Texas Tech GM James Blanchard's extension through 2028 is worth up to $2.225 million over the length of the deal with retention bonuses, a source tells ESPN. Blanchard can also earn performance bonuses. pic.twitter.com/4oukeRzwWA

— Max Olson (@max_olson) December 17, 2025

I hope for Linda Livingstone's sake that they discover a cure for blindness.

boognish_bear said:

---

Texas Tech GM James Blanchard's extension through 2028 is worth up to $2.225 million over the length of the deal with retention bonuses, a source tells ESPN. Blanchard can also earn performance bonuses. pic.twitter.com/4oukeRzwWA

— Max Olson (@max_olson) December 17, 2025

---

So i guess it is not unusual to give extensions after winning B12. Guess that validates what BU did in 21.

Who is Cody Campbell? Aranda coached us to a Big 12 championship.

Waco1947 said:

---

Who is Cody Campbell? Aranda coached us to a Big 12 championship.

---

Dave can't coach his way out of a wet paper bag. He's under water for 4 years. That '21 team had nothing to do with him. He looks confused and still is confused.
Whatever success Baylor has in '26 will be limited because he's still employed. No where but Baylor.

That isn't a nine year extension, and Blanchard isn't new at this job.

CaliBear00 said:

---

That isn't a nine year extensions, and Blanchard isn't new at this job.

---

Did we give Aranda a 9 year extension?

CaliBear00 said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

That isn't a nine year extensions, and Blanchard isn't new at this job.

---

Did we give Aranda a 9 year extension?

---

Indeed we did. This is one of the ways Mack Rhoades screwed the program over.

---

I have to agree, that is ridiculous...

Dia del DougO said:

---

I don't know if Baylor would be in Tech's current situation if they had hired McGuire instead of Aranda. But I truly believe Baylor would be in a far better spot right now if they had.

They may have not won a conference championship in 21, or maybe so. But I believe he would still be here and fairly successful, at least, if not poach by a richer program.

---

could be. no way of knowing, obviously. whatever the case, i have seen him make some horrendous calls that cost txt victories. i hope it doesn't happen in the cfp. because his in-game decision making is my main concern for tech advancing to the finals.

Fair point. There's going to be a massive coaching advantage for Oregon in that quarterfinal.

Dia del DougO said:

---

I don't know if Baylor would be in Tech's current situation if they had hired McGuire instead of Aranda. But I truly believe Baylor would be in a far better spot right now if they had.

They may have not won a conference championship in 21, or maybe so. But I believe he would still be here and fairly successful, at least, if not poach by a richer program.

---

I don't think we are that different of a situation. Maybe a few games won on Defense, but maybe a few lost on Offense. I think it is a push. I don't see Maguire as much of an upgrade over Aranda. Different strengths and weaknesses, but Dave beat Joey 2 of the 3 times they played. Head to Head has to count for something and the times he won it was not a contest.

I think the limiting factor is the rosters, Rhodes doing the "we don't do NIL" I think caused irrepairable damage of us being behind. Unless more money for NIL comes in, I don't see Aranda winning.

FLBear5630 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

That isn't a nine year extensions, and Blanchard isn't new at this job.

---

Did we give Aranda a 9 year extension?

---

7 year extension.

Signed Feb 2022 . Ends December 2029.

Waco1947 said:

---

Who is Cody Campbell? Aranda coached us to a Big 12 championship.

---

Man are you in the dark ages or just toying with everyone?

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Who is Cody Campbell? Aranda coached us to a Big 12 championship.

---

Man are you in the dark ages or just toying with everyone?

---

Just stupid. My apologies for asking

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.

---

You can't ignore that he walked in and took over a program that only had 2 winning seasons the previous 10 years. You look at his first three years and go "meh...he's a meh coach" and you are viewing them out of the context of what preceded them.

And contrary to what others here have said, he did not inherit a loaded team....far, far from it.

EDIT: The copy/paste didn't work too well. Just go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_Tech_Red_Raiders_football_seasons

IowaBear said:

---

Fair point. There's going to be a massive coaching advantage for Oregon in that quarterfinal.

---

No there won't. Shiel Woods will be the best coordinator in that game and most games that Tech plays.

Dan Lanning > Joey that's not even a debate. Oregons coordinators are pretty damn good in their own right

notned 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.

---

You can't ignore that he walked in and took over a program that only had 2 winning seasons the previous 10 years. You look at his first three years and go "meh...he's a meh coach" and you are viewing them out of the context of what preceded them.

And contrary to what others here have said, he did not inherit a loaded team....far, far from it.

EDIT: The copy/paste didn't work too well. Just go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_Tech_Red_Raiders_football_seasons

---

Like I said, McGwire hit his ceiling. Just for lulz, let's switch out Joey McGwire with Matt Rhule.

I thought the Aranda hire was a good one, too. It was a little risky, but with a high ceiling, though with understanding that he would be learning to be a head coach for the first time in his life. But surely the defense would be great, right? Welp...

I just haven't seen that process improving over the past several years.

Stefano DiMera said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

CaliBear00 said:

---

That isn't a nine year extensions, and Blanchard isn't new at this job.

---

Did we give Aranda a 9 year extension?

---

7 year extension.

Signed Feb 2022 . Ends December 2029.

---

Then he will assuredly coach through the 2027 season. Ain't no way anyone will pay out more than 2 seasons.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

canoso said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

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.

---

The concern is understandable, but it reads as though different groups are saying different things.

The topic of the discussion regarding Tech is that there was a clear and consistent baseline at Tech with McGuire as HC (5+ losses) with a dramatic change once a significant amount of money was introduced. Further, the difference in the case of Tech vs. programs like Oregon or Alabama is that (a) McGuire is still HC at the same Tech program that is playing largely the same teams before and after the NIL change so that the impact of the resources is far more apparent than it would be elsewhere and (b) Oregon and Alabama performed at a high level both pre and post NIL. In regard to the latter, Oregon and Alabama certainly benefited from NIL in various ways, but they didn't transform from 5 loss teams to what they are now because of it.

---

Three years isn't enough time to build "a clear and consistent baseline."

Nick Saban's first four seasons at Michigan State resulted in records of 6-5, 6-6, 7-5 and 6-6. He broke through in Year 5 and the rest is history.

Suggesting that McGuire's teams were never going to improve without the talent infusion they got is silly. They likely would have improved by a win or two in 2025 just by virtue of the upgrades they made to their offensive and defensive coordinator positions.

And Oregon's pre- and post-Phil Knight results would pretty much destroy your point about them. Oregon is Tech with a 30-year head start.

---

"Three years isn't enough time to build "a clear and consistent baseline."

Inarguable truth. Art Briles, who led BU to football to regular wins vs powerful traditional rivals (though everyone "knew" BU would never beat them, let alone like rented mules), went 4-8, 4-8, 7-5 in his first three seasons at BU. We need to hear about all the players he bought as he took BU football to a level of success it had never reached before and may never again.

But we digress from the purpose of the McGuire naysayers, which is to divert attention from the present darkness of BU football and the fact that most of the damage was self-inflicted even as infallibility was claimed.

---

eehT
eehT
eehT

I hope this did the trick

---

Can we please ban the know nothing, nasty liberals from the sports discussions ?

In another thread here this guy said a man who's attended my church for years is a Jew and many posters here are probably uncomfortable with him being a Jew. Since in the mind of the new baylor liberals, football fans also hate Jews.

WestUBears88 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

canoso said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

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.

---

The concern is understandable, but it reads as though different groups are saying different things.

The topic of the discussion regarding Tech is that there was a clear and consistent baseline at Tech with McGuire as HC (5+ losses) with a dramatic change once a significant amount of money was introduced. Further, the difference in the case of Tech vs. programs like Oregon or Alabama is that (a) McGuire is still HC at the same Tech program that is playing largely the same teams before and after the NIL change so that the impact of the resources is far more apparent than it would be elsewhere and (b) Oregon and Alabama performed at a high level both pre and post NIL. In regard to the latter, Oregon and Alabama certainly benefited from NIL in various ways, but they didn't transform from 5 loss teams to what they are now because of it.

---

Three years isn't enough time to build "a clear and consistent baseline."

Nick Saban's first four seasons at Michigan State resulted in records of 6-5, 6-6, 7-5 and 6-6. He broke through in Year 5 and the rest is history.

Suggesting that McGuire's teams were never going to improve without the talent infusion they got is silly. They likely would have improved by a win or two in 2025 just by virtue of the upgrades they made to their offensive and defensive coordinator positions.

And Oregon's pre- and post-Phil Knight results would pretty much destroy your point about them. Oregon is Tech with a 30-year head start.

---

"Three years isn't enough time to build "a clear and consistent baseline."

Inarguable truth. Art Briles, who led BU to football to regular wins vs powerful traditional rivals (though everyone "knew" BU would never beat them, let alone like rented mules), went 4-8, 4-8, 7-5 in his first three seasons at BU. We need to hear about all the players he bought as he took BU football to a level of success it had never reached before and may never again.

But we digress from the purpose of the McGuire naysayers, which is to divert attention from the present darkness of BU football and the fact that most of the damage was self-inflicted even as infallibility was claimed.

---

eehT
eehT
eehT

I hope this did the trick

---

Can we please ban the know nothing, nasty liberals from the sports discussions ?

In another thread here this guy said a man who's attended my church for years is a Jew and many posters here are probably uncomfortable with him being a Jew. Since in the mind of the new baylor liberals, football fans also hate Jews.

---

WestUBears88 said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

canoso said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

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.

---

The concern is understandable, but it reads as though different groups are saying different things.

The topic of the discussion regarding Tech is that there was a clear and consistent baseline at Tech with McGuire as HC (5+ losses) with a dramatic change once a significant amount of money was introduced. Further, the difference in the case of Tech vs. programs like Oregon or Alabama is that (a) McGuire is still HC at the same Tech program that is playing largely the same teams before and after the NIL change so that the impact of the resources is far more apparent than it would be elsewhere and (b) Oregon and Alabama performed at a high level both pre and post NIL. In regard to the latter, Oregon and Alabama certainly benefited from NIL in various ways, but they didn't transform from 5 loss teams to what they are now because of it.

---

Three years isn't enough time to build "a clear and consistent baseline."

Nick Saban's first four seasons at Michigan State resulted in records of 6-5, 6-6, 7-5 and 6-6. He broke through in Year 5 and the rest is history.

Suggesting that McGuire's teams were never going to improve without the talent infusion they got is silly. They likely would have improved by a win or two in 2025 just by virtue of the upgrades they made to their offensive and defensive coordinator positions.

And Oregon's pre- and post-Phil Knight results would pretty much destroy your point about them. Oregon is Tech with a 30-year head start.

---

"Three years isn't enough time to build "a clear and consistent baseline."

Inarguable truth. Art Briles, who led BU to football to regular wins vs powerful traditional rivals (though everyone "knew" BU would never beat them, let alone like rented mules), went 4-8, 4-8, 7-5 in his first three seasons at BU. We need to hear about all the players he bought as he took BU football to a level of success it had never reached before and may never again.

But we digress from the purpose of the McGuire naysayers, which is to divert attention from the present darkness of BU football and the fact that most of the damage was self-inflicted even as infallibility was claimed.

---

eehT
eehT
eehT

I hope this did the trick

---

Can we please ban the know nothing, nasty liberals from the sports discussions ?

In another thread here this guy said a man who's attended my church for years is a Jew and many posters here are probably uncomfortable with him being a Jew. Since in the mind of the new baylor liberals, football fans also hate Jews.

---

Can we please just ban political comments and labeling of people you don't even know from the sports discussions. There is already a board where you can go to post such comments. I am sure your comments will be welcomed there. That board has already driven away many good posters because there is no objective discussions. We don't need to drive people away from this one as well.

McGuire is a high school rah-rah coach. I certainly understand how members of this board, the vast majority of which most likely never played past 8th grade football (if that), think he could have been successful here.

College football is no longer college football. If you crybabies want to play the current game then by all means open up YOUR wallets. Nobody is going to win big on the current playing field unless you pay insanely inflated "salaries" to immature, conceited and at-risk kids. Then you have to fight to keep them out of the police blotter. Classes? They don't need no stinking classes.

Thee University said:

---

McGuire is a high school rah-rah coach. I certainly understand how members of this board, the vast majority of which most likely never played past 8th grade football (if that), think he could have been successful here.

College football is no longer college football. If you crybabies want to play the current game then by all means open up YOUR wallets. Nobody is going to win big on the current playing field unless you pay insanely inflated "salaries" to immature, conceited and at-risk kids. Then you have to fight to keep them out of the police blotter. Classes? They don't need no stinking classes.

---

The most important person on a Staff going forward is the General Manager/NIL Manager. They have the connections to agents that have the connections to the players. It is all about the players abd now it is all about what you can pay. What is the going rate for a Starting DL? You going to sit a kid making 500k? Will they let a Coach? 50k? practice player.

JBear14 said:

---

Joey has never had a losing season at Texas Tech (which we all agree has historically been hard to recruit to). Aranda meanwhile has had 4 losing seasons out of 6 with Baylor. His most talented roster since 2021 just went 5-7, and has players fleeing in the Portal.

We've seen plenty of programs throw money at players, and still fail in their objectives of winning the conference title (i.e. Aggie, UT). Tech spent it's money wisely, and Joey coached his guys up enough to meet the expectations of their talent. Also motivated his less-talented kids to play better.

The truth is, a lot of Baylor fans **** on Joey because they are envious that he took Tech to the top, while we're stuck with Aranda for another year after going 5-7 with his current roster. Joey would have at least won 9 with our current roster. He's a better coach than Dave. A better motivator than Dave. And many of us can't stand the fact that we let him go to Tech, while we're stuck with "Decaf Dave."

---

There is somewhat a difference between TT and UT / A&M. UT and A&M have several peers in their conference that match or can exceed what those two schools spend. There is no one in the Big XII that is coming anywhere close to matching the amount of money Tech dramatically infused into its program. As such that creates a significant advantage for Tech in the conference. BYU may soon match, but they are not there yet.

With the amount of money Tech put in, you get talent that is already recognized as being really good. They didn't need development at Texas Tech and any further development in their short time there is marginal at best. Tech jumped far ahead of everyone else this year in talent...they bought it already ready to use.

McGuire would not have won 9 games at Baylor this season unless he could have prevented the injuries of the portal players that we did get that were suppose to have upgraded our talent on defense. We should have been better on defense, but we never got to see what those portal players would have brought to the table. They were injured before they ever got started.

blackie said:

---

JBear14 said:

---

Joey has never had a losing season at Texas Tech (which we all agree has historically been hard to recruit to). Aranda meanwhile has had 4 losing seasons out of 6 with Baylor. His most talented roster since 2021 just went 5-7, and has players fleeing in the Portal.

We've seen plenty of programs throw money at players, and still fail in their objectives of winning the conference title (i.e. Aggie, UT). Tech spent it's money wisely, and Joey coached his guys up enough to meet the expectations of their talent. Also motivated his less-talented kids to play better.

The truth is, a lot of Baylor fans **** on Joey because they are envious that he took Tech to the top, while we're stuck with Aranda for another year after going 5-7 with his current roster. Joey would have at least won 9 with our current roster. He's a better coach than Dave. A better motivator than Dave. And many of us can't stand the fact that we let him go to Tech, while we're stuck with "Decaf Dave."

---

There is somewhat a difference between TT and UT / A&M. UT and A&M have several peers in their conference that match or can exceed what those two schools spend. There is no one in the Big XII that is coming anywhere close to matching the amount of money Tech dramatically infused into its program. As such that creates a significant advantage for Tech in the conference. BYU may soon match, but they are not there yet.

With the amount of money Tech put in, you get talent that is already recognized as being really good. They didn't need development at Texas Tech and any further development in their short time there is marginal at best. Tech jumped far ahead of everyone else this year in talent...they bought it already ready to use.

McGuire would not have won 9 games at Baylor this season unless he could have prevented the injuries of the portal players that we did get that were suppose to have upgraded our talent on defense. We should have been better on defense, but we never got to see what those portal players would have brought to the table. They were injured before they ever got started.

---

This is what is being overlooked by some here. Simply because Tech is running through the Big 12 with its current roster does not mean that it would automatically do the same in either the B1G or the SEC (especially depending on schedule; looking at you 2025 A&M), and, because that is the case, comparing Tech to Texas A&M and Texas does not necessarily make sense in this particular context. For reference, the 2025 247 Team Talent Composite pegs Tech at #29, and Tech has not played any teams higher than its own rank, let alone top 10 programs in that ranking such as Texas A&M or Texas. Further, and to Blackie's point, many programs within the SEC and B1G have rosters of a similar (or better) overall quality - 15 SEC teams in the top 28 of the 247 Team Talent Composite and 8 B1G teams in the same.

Is Tech better than many of the teams ranked in front of it? Certainly, but the notion that what is currently happening at Tech is a transferable skill for the HC is a bit naive in the sense that there may not be another team in all of FBS that has such a significant NIL advantage over its conference mates. To that end, one could easily argue that Tech could have won 10+ games on its 2025 schedule on autopilot, while programs like Texas A&M and Texas could spend the same and not land such results given the spending of their conference mates and their 2025 schedules.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

blackie said:

---

JBear14 said:

---

Joey has never had a losing season at Texas Tech (which we all agree has historically been hard to recruit to). Aranda meanwhile has had 4 losing seasons out of 6 with Baylor. His most talented roster since 2021 just went 5-7, and has players fleeing in the Portal.

We've seen plenty of programs throw money at players, and still fail in their objectives of winning the conference title (i.e. Aggie, UT). Tech spent it's money wisely, and Joey coached his guys up enough to meet the expectations of their talent. Also motivated his less-talented kids to play better.

The truth is, a lot of Baylor fans **** on Joey because they are envious that he took Tech to the top, while we're stuck with Aranda for another year after going 5-7 with his current roster. Joey would have at least won 9 with our current roster. He's a better coach than Dave. A better motivator than Dave. And many of us can't stand the fact that we let him go to Tech, while we're stuck with "Decaf Dave."

---

There is somewhat a difference between TT and UT / A&M. UT and A&M have several peers in their conference that match or can exceed what those two schools spend. There is no one in the Big XII that is coming anywhere close to matching the amount of money Tech dramatically infused into its program. As such that creates a significant advantage for Tech in the conference. BYU may soon match, but they are not there yet.

With the amount of money Tech put in, you get talent that is already recognized as being really good. They didn't need development at Texas Tech and any further development in their short time there is marginal at best. Tech jumped far ahead of everyone else this year in talent...they bought it already ready to use.

McGuire would not have won 9 games at Baylor this season unless he could have prevented the injuries of the portal players that we did get that were suppose to have upgraded our talent on defense. We should have been better on defense, but we never got to see what those portal players would have brought to the table. They were injured before they ever got started.

---

This is what is being overlooked by some here. Simply because Tech is running through the Big 12 with its current roster does not mean that it would automatically do the same in either the B1G or the SEC (especially depending on schedule; looking at you 2025 A&M), and, because that is the case, comparing Tech to Texas A&M and Texas does not necessarily make sense in this particular context. For reference, the 2025 247 Team Talent Composite pegs Tech at #29, and Tech has not played any teams higher than its own rank, let alone top 10 programs in that ranking such as Texas A&M or Texas. Further, and to Blackie's point, many programs within the SEC and B1G have rosters of a similar (or better) overall quality - 15 SEC teams in the top 28 of the 247 Team Talent Composite and 8 B1G teams in the same.

Is Tech better than many of the teams ranked in front of it? Certainly, but the notion that what is currently happening at Tech is a transferable skill for the HC is a bit naive in the sense that there may not be another team in all of FBS that has such a significant NIL advantage over its conference mates. To that end, one could easily argue that Tech could have won 10+ games on its 2025 schedule on autopilot, while programs like Texas A&M and Texas could spend the same and not land such results given the spending of their conference mates and their 2025 schedules.

---

A coach's job at any level is to get the most he possibly can out of any team he coaches. For some program's, like Tech before Cody Campbell's spending spree, that means achieving consistent winning seasons. In Tech's current situation, that means winning championships. Joey has largely maximized the talent he's had in Lubbock the entire time he's been there. They've exceeded their Vegas over/under in three of the four years he's been there and missed by half a game in the one season they didn't.

Dave, meanwhile, has had one season in six at Baylor that wasn't a disappointment in one way or another. Even the fool's gold 2024 season started at 2-4, with three Big 12 losses before the conference race had ever even really begun.

Give me Joey McGuire over the **** we've had to watch under our current head coach 100 times out of 100.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

blackie said:

---

JBear14 said:

---

Joey has never had a losing season at Texas Tech (which we all agree has historically been hard to recruit to). Aranda meanwhile has had 4 losing seasons out of 6 with Baylor. His most talented roster since 2021 just went 5-7, and has players fleeing in the Portal.

We've seen plenty of programs throw money at players, and still fail in their objectives of winning the conference title (i.e. Aggie, UT). Tech spent it's money wisely, and Joey coached his guys up enough to meet the expectations of their talent. Also motivated his less-talented kids to play better.

The truth is, a lot of Baylor fans **** on Joey because they are envious that he took Tech to the top, while we're stuck with Aranda for another year after going 5-7 with his current roster. Joey would have at least won 9 with our current roster. He's a better coach than Dave. A better motivator than Dave. And many of us can't stand the fact that we let him go to Tech, while we're stuck with "Decaf Dave."

---

There is somewhat a difference between TT and UT / A&M. UT and A&M have several peers in their conference that match or can exceed what those two schools spend. There is no one in the Big XII that is coming anywhere close to matching the amount of money Tech dramatically infused into its program. As such that creates a significant advantage for Tech in the conference. BYU may soon match, but they are not there yet.

With the amount of money Tech put in, you get talent that is already recognized as being really good. They didn't need development at Texas Tech and any further development in their short time there is marginal at best. Tech jumped far ahead of everyone else this year in talent...they bought it already ready to use.

McGuire would not have won 9 games at Baylor this season unless he could have prevented the injuries of the portal players that we did get that were suppose to have upgraded our talent on defense. We should have been better on defense, but we never got to see what those portal players would have brought to the table. They were injured before they ever got started.

---

This is what is being overlooked by some here. Simply because Tech is running through the Big 12 with its current roster does not mean that it would automatically do the same in either the B1G or the SEC (especially depending on schedule; looking at you 2025 A&M), and, because that is the case, comparing Tech to Texas A&M and Texas does not necessarily make sense in this particular context. For reference, the 2025 247 Team Talent Composite pegs Tech at #29, and Tech has not played any teams higher than its own rank, let alone top 10 programs in that ranking such as Texas A&M or Texas. Further, and to Blackie's point, many programs within the SEC and B1G have rosters of a similar (or better) overall quality - 15 SEC teams in the top 28 of the 247 Team Talent Composite and 8 B1G teams in the same.

Is Tech better than many of the teams ranked in front of it? Certainly, but the notion that what is currently happening at Tech is a transferable skill for the HC is a bit naive in the sense that there may not be another team in all of FBS that has such a significant NIL advantage over its conference mates. To that end, one could easily argue that Tech could have won 10+ games on its 2025 schedule on autopilot, while programs like Texas A&M and Texas could spend the same and not land such results given the spending of their conference mates and their 2025 schedules.

---

A coach's job at any level is to get the most he possibly can out of any team he coaches. For some program's, like Tech before Cody Campbell's spending spree, that means achieving consistent winning seasons. In Tech's current situation, that means winning championships. Joey has largely maximized the talent he's had in Lubbock the entire time he's been there. They've exceeded their Vegas over/under in three of the four years he's been there and missed by half a game in the one season they didn't.

Dave, meanwhile, has had one season in six at Baylor that wasn't a disappointment in one way or another. Even the fool's gold 2024 season started at 2-4, with three Big 12 losses before the conference race had ever even really begun.

Give me Joey McGuire over the **** we've had to watch under our current head coach 100 times out of 100.

---

Sure, but no one in this thread has made the argument that Aranda has out performed McGuire in the full NIL era (2022-on), so the purpose is the comparison is unclear.

If 2025 Baylor had Tech's $28M+ NIL budget/roster and schedule (sub Auburn for Oregon State, 5/12 regular season opponents being bowl eligible teams instead of 9/12, etc.) but had Aranda at HC, it too could have likely auto piloted to a similar high number of wins. Some may disagree, but they may not be fully understanding, for example, just how much more talented Tech's roster (including its defensive line) is vs the rest of the Big 12 or how Tech missed the middle of the Big 12 in its entirety other than Arizona State (Arizona, ISU, TCU, and Cincinnati), which it lost to (yes, without its QB).

Edit: One could actually go a step further and argue that Baylor would likely have won between 7-8 regular season games with its current roster/staff if it had played Tech's 2025 schedule instead of Baylor's 2025 schedule, and that take wouldn't be particularly unreasonable. In such a scenario, the only likely certainly losses would have been Arizona State, Houston, BYU and Utah.