that D came together. It is a fascinating read and really impressed me with the knowledge of the rule changes and how to use them to their advantage rather that just *****.

2 - Tech - Gotta give them credit. I don't think that the culture changed since Leach, Tech has always had a culture of trying to get to the top level. They came up with the cash and gave Joey the support he needs to put together a winning team. We do not have that. We seem to fight ourselves. Tech is ALL moving in the same direction.


Finally, I don't think Joey would have been a good choice for Baylor. I cannot see him surviving the BS that Baylor puts their HCs through. They definitely would not have gotten those players and would have laughed when Joey said I need 7 million to make it happen. It was a good choice for him to leave, I can't see Baylor doing what Tech did.

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

Sounds strangely familiar, doesn't it?

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

Respectfully, Will you at least concede that the blue bloods have been buying players for years?

Timbear said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

Respectfully, Will you at least concede that the blue bloods have been buying players for years?

---

Of course. What makes you think I don't? In the dream someone posted about an 80 team conference I flatly stated winners had been buying teams for decades.

the only thing holding back txt from winning the cfp is friday nights joey.

I have a feeling that Tech will get to enjoy some time rising to the top, but the major powers are not going to enjoy - or allow for long - to get their boats rocked.

Some kind of targeted NIL changes or even a lawsuit aimed at limiting "new money" schools like Tech would not surprise me in the slightest.

OurOurs said:

---

I have a feeling that Tech will get to enjoy some time rising to the top, but the major powers are not going to enjoy - or allow for long - to get their boats rocked.

Some kind of targeted NIL changes or even a lawsuit aimed at limiting "new money" schools like Tech would not surprise me in the slightest.

---

When Baylor became a threat to the bigs. They came at Baylor.

Saban wanted rule changes to slow down the hurry up offense saying people would get injured.
UT made a run at Briles and , I believe, were in cahoots with some on our BOR to bring him down.

Being a state school , it will be harder to accomplish but, they will come at them.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

During the conference champ broadcast they said Cody does all the decisions on the players and the coaching staff does not waste time on recruiting so they focus on the x and o's if that's true I think that's pretty damn amazing teamwork.

dycbaylor02 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

During the conference champ broadcast they said Cody does all the decisions on the players and the coaching staff does not waste time on recruiting so they focus on the x and o's if that's true I think that's pretty damn amazing teamwork.

---

I didn't hear that but he did play for tech and played in the NFL so he's not just some rich guy throwing his money around.

dycbaylor02 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

During the conference champ broadcast they said Cody does all the decisions on the players and the coaching staff does not waste time on recruiting so they focus on the x and o's if that's true I think that's pretty damn amazing teamwork.

---

Um, no.

James Blanchard is the GM and he has a team of evaluators. Their full-time job is evaluating talent and selecting who to recruit. They will share this with the coordinators and positions coaches, but they have final say with only Joey being able to veto them. Additionally, Blanchard manages the budget for the NIL offerings (but not the NIL itself).

They will work with Cody and the Matador Club (the NIL collective) on what they want to offer, terms of the contract (1 yr, 2 yr, etc.) and so on. But Blanchard is truly running it like an NFL GM. He manages the evaluation of talent, the decision-making on who to go after, and the financial and contract decisions. He works with Cody et al for them, through the NIL collective, to fund the NIL particulars for the players he selects.

Blanchard is in charge of the whole operation, minus writing the NIL check.

This is why Notre Dame and USC and others have tried to throw bags of cash at Blanchard to come work for them instead. ND tried two years in a row.

notned said:

---

dycbaylor02 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

During the conference champ broadcast they said Cody does all the decisions on the players and the coaching staff does not waste time on recruiting so they focus on the x and o's if that's true I think that's pretty damn amazing teamwork.

---

Um, no.

James Blanchard is the GM and he has a team of evaluators. Their full-time job is evaluating talent and selecting who to recruit. They will share this with the coordinators and positions coaches, but they have final say with only Joey being able to veto them. Additionally, Blanchard manages the budget for the NIL offerings (but not the NIL itself).

They will work with Cody and the Matador Club (the NIL collective) on what they want to offer, terms of the contract (1 yr, 2 yr, etc.) and so on. But Blanchard is truly running it like an NFL GM. He manages the evaluation of talent, the decision-making on who to go after, and the financial and contract decisions. He works with Cody et al for them, through the NIL collective, to fund the NIL particulars for the players he selects.

Blanchard is in charge of the whole operation, minus writing the NIL check.

This is why Notre Dame and USC and others have tried to throw bags of cash at Blanchard to come work for them instead. ND tried two years in a row.

---

It is an interesting set up. This is the future

Timbear said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Cody Campbell is a very interesting character. That's what makes TT's success with his money, not only successful but demonstrates what money can buy if spent wisely.

I will never understand how BU was goaded into paying Rhoades and Aranda boatloads of money. Linda can talk all she wants about the economies of athletics vs academics but they way overspent on unqualified targets.

---

Respectfully, Will you at least concede that the blue bloods have been buying players for years?

---

I think you would be hard pressed to prove it to the extent that it is today and not for the amounts and percentage of the team being paid. It is way more than the past ever was.

Probably but a Trans Am in 1980's was worth a lot to a 17 year old kid. DKR recruited our next door neighbors kid who wasn't qualified to play touch football but his buddy was a 5 star going elsewhere so both got full scholarships to UT.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

tmcats said:

---

the only thing holding back txt from winning the cfp is friday nights joey.

---

Ya! Look at all the winning before Joey and how he has screwed it up.

You sound like someone Joey didn't ask to come along to tech.

---

i've watched joey make some of the dumbest decisions ever like going for 4th down when he had top ten oregon on the ropes in lubbock,. then losing. he's fortunate to be cody campbell's coach. and i hope txt wins the thing. proof that championships can be bought.

canoso said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

SailorBear13 said:

---

Watching the Big 12 championship game it's hard to think…. is this what could have been at Baylor Football if we kept him as HC?

With him and James Blanchard there is an argument to be had our team would have been much better. I guess we'll never know.

---

It'd still be mediocre here. McGwire turned out to be pretty mid as a head coach. It took buying a team to finally get him beyond an eight win season. He always was mostly a rah-rah guy.

---

Oops, keep wiping your face. There's still quite a bit of egg on it.

---

Really? Care to point out where I'm wrong?

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

---

It's "McGuire," not "Maguire."

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

---

It absolutely does. Because five years is a much larger and more representative sample where coaching football is concerned.

Cali's entire case is that Joey McGuire had established himself as a mediocre head coach -- something that can't even be done in three year's time, particularly when taking over a program that had largely sucked before you arrived.

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

---

It absolutely does. Because five years is a much larger and meaningful sample where coaching football is concerned.

Cali's entire case is that Joey McGuire had established himself as a mediocre head coach -- something that can't even be done in three year's time, particularly when taking over a program that had largely sucked before you arrived.

---

As has been documented elsewhere, Texas Tech was literally loaded with super seniors for his first 2 seasons - both in abstract and relative to the Big 12 teams on Tech's schedule - and that is indisputable fact. Going a step further, the mainstream sports media projected that 2023 Tech - in McGuire's year 2 - was going to do great things (i.e. top 25 preseason FPI*, top 25 preseason coaches poll**, etc.***), however, it sputtered the same way that it did during his year 1 and year 3 (5+ losses per season). McGuire's 2025 season has been objectively special, but the fact that it was achieved by significantly outspending the other teams in this Big 12 dims the glow of such success given that that Tech team could autopilot to 8-9+ wins with its schedule.

At the end of the day, as long as everyone is agreed that:

1. Texas Tech was loaded with super seniors in McGuire's first two seasons,
2. Texas Tech missed its national preseason expectations in 2023,
3. Texas Tech lost at least 5 games per season in McGuire's first three seasons, and
4. Texas Tech only won the Big 12 in his fourth season because Tech significantly outspent the rest of the teams on its regular season schedule plus conference title game on NIL

then no one is really disagreeing here because we are agreed on what is objectively true.

* College football rankings: ESPN updates 2023 preseason FPI Top 25 for kickoff
** College football rankings: 2023 preseason Coaches Poll released
***Texas Tech football: Preseason expectations have rarely been this high

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

Oh, my bad. All his seasons before this season look the same to me.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

---

It absolutely does. Because five years is a much larger and meaningful sample where coaching football is concerned.

Cali's entire case is that Joey McGuire had established himself as a mediocre head coach -- something that can't even be done in three year's time, particularly when taking over a program that had largely sucked before you arrived.

---

As has been documented elsewhere, Texas Tech was literally loaded with super seniors for his first 2 seasons - both in abstract and relative to the Big 12 teams on Tech's schedule - and that is indisputable fact. Going a step further, the mainstream sports media projected that 2023 Tech - in McGuire's year 2 - was going to do great things (i.e. top 25 preseason FPI*, top 25 preseason coaches poll**, etc.***), however, it sputtered the same way that it did during his year 1 and year 3 (5+ losses per season). McGuire's 2025 season has been objectively special, but the fact that it was achieved by significantly outspending the other teams in this Big 12 dims the glow of such success given that that Tech team could autopilot to 8-9+ wins with its schedule.

At the end of the day, as long as everyone is agreed that:

1. Texas Tech was loaded with super seniors in McGuire's first two seasons,
2. Texas Tech missed its national preseason expectations in 2023,
3. Texas Tech lost at least 5 games per season in McGuire's first three seasons, and
4. Texas Tech only won the Big 12 in his fourth season because Tech significantly outspent the rest of the teams on its regular season schedule plus conference title game on NIL

then no one is really disagreeing here because we are agreed on what is objectively true.

* College football rankings: ESPN updates 2023 preseason FPI Top 25 for kickoff
** College football rankings: 2023 preseason Coaches Poll released
***Texas Tech football: Preseason expectations have rarely been this high

---

As long as we agree that Nick Saban, who had a worse winning percentage after five years as a head coach (.586) than Joey did after three (.605), was a mediocre coach before he gained access to top level Big Ten and SEC talent at Michigan State, LSU and Alabama, no one is disagreeing with what is objectively true.

Does no one else see how ridiculous this is?

Talent makes all coaches' records better. That doesn't mean guys were bad or mediocre coaches before they got access to elite talent. And it certainly doesn't mean that the die on a coaches' career is cast in the first three years as a head coach.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

---

It absolutely does. Because five years is a much larger and meaningful sample where coaching football is concerned.

Cali's entire case is that Joey McGuire had established himself as a mediocre head coach -- something that can't even be done in three year's time, particularly when taking over a program that had largely sucked before you arrived.

---

As has been documented elsewhere, Texas Tech was literally loaded with super seniors for his first 2 seasons - both in abstract and relative to the Big 12 teams on Tech's schedule - and that is indisputable fact. Going a step further, the mainstream sports media projected that 2023 Tech - in McGuire's year 2 - was going to do great things (i.e. top 25 preseason FPI*, top 25 preseason coaches poll**, etc.***), however, it sputtered the same way that it did during his year 1 and year 3 (5+ losses per season). McGuire's 2025 season has been objectively special, but the fact that it was achieved by significantly outspending the other teams in this Big 12 dims the glow of such success given that that Tech team could autopilot to 8-9+ wins with its schedule.

At the end of the day, as long as everyone is agreed that:

1. Texas Tech was loaded with super seniors in McGuire's first two seasons,
2. Texas Tech missed its national preseason expectations in 2023,
3. Texas Tech lost at least 5 games per season in McGuire's first three seasons, and
4. Texas Tech only won the Big 12 in his fourth season because Tech significantly outspent the rest of the teams on its regular season schedule plus conference title game on NIL

then no one is really disagreeing here because we are agreed on what is objectively true.

* College football rankings: ESPN updates 2023 preseason FPI Top 25 for kickoff
** College football rankings: 2023 preseason Coaches Poll released
***Texas Tech football: Preseason expectations have rarely been this high

---

As long as we agree that Nick Saban, who had a worse winning percentage after five years as a head coach (.586) than Joey did after three (.605), was a mediocre coach before he gained access to top level Big Ten and SEC talent at Michigan State, LSU and Alabama, no one is disagreeing with what is objectively true.

Does no one else see how ridiculous this is?

Talent makes all coaches' records better. That doesn't mean guys were bad or mediocre coaches before they got access to elite talent. And it certainly doesn't mean that the die on a coaches' career is cast in the first three years of his head coaching career.

---

What does Saban have to do with anything being discussed here? That's not even an apples to apples comparison.

Nevertheless, it seems like everyone is agreed on McGuire, and that's all that really matters.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

notned said:

---

Calibear00-

Look at the Tech season results for the 10 years preceding Joey's hiring. I think it will bring his record in his first three years into perspective.

Contrary to an earlier comment made, he did not inherit a talent-laden team nor a culture that knew how to win.

---

I don't know what else to tell you. He's been so mid for five years, only to see an exponential improvement in results once a billionaire started buying players.

Please stop digging for things that aren't there.

---

For five years? This is Joey McGuire's fourth year as Tech's head coach.

---

This is typical SicEm behavior.

So, it totally makes the point null and void because it was 3 years of mediocrity and not 5? The guy's point remains, Maguire was mediocre until Tech paid 7 Million for a defense. That is the point, not whether it is 4 or 5 years, it is a message board. Not a courtroom.

---

It absolutely does. Because five years is a much larger and meaningful sample where coaching football is concerned.

Cali's entire case is that Joey McGuire had established himself as a mediocre head coach -- something that can't even be done in three year's time, particularly when taking over a program that had largely sucked before you arrived.

---

As has been documented elsewhere, Texas Tech was literally loaded with super seniors for his first 2 seasons - both in abstract and relative to the Big 12 teams on Tech's schedule - and that is indisputable fact. Going a step further, the mainstream sports media projected that 2023 Tech - in McGuire's year 2 - was going to do great things (i.e. top 25 preseason FPI*, top 25 preseason coaches poll**, etc.***), however, it sputtered the same way that it did during his year 1 and year 3 (5+ losses per season). McGuire's 2025 season has been objectively special, but the fact that it was achieved by significantly outspending the other teams in this Big 12 dims the glow of such success given that that Tech team could autopilot to 8-9+ wins with its schedule.

At the end of the day, as long as everyone is agreed that:

1. Texas Tech was loaded with super seniors in McGuire's first two seasons,
2. Texas Tech missed its national preseason expectations in 2023,
3. Texas Tech lost at least 5 games per season in McGuire's first three seasons, and
4. Texas Tech only won the Big 12 in his fourth season because Tech significantly outspent the rest of the teams on its regular season schedule plus conference title game on NIL

then no one is really disagreeing here because we are agreed on what is objectively true.

* College football rankings: ESPN updates 2023 preseason FPI Top 25 for kickoff
** College football rankings: 2023 preseason Coaches Poll released
***Texas Tech football: Preseason expectations have rarely been this high

---

As long as we agree that Nick Saban, who had a worse winning percentage after five years as a head coach (.586) than Joey did after three (.605), was a mediocre coach before he gained access to top level Big Ten and SEC talent at Michigan State, LSU and Alabama, no one is disagreeing with what is objectively true.

Does no one else see how ridiculous this is?

Talent makes all coaches' records better. That doesn't mean guys were bad or mediocre coaches before they got access to elite talent. And it certainly doesn't mean that the die on a coaches' career is cast in the first three years of his head coaching career.

---

What does Saban have to do with anything being discussed here? That's not even an apples to apples comparison.

---

It is absolutely an apples to apples comparison. The man who is universally accepted as the greatest coach in college football history posted records a lot like Joey McGuire's until he got access to elite talent. That's how college football coaching works.

And no one says the same things being said about Joey McGuire about Nick Saban ... or Kirby Smart ... or Dan Lanning ... or any number of other "elite" coaches who have led championship seasons at programs that have always had access to the talent that McGuire now has at his disposal at Tech. It's an obvious double standard.