Take your bs back to the politics board

There is literally no one more wrong than you

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Take your bs back to the politics board

There is literally no one more wrong than you

---

The biggest indicator I am right is you disagree. The fact you are arguing against NIL while teams in our conference are buying whole defenses shows your idiocy. But keep spouting.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

This is an interesting article on NIL and who is embracing it. It answers the Memphis question (#50 with ties to Fed Ex). Neither Baylor nor Boise made the top 50.

College football's top 50 programs ranked by NIL efforts

For Boise, they were not listed on that list. But, I found this article you may find interesting.

Where Boise State Football's NIL Money is Coming From: Key Contributors and Sources - CollegeNetWorth.com


As for Aranda, this article is the biggest indictment to get rid of him, according to this Dallas article he is the reason BU is so far behind in NIL. THAT gets more pissed than the play against Auburn. That shows he either can't read the tea leaves or worse did and chose not to do it. NIL is the future to winning, period. Whether we like it or not, it is. BU is way behind, I blamed in on Rhodes, but this says it is Aranda. Gonna take a whole lot of marketing to overcome that stigma.

Aranda admits he's reason for Baylor's lack of NIL presence

I am more tolerant of bad teams, because it is cyclical for a school like BU. We may have 2 good years and 3 mediocre. No issues, nature of the beast. But, to not try or worse take a contrary position on the money at a P4 school. Is a problem.

He needs to go to an academy with that attitude. You may have convinced me...

---

Well, you dont know that at all bc it clearly states in the article : Only public universities were included in the findings.

I could almost guarantee you that we are in the top 50 and probably the top 40. We would be ahead of Memphis for sure.

---

We are 41, I said that earlier in a post. I was using it to answer the Memphis question. My mistake, poorly written. The point of the articles was that those schools are in big on NIL. We have to embrace NIL, if Aranda doesn't he needs to leave a P4 school. Just "doing it" is not enough, you have to sell it. The other article talked about Boise.

His public attitude on NIL pushed me over the line, he needs to go. We cannot compete without it, even with itwe have some limitations to overcome anyway. Thanks for pointing out.

---

We both want the same thing. Aranda gone. But for me there are multiple issues. For you, it appears to just be his NIL stance, which I agree is bad.

---

Simpler than that. The first thing that has to be in place to win is the NIL to attract the talent that can compete. Or, we will be stuck in this loop of competing with the Auburns and other mid-tier teams. After researching, Aranda has said too much and the stupid "We pay players" shirts send a message that he is NOT on board with it. If I had a kid being courted by schools, I would want to go where they are using the system to the fullest to pay my kid.

---

Oklahoma State had more money than Oregon according to your chart, right? Or are you admitting that this chart is made up? It's gotta be one or the other

---

Don't be an idiot. On any given day... Look at who goes to the playoff, who wins the NC and the amounts of money being spent. Then tell me your "real coach" can win with Texas State's roster. You want to discuss a real subject, great. Let's go. You want to be an idiot, welcome to ignore.

---

If I'm an idiot, you're the kind of person that has to set an alarm every 5 seconds so that they remember to breathe. Everything about you on this message board exudes "beta man" energy. Just admit that you had a terrible take dude. You can't write it off by saying "any given Saturday"'

---

I said NIL is the most important thing to being successful. You said "No" it is a coach. A good coach can win. Who is this idiot??? You have no idea what you are talking about. In today's CFB, the MOST IMPORTANT person is the NIL Manager. Coaches are leaving the profession because of it. Player development, HS recruiting pales compared to NIL and the Portal. You don't pay, you are not competing.

But keep looking for those one offs where a team loses to an underdog and base your program on that. Let's see how successful you will be. Oh, wait. It is what Baylor HAS done up to this year.

---

FLB has a point here, just look at our championship season - the defensive players won that season for us, despite CDA doing everything he could to muck it up.

#FireAranda

Ain't gonna happen any time soon.

Get back to me after the TCU game.

Put it on paper.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

This is an interesting article on NIL and who is embracing it. It answers the Memphis question (#50 with ties to Fed Ex). Neither Baylor nor Boise made the top 50.

College football's top 50 programs ranked by NIL efforts

For Boise, they were not listed on that list. But, I found this article you may find interesting.

Where Boise State Football's NIL Money is Coming From: Key Contributors and Sources - CollegeNetWorth.com


As for Aranda, this article is the biggest indictment to get rid of him, according to this Dallas article he is the reason BU is so far behind in NIL. THAT gets more pissed than the play against Auburn. That shows he either can't read the tea leaves or worse did and chose not to do it. NIL is the future to winning, period. Whether we like it or not, it is. BU is way behind, I blamed in on Rhodes, but this says it is Aranda. Gonna take a whole lot of marketing to overcome that stigma.

Aranda admits he's reason for Baylor's lack of NIL presence

I am more tolerant of bad teams, because it is cyclical for a school like BU. We may have 2 good years and 3 mediocre. No issues, nature of the beast. But, to not try or worse take a contrary position on the money at a P4 school. Is a problem.

He needs to go to an academy with that attitude. You may have convinced me...

---

Well, you dont know that at all bc it clearly states in the article : Only public universities were included in the findings.

I could almost guarantee you that we are in the top 50 and probably the top 40. We would be ahead of Memphis for sure.

---

We are 41, I said that earlier in a post. I was using it to answer the Memphis question. My mistake, poorly written. The point of the articles was that those schools are in big on NIL. We have to embrace NIL, if Aranda doesn't he needs to leave a P4 school. Just "doing it" is not enough, you have to sell it. The other article talked about Boise.

His public attitude on NIL pushed me over the line, he needs to go. We cannot compete without it, even with itwe have some limitations to overcome anyway. Thanks for pointing out.

---

We both want the same thing. Aranda gone. But for me there are multiple issues. For you, it appears to just be his NIL stance, which I agree is bad.

---

Simpler than that. The first thing that has to be in place to win is the NIL to attract the talent that can compete. Or, we will be stuck in this loop of competing with the Auburns and other mid-tier teams. After researching, Aranda has said too much and the stupid "We pay players" shirts send a message that he is NOT on board with it. If I had a kid being courted by schools, I would want to go where they are using the system to the fullest to pay my kid.

---

Oklahoma State had more money than Oregon according to your chart, right? Or are you admitting that this chart is made up? It's gotta be one or the other

---

Don't be an idiot. On any given day... Look at who goes to the playoff, who wins the NC and the amounts of money being spent. Then tell me your "real coach" can win with Texas State's roster. You want to discuss a real subject, great. Let's go. You want to be an idiot, welcome to ignore.

---

If I'm an idiot, you're the kind of person that has to set an alarm every 5 seconds so that they remember to breathe. Everything about you on this message board exudes "beta man" energy. Just admit that you had a terrible take dude. You can't write it off by saying "any given Saturday"'

---

I said NIL is the most important thing to being successful. You said "No" it is a coach. A good coach can win. Who is this idiot??? You have no idea what you are talking about. In today's CFB, the MOST IMPORTANT person is the NIL Manager. Coaches are leaving the profession because of it. Player development, HS recruiting pales compared to NIL and the Portal. You don't pay, you are not competing.

But keep looking for those one offs where a team loses to an underdog and base your program on that. Let's see how successful you will be. Oh, wait. It is what Baylor HAS done up to this year.

---

FLB has a point here, just look at our championship season - the defensive players won that season for us, despite CDA doing everything he could to muck it up.

---

That world does not exist anymore. We are in a different paradigm. Think of it more as a market, than an educational opportunity. Players are commodities, nothing more. Interchangeable based on their performance and the ability to win. If they get better, we pay them of Ohio State will. They get worse, they don't get NIL. That is the reality of the system we are in. The world Briles coached in or the 21 B12 Championship team does not exist anymore. Briles would have excelled in this world, but he is too old now and his son is not him. He would get it. Aranda doesn't. He and Rhodes did a lot of damage with the "We Pay Players" and the everyone gets the same amount crap. We are just starting to recover.

Think about this. NIL and the right person pulling the strings bought Tech a playoff team in one year. They put rah-rah Joey f-ing Maguire in the playoff. Where he showed his coaching prowess against equally or better talented teams.

The sooner the alumni and the fans get behind the NIL, the sooner BU gets over the hump. But, there is nothing nice about CFB, it is a cesspool. I know coaches known for player development that left because it is a nasty buisness now.

FLBear5630 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

This is an interesting article on NIL and who is embracing it. It answers the Memphis question (#50 with ties to Fed Ex). Neither Baylor nor Boise made the top 50.

College football's top 50 programs ranked by NIL efforts

For Boise, they were not listed on that list. But, I found this article you may find interesting.

Where Boise State Football's NIL Money is Coming From: Key Contributors and Sources - CollegeNetWorth.com


As for Aranda, this article is the biggest indictment to get rid of him, according to this Dallas article he is the reason BU is so far behind in NIL. THAT gets more pissed than the play against Auburn. That shows he either can't read the tea leaves or worse did and chose not to do it. NIL is the future to winning, period. Whether we like it or not, it is. BU is way behind, I blamed in on Rhodes, but this says it is Aranda. Gonna take a whole lot of marketing to overcome that stigma.

Aranda admits he's reason for Baylor's lack of NIL presence

I am more tolerant of bad teams, because it is cyclical for a school like BU. We may have 2 good years and 3 mediocre. No issues, nature of the beast. But, to not try or worse take a contrary position on the money at a P4 school. Is a problem.

He needs to go to an academy with that attitude. You may have convinced me...

---

Well, you dont know that at all bc it clearly states in the article : Only public universities were included in the findings.

I could almost guarantee you that we are in the top 50 and probably the top 40. We would be ahead of Memphis for sure.

---

We are 41, I said that earlier in a post. I was using it to answer the Memphis question. My mistake, poorly written. The point of the articles was that those schools are in big on NIL. We have to embrace NIL, if Aranda doesn't he needs to leave a P4 school. Just "doing it" is not enough, you have to sell it. The other article talked about Boise.

His public attitude on NIL pushed me over the line, he needs to go. We cannot compete without it, even with itwe have some limitations to overcome anyway. Thanks for pointing out.

---

We both want the same thing. Aranda gone. But for me there are multiple issues. For you, it appears to just be his NIL stance, which I agree is bad.

---

Simpler than that. The first thing that has to be in place to win is the NIL to attract the talent that can compete. Or, we will be stuck in this loop of competing with the Auburns and other mid-tier teams. After researching, Aranda has said too much and the stupid "We pay players" shirts send a message that he is NOT on board with it. If I had a kid being courted by schools, I would want to go where they are using the system to the fullest to pay my kid.

---

Oklahoma State had more money than Oregon according to your chart, right? Or are you admitting that this chart is made up? It's gotta be one or the other

---

Don't be an idiot. On any given day... Look at who goes to the playoff, who wins the NC and the amounts of money being spent. Then tell me your "real coach" can win with Texas State's roster. You want to discuss a real subject, great. Let's go. You want to be an idiot, welcome to ignore.

---

If I'm an idiot, you're the kind of person that has to set an alarm every 5 seconds so that they remember to breathe. Everything about you on this message board exudes "beta man" energy. Just admit that you had a terrible take dude. You can't write it off by saying "any given Saturday"'

---

I said NIL is the most important thing to being successful. You said "No" it is a coach. A good coach can win. Who is this idiot??? You have no idea what you are talking about. In today's CFB, the MOST IMPORTANT person is the NIL Manager. Coaches are leaving the profession because of it. Player development, HS recruiting pales compared to NIL and the Portal. You don't pay, you are not competing.

But keep looking for those one offs where a team loses to an underdog and base your program on that. Let's see how successful you will be. Oh, wait. It is what Baylor HAS done up to this year.

---

FLB has a point here, just look at our championship season - the defensive players won that season for us, despite CDA doing everything he could to muck it up.

---

That world does not exist anymore. We are in a different paradigm. Think of it more as a market, than an educational opportunity. Players are commodities, nothing more. Interchangeable based on their performance and the ability to win. If they get better, we pay them of Ohio State will. They get worse, they don't get NIL. That is the reality of the system we are in. The world Briles coached in or the 21 B12 Championship team does not exist anymore. Briles would have excelled in this world, but he is too old now and his son is not him. He would get it. Aranda doesn't. He and Rhodes did a lot of damage with the "We Pay Players" and the everyone gets the same amount crap. We are just starting to recover.

Think about this. NIL and the right person pulling the strings bought Tech a playoff team in one year. They put rah-rah Joey f-ing Maguire in the playoff. Where he showed his coaching prowess against equally or better talented teams.

The sooner the alumni and the fans get behind the NIL, the sooner BU gets over the hump. But, there is nothing nice about CFB, it is a cesspool. I know coaches known for player development that left because it is a nasty buisness now.

---

I'm not sure why you are talking to me about NIL. I was one of the first people on this board talking about how big NIL would get. I'm talking right at the beginning I was predicting that in only a couple of years UT's entire line would be getting 6 figures+ and everyone on the bench would be banking as well. The typical know-it-alls were dismissive of the that idea, and now here we are, it's so much worse than we could have imagined.
I was also right about CDA. He just doesn't get headcoaching. It has been obvious since the start.
Last, I was supporting your idea that the quantity+quality of talent on a roster can mean more than a coach. The championship team proves that. CDA did everything he could to lose.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

This is an interesting article on NIL and who is embracing it. It answers the Memphis question (#50 with ties to Fed Ex). Neither Baylor nor Boise made the top 50.

College football's top 50 programs ranked by NIL efforts

For Boise, they were not listed on that list. But, I found this article you may find interesting.

Where Boise State Football's NIL Money is Coming From: Key Contributors and Sources - CollegeNetWorth.com


As for Aranda, this article is the biggest indictment to get rid of him, according to this Dallas article he is the reason BU is so far behind in NIL. THAT gets more pissed than the play against Auburn. That shows he either can't read the tea leaves or worse did and chose not to do it. NIL is the future to winning, period. Whether we like it or not, it is. BU is way behind, I blamed in on Rhodes, but this says it is Aranda. Gonna take a whole lot of marketing to overcome that stigma.

Aranda admits he's reason for Baylor's lack of NIL presence

I am more tolerant of bad teams, because it is cyclical for a school like BU. We may have 2 good years and 3 mediocre. No issues, nature of the beast. But, to not try or worse take a contrary position on the money at a P4 school. Is a problem.

He needs to go to an academy with that attitude. You may have convinced me...

---

Well, you dont know that at all bc it clearly states in the article : Only public universities were included in the findings.

I could almost guarantee you that we are in the top 50 and probably the top 40. We would be ahead of Memphis for sure.

---

We are 41, I said that earlier in a post. I was using it to answer the Memphis question. My mistake, poorly written. The point of the articles was that those schools are in big on NIL. We have to embrace NIL, if Aranda doesn't he needs to leave a P4 school. Just "doing it" is not enough, you have to sell it. The other article talked about Boise.

His public attitude on NIL pushed me over the line, he needs to go. We cannot compete without it, even with itwe have some limitations to overcome anyway. Thanks for pointing out.

---

We both want the same thing. Aranda gone. But for me there are multiple issues. For you, it appears to just be his NIL stance, which I agree is bad.

---

Simpler than that. The first thing that has to be in place to win is the NIL to attract the talent that can compete. Or, we will be stuck in this loop of competing with the Auburns and other mid-tier teams. After researching, Aranda has said too much and the stupid "We pay players" shirts send a message that he is NOT on board with it. If I had a kid being courted by schools, I would want to go where they are using the system to the fullest to pay my kid.

---

Oklahoma State had more money than Oregon according to your chart, right? Or are you admitting that this chart is made up? It's gotta be one or the other

---

Don't be an idiot. On any given day... Look at who goes to the playoff, who wins the NC and the amounts of money being spent. Then tell me your "real coach" can win with Texas State's roster. You want to discuss a real subject, great. Let's go. You want to be an idiot, welcome to ignore.

---

If I'm an idiot, you're the kind of person that has to set an alarm every 5 seconds so that they remember to breathe. Everything about you on this message board exudes "beta man" energy. Just admit that you had a terrible take dude. You can't write it off by saying "any given Saturday"'

---

I said NIL is the most important thing to being successful. You said "No" it is a coach. A good coach can win. Who is this idiot??? You have no idea what you are talking about. In today's CFB, the MOST IMPORTANT person is the NIL Manager. Coaches are leaving the profession because of it. Player development, HS recruiting pales compared to NIL and the Portal. You don't pay, you are not competing.

But keep looking for those one offs where a team loses to an underdog and base your program on that. Let's see how successful you will be. Oh, wait. It is what Baylor HAS done up to this year.

---

FLB has a point here, just look at our championship season - the defensive players won that season for us, despite CDA doing everything he could to muck it up.

---

That world does not exist anymore. We are in a different paradigm. Think of it more as a market, than an educational opportunity. Players are commodities, nothing more. Interchangeable based on their performance and the ability to win. If they get better, we pay them of Ohio State will. They get worse, they don't get NIL. That is the reality of the system we are in. The world Briles coached in or the 21 B12 Championship team does not exist anymore. Briles would have excelled in this world, but he is too old now and his son is not him. He would get it. Aranda doesn't. He and Rhodes did a lot of damage with the "We Pay Players" and the everyone gets the same amount crap. We are just starting to recover.

Think about this. NIL and the right person pulling the strings bought Tech a playoff team in one year. They put rah-rah Joey f-ing Maguire in the playoff. Where he showed his coaching prowess against equally or better talented teams.

The sooner the alumni and the fans get behind the NIL, the sooner BU gets over the hump. But, there is nothing nice about CFB, it is a cesspool. I know coaches known for player development that left because it is a nasty buisness now.

---

I'm not sure why you are talking to me about NIL. I was one of the first people on this board talking about how big NIL would get. I'm talking right at the beginning I was predicting that in only a couple of years UT's entire line would be getting 6 figures+ and everyone on the bench would be banking as well. The typical know-it-alls were dismissive of the that idea, and now here we are, it's so much worse than we could have imagined.
I was also right about CDA. He just doesn't get headcoaching. It has been obvious since the start.
Last, I was supporting your idea that the quantity+quality of talent on a roster can mean more than a coach. The championship team proves that. CDA did everything he could to lose.

---

Sorry if it was wrong post. Hard to keep track on a phone. I am glad you get it, too many think a simple coaching change and we win.

FLBear5630 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

This is an interesting article on NIL and who is embracing it. It answers the Memphis question (#50 with ties to Fed Ex). Neither Baylor nor Boise made the top 50.

College football's top 50 programs ranked by NIL efforts

For Boise, they were not listed on that list. But, I found this article you may find interesting.

Where Boise State Football's NIL Money is Coming From: Key Contributors and Sources - CollegeNetWorth.com


As for Aranda, this article is the biggest indictment to get rid of him, according to this Dallas article he is the reason BU is so far behind in NIL. THAT gets more pissed than the play against Auburn. That shows he either can't read the tea leaves or worse did and chose not to do it. NIL is the future to winning, period. Whether we like it or not, it is. BU is way behind, I blamed in on Rhodes, but this says it is Aranda. Gonna take a whole lot of marketing to overcome that stigma.

Aranda admits he's reason for Baylor's lack of NIL presence

I am more tolerant of bad teams, because it is cyclical for a school like BU. We may have 2 good years and 3 mediocre. No issues, nature of the beast. But, to not try or worse take a contrary position on the money at a P4 school. Is a problem.

He needs to go to an academy with that attitude. You may have convinced me...

---

Well, you dont know that at all bc it clearly states in the article : Only public universities were included in the findings.

I could almost guarantee you that we are in the top 50 and probably the top 40. We would be ahead of Memphis for sure.

---

We are 41, I said that earlier in a post. I was using it to answer the Memphis question. My mistake, poorly written. The point of the articles was that those schools are in big on NIL. We have to embrace NIL, if Aranda doesn't he needs to leave a P4 school. Just "doing it" is not enough, you have to sell it. The other article talked about Boise.

His public attitude on NIL pushed me over the line, he needs to go. We cannot compete without it, even with itwe have some limitations to overcome anyway. Thanks for pointing out.

---

We both want the same thing. Aranda gone. But for me there are multiple issues. For you, it appears to just be his NIL stance, which I agree is bad.

---

Simpler than that. The first thing that has to be in place to win is the NIL to attract the talent that can compete. Or, we will be stuck in this loop of competing with the Auburns and other mid-tier teams. After researching, Aranda has said too much and the stupid "We pay players" shirts send a message that he is NOT on board with it. If I had a kid being courted by schools, I would want to go where they are using the system to the fullest to pay my kid.

---

Oklahoma State had more money than Oregon according to your chart, right? Or are you admitting that this chart is made up? It's gotta be one or the other

---

Don't be an idiot. On any given day... Look at who goes to the playoff, who wins the NC and the amounts of money being spent. Then tell me your "real coach" can win with Texas State's roster. You want to discuss a real subject, great. Let's go. You want to be an idiot, welcome to ignore.

---

If I'm an idiot, you're the kind of person that has to set an alarm every 5 seconds so that they remember to breathe. Everything about you on this message board exudes "beta man" energy. Just admit that you had a terrible take dude. You can't write it off by saying "any given Saturday"'

---

I said NIL is the most important thing to being successful. You said "No" it is a coach. A good coach can win. Who is this idiot??? You have no idea what you are talking about. In today's CFB, the MOST IMPORTANT person is the NIL Manager. Coaches are leaving the profession because of it. Player development, HS recruiting pales compared to NIL and the Portal. You don't pay, you are not competing.

But keep looking for those one offs where a team loses to an underdog and base your program on that. Let's see how successful you will be. Oh, wait. It is what Baylor HAS done up to this year.

---

FLB has a point here, just look at our championship season - the defensive players won that season for us, despite CDA doing everything he could to muck it up.

---

That world does not exist anymore. We are in a different paradigm. Think of it more as a market, than an educational opportunity. Players are commodities, nothing more. Interchangeable based on their performance and the ability to win. If they get better, we pay them of Ohio State will. They get worse, they don't get NIL. That is the reality of the system we are in. The world Briles coached in or the 21 B12 Championship team does not exist anymore. Briles would have excelled in this world, but he is too old now and his son is not him. He would get it. Aranda doesn't. He and Rhodes did a lot of damage with the "We Pay Players" and the everyone gets the same amount crap. We are just starting to recover.

Think about this. NIL and the right person pulling the strings bought Tech a playoff team in one year. They put rah-rah Joey f-ing Maguire in the playoff. Where he showed his coaching prowess against equally or better talented teams.

The sooner the alumni and the fans get behind the NIL, the sooner BU gets over the hump. But, there is nothing nice about CFB, it is a cesspool. I know coaches known for player development that left because it is a nasty buisness now.

---

I'm not sure why you are talking to me about NIL. I was one of the first people on this board talking about how big NIL would get. I'm talking right at the beginning I was predicting that in only a couple of years UT's entire line would be getting 6 figures+ and everyone on the bench would be banking as well. The typical know-it-alls were dismissive of the that idea, and now here we are, it's so much worse than we could have imagined.
I was also right about CDA. He just doesn't get headcoaching. It has been obvious since the start.
Last, I was supporting your idea that the quantity+quality of talent on a roster can mean more than a coach. The championship team proves that. CDA did everything he could to lose.

---

Sorry if it was wrong post. Hard to keep track on a phone. I am glad you get it, too many think a simple coaching change and we win.

---

Some, perhaps many, BU people that bemoan this NIL era are actually grateful for it inasmuch as it's just one more useful excuse for our contiinuing football mediocrity.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Guitarbiscuit said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

This is an interesting article on NIL and who is embracing it. It answers the Memphis question (#50 with ties to Fed Ex). Neither Baylor nor Boise made the top 50.

College football's top 50 programs ranked by NIL efforts

For Boise, they were not listed on that list. But, I found this article you may find interesting.

Where Boise State Football's NIL Money is Coming From: Key Contributors and Sources - CollegeNetWorth.com


As for Aranda, this article is the biggest indictment to get rid of him, according to this Dallas article he is the reason BU is so far behind in NIL. THAT gets more pissed than the play against Auburn. That shows he either can't read the tea leaves or worse did and chose not to do it. NIL is the future to winning, period. Whether we like it or not, it is. BU is way behind, I blamed in on Rhodes, but this says it is Aranda. Gonna take a whole lot of marketing to overcome that stigma.

Aranda admits he's reason for Baylor's lack of NIL presence

I am more tolerant of bad teams, because it is cyclical for a school like BU. We may have 2 good years and 3 mediocre. No issues, nature of the beast. But, to not try or worse take a contrary position on the money at a P4 school. Is a problem.

He needs to go to an academy with that attitude. You may have convinced me...

---

Well, you dont know that at all bc it clearly states in the article : Only public universities were included in the findings.

I could almost guarantee you that we are in the top 50 and probably the top 40. We would be ahead of Memphis for sure.

---

We are 41, I said that earlier in a post. I was using it to answer the Memphis question. My mistake, poorly written. The point of the articles was that those schools are in big on NIL. We have to embrace NIL, if Aranda doesn't he needs to leave a P4 school. Just "doing it" is not enough, you have to sell it. The other article talked about Boise.

His public attitude on NIL pushed me over the line, he needs to go. We cannot compete without it, even with itwe have some limitations to overcome anyway. Thanks for pointing out.

---

We both want the same thing. Aranda gone. But for me there are multiple issues. For you, it appears to just be his NIL stance, which I agree is bad.

---

Simpler than that. The first thing that has to be in place to win is the NIL to attract the talent that can compete. Or, we will be stuck in this loop of competing with the Auburns and other mid-tier teams. After researching, Aranda has said too much and the stupid "We pay players" shirts send a message that he is NOT on board with it. If I had a kid being courted by schools, I would want to go where they are using the system to the fullest to pay my kid.

---

Oklahoma State had more money than Oregon according to your chart, right? Or are you admitting that this chart is made up? It's gotta be one or the other

---

Don't be an idiot. On any given day... Look at who goes to the playoff, who wins the NC and the amounts of money being spent. Then tell me your "real coach" can win with Texas State's roster. You want to discuss a real subject, great. Let's go. You want to be an idiot, welcome to ignore.

---

If I'm an idiot, you're the kind of person that has to set an alarm every 5 seconds so that they remember to breathe. Everything about you on this message board exudes "beta man" energy. Just admit that you had a terrible take dude. You can't write it off by saying "any given Saturday"'

---

I said NIL is the most important thing to being successful. You said "No" it is a coach. A good coach can win. Who is this idiot??? You have no idea what you are talking about. In today's CFB, the MOST IMPORTANT person is the NIL Manager. Coaches are leaving the profession because of it. Player development, HS recruiting pales compared to NIL and the Portal. You don't pay, you are not competing.

But keep looking for those one offs where a team loses to an underdog and base your program on that. Let's see how successful you will be. Oh, wait. It is what Baylor HAS done up to this year.

---

FLB has a point here, just look at our championship season - the defensive players won that season for us, despite CDA doing everything he could to muck it up.

---

That world does not exist anymore. We are in a different paradigm. Think of it more as a market, than an educational opportunity. Players are commodities, nothing more. Interchangeable based on their performance and the ability to win. If they get better, we pay them of Ohio State will. They get worse, they don't get NIL. That is the reality of the system we are in. The world Briles coached in or the 21 B12 Championship team does not exist anymore. Briles would have excelled in this world, but he is too old now and his son is not him. He would get it. Aranda doesn't. He and Rhodes did a lot of damage with the "We Pay Players" and the everyone gets the same amount crap. We are just starting to recover.

Think about this. NIL and the right person pulling the strings bought Tech a playoff team in one year. They put rah-rah Joey f-ing Maguire in the playoff. Where he showed his coaching prowess against equally or better talented teams.

The sooner the alumni and the fans get behind the NIL, the sooner BU gets over the hump. But, there is nothing nice about CFB, it is a cesspool. I know coaches known for player development that left because it is a nasty buisness now.

---

I'm not sure why you are talking to me about NIL. I was one of the first people on this board talking about how big NIL would get. I'm talking right at the beginning I was predicting that in only a couple of years UT's entire line would be getting 6 figures+ and everyone on the bench would be banking as well. The typical know-it-alls were dismissive of the that idea, and now here we are, it's so much worse than we could have imagined.
I was also right about CDA. He just doesn't get headcoaching. It has been obvious since the start.
Last, I was supporting your idea that the quantity+quality of talent on a roster can mean more than a coach. The championship team proves that. CDA did everything he could to lose.

---

Sorry if it was wrong post. Hard to keep track on a phone. I am glad you get it, too many think a simple coaching change and we win.

---

Nah, people know that CDA isn't a good headcoach. Changing him increases our odds.

---

Having UT's payroll increases much more...

Quote:

---

Having UT's payroll increases much more...

---

Yep, definitely

muddybrazos said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

VaeBear said:

---

I saw this posted on a Baylor sports group on Facebook in regards to firing Aranda....

"I want Dave Aranda to be the coach until he doesn't want the job anymore.

What he teaches those young men is a lot more valuable than W's and L's. They will be better men, citizens, husbands, fathers, employers, and employees because of him.

Winning is fun, sure, but the things I just described are what the world needs.

Okay, everyone can pile on now."

---

That's gotta be trolling. But if it's not, I think people forget winning coaches can teach all of those same things

---

Just curious, you guys really believe that BU is getting someone better and that will "win"?

Next curiosity, where do you think BU is in the College Athletic world? Based on BU's history and the current environment you think BU should be winning? To put in perspective.

Aranda is the 50th highest paid coach. And BU is 49th or so in NIL, 8th in B12.

Final question, how has he underperformed with that level of investment.

---

Are these real questions? They are all kind of self-explanatory, but here goes

Yes, I believe that Baylor can find a better coach than Dave. Dave is not a winner, and if the new coach doesn't work out, hey, we tried. Again, we are talking about replacing a coach that lost to Air Force and Texas State after having weeks/an entire off-season to prepare for both. Another way of saying this is how hard is it to replace a coach that doesn't win games? Not that hard

It's more difficult to answer your second question, because you didn't proofread what you wrote, and it's difficult to understand. No one on here expects Baylor to turn into Georgia. Nobody on here expects Baylor to routinely compete for the big 12 championship every year or heck, most years. I DO expect Baylor to make a bowl game every year and compete for the big 12 championship every three or four years. I DO expect not to get blown out. I DO expect us to not lose to clearly inferior programs as stated above. I also expect a coach at Baylor to be a force multiplier and not simply a CEO that blows through coordinators like hotcakes and hopes and prays that this year's iteration of potential scapegoats works out

I would want to see concrete figures posted for all these assertions that he's 49th of this and 50-whatever that. Baylor does not publish those numbers, and I doubt you are privy to that info, no offense.

I think you're really caught up on this idea that winning is purely a function of money. reality is more nuanced than that. Coaches that punch above their weight by coaching their team to be better than the sum of their individual talent is very much a thing. The Navy coach comes to mind, and's that's just one example. Briles was winning with two and three star guys because of his scheme and coaching. The list could go on and on. Frankly, I think this idea that little old Baylor can't do better than Dave is a coping mechanism

---

Damn right they are. You get what you invest. BU invests average money and gets average returns. Some would say we out performed our investment with the B12 Championship, Sugar Bowl win. But, that was long ago under a different system.

You believe you can get a "winner" today. A winning coach that wins year in and year out for the 49th highest salary? Investing #40 level NIL? You invest average, you get average. We are very average, in an average to bad location, at a highly religious school... I am sure the next Sabans are lined up...

---

Ok wow. There's a lot of strawman here. I didn't realize that being in the camp that wants to get rid of Dave somehow means that you are under the impression that your school is going to hire the next Nick Saban.

Unless you're willing to post some sort of reliable source (ie not anESPN article or some supposed premium board insider) for this NIL data, it's worthless for the sake of this argument. The ball is in your court to prove:

1. These NIL numbers you're quoting as fact,

2. The underlying argument that coaching doesn't matter and that winning is merely a function of investment

3. That we couldn't hire a coach that loses lots of games to replace a coach that loses lots of games. If coaching does matter, why wouldn't a new coach bring improvement, and if coaching doesn't matter, why does coaching not matter? How would you explain our program under Art Briles, or programs like Air Force and Texas State that are able to beat bad coaches like Dave Aranda with less talent and resources?

I'll hang up and listen

---

Look it up yourself if you question. If you dont know those percentages sre in the right ball park you have a lot of learning to do to get in the conversation.

Briles again? That was a decade ago, that system is gone several times over. If you want to talk replacing, you have to understand todays structure. Not pine for a decade ago.

Talent wins. Today talent cost money. You spend cheap, you get cheap. We spend at Alamo Bowl level.

Fix the money before firing and hiring. Yes money wins, always has. There is no super HC that wins with the little engine that could. We are right where we should be based on spending.

Real easy to find...

https://nil-ncaa.com/big12/

---

How are Boise and Memphis as good as they are? Surely we can outspend them. We need a GM who's entire job it is to research the entire G5 and determine who are the best players on each of those teams at every position and then target and make money offers to those players every year. Thats the new game. See who is the best guy on App state, Coastal Carolina, Tx State, S Alabama, Jax state etc then go get them. Then you look on the bench at P4 places to find guys who want to play.

---

Look at our D-line line this year. We've got a bunch of those guys now leading that group.

But I agree, that's the market inefficiency. I don't want failed blue chip recruits from SEC and Big Ten schools. I want the hyper productive Big 12, G6 and FCS guys.

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I hope the next BU head coach is a guy who has been successful as a head coach at multiple levels so we can avoid on the job training.

Year 7 and Dave's discovering a HC needs to be a leader….like what in the **** are we doing here? 7 years and this clown is learning this?! He continues to make a joke of himself weekly at this point.

BU Football is just a guinea pig

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

No, we are the learning curve. When he gets fired and rehired somewhere else (which he will) he will tell everyone how much he learned at Baylor and allowed him to be successful somewhere else. IMO, that is why you want a HC on his second stint, not the first. I would rather have a guy that struggled at FSU, then an OC or DC in his first gig.

BU IMO, needs someone from Texas and has already cut their teeth elsewhere which is why Briles was successful. He made his mistakes elsewhere. Funny, I can see Joey coming back after Tech figures out it isn't going to do more than go to the playoff with him as HC.

I like the guy at Texas State Coach.

IowaBear said:

---

Year 7 and Dave's discovering a HC needs to be a leader….like what in the **** are we doing here? 7 years and this clown is learning this?! He continues to make a joke of himself weekly at this point.

---

Dude just does not have the personality for the job. People accuse me of hating Dave, but I've said before that I think he will make a good athletic director or some other off the field role where he can hang out in his office doing paperwork or whatever, but he is not head coach material

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Most of us were right about him and Mack Rhoades YEARS AGO

We all were ostracized because "but 2021!"

---

It's the same 4 excuses recycled year after year.

Injuries (as if no other team deals with those)

lack of money to buy the best players (as if Air Force and Texas State had better talent than us. Also the games we've lost on the last second plays because of lack of execution, or the games we've lost because we didn't take the field goal because of what ChatGPT said to do in that situation),

scapegoating a coordinator (you're supposed to be the defensive guru buddy)

eligibility issues (why did you recruit ineligible players).

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

---

This is correct, honest, and non-bashing. Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

---

I don't think people should ever stop striving to learn and/or improve, regardless of where they start, where they are currently or how much rope they have left on their contract.

This isn't a commentary on Dave Aranda's fitness as a Power 4 head coach. It's just an acknowledgement that he possesses a level of humility, introspection and vulnerability that a) is rare among his peers in his profession and b) I find refreshing.

bear2be2 said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

---

I don't think people should ever stop striving to learn and/or improve, regardless of where they start, where they are currently or how much rope they have left on their contract.

This isn't a commentary on Dave Aranda's fitness as a Power 4 head coach. It's just an acknowledgement that he possesses a level of humility, introspection and vulnerability that a) is rare among his peers in his profession and b) I find refreshing.

---

fair enough. I think we all find that refreshing in people. But honestly, in my world, an introspective person would have figured this out a long time ago.

At this point, and for many years back, he reminds of a bad performing employee, one who keeps getting negative performance feedback, and keeps making statements that he thinks sounds good to show how he intends to improve. Unfortunately, in this case, he's just not the right guy for the role - and no number of "intentional sounding" statements are going to change that.

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

---

A high tide raises all ships in the harbor, but if you were to clone Indiana's team, hand that team to Dave, and then have him face off with Cignetti's Indiana team, Cignetti's team would be a -3 favorite at least. Dave is still discovering some of the basics of leadership in year seven. Not hating on the guy, he's just not the right fit for a head coaching position

Youre a clown said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

---

A high tide raises all ships in the harbor, but if you were to clone Indiana's team, hand that team to Dave, and then have him face off with Cignetti's Indiana team, Cignetti's team would be a -3 favorite at least. Dave is still discovering some of the basics of leadership in year seven. Not hating on the guy, he's just not the right fit for a head coaching position

---

-3 is incredibly conservative. I'd go -23 at least.

A Cignetti team would beat the shyt outta a Davey team if talent is equal

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Most of us were right about him and Mack Rhoades YEARS AGO

We all were ostracized because "but 2021!"

---

I started to realize that 2021 was a fluke midway thru 2022, first game of 2023 sealed the deal.

canoso said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

I actually like how introspective and honest he is. There's something refreshing about that level of vulnerability in a space that has become as highly insulated as high-major college football is.

I just wish that each new discovery didn't come with a new problem in need of solving. His entire tenure has been one giant game of "whack-a-mole."

---

lol, you usually have great opinions, but this one misses the mark.

Sire Cerebral is 7 years in, and he's just figuring this out, lol. That's not introspective, that's desperation throwing paint against the wall.

And I don't want him leading anything - he's not good at it. He's not a good headcoach, plain and simple.

He can go somewhere else with more money, where an increase in talent will make him look good. Or he can go somewhere with lesser talent in a lesser league, where lesser competition will make him look good. But he cannot compete at a place like Baylor, he just doesn't have the skills.

I was right 5 years ago about him not making a good hc, and nothing has changed.

---

A high tide raises all ships in the harbor, but if you were to clone Indiana's team, hand that team to Dave, and then have him face off with Cignetti's Indiana team, Cignetti's team would be a -3 favorite at least. Dave is still discovering some of the basics of leadership in year seven. Not hating on the guy, he's just not the right fit for a head coaching position

---

-3 is incredibly conservative. I'd go -23 at least.

---

I think the talent would be good enough to prop him up and insulate him from being blown out. Deciding factor would be turnovers - I would trust Cignetti more to capitalize on turnovers, because that's what good coaches do and mediocre/bad coaches don't

boognish_bear said:

---

Sometimes I wish he was not so transparent and kept his new coaching 101 discoveries to himself...

Head coach Dave Aranda on being the first one to run out of the tunnel ahead of games:

"I'm trying to lead as much as I can. I think that's something that I haven't done, and it's probably about time I did."#SicEm🐻 pic.twitter.com/fs77OHNh7Q

— Baylor Bears on SicEm365 (@SicEm365) September 14, 2026

---

LOL. After 6 seasons he begins his 7th with that silly comment?

BigGameBaylorBear said:

---

Danielsjackson114 said:

---

Most of us were right about him and Mack Rhoades YEARS AGO

We all were ostracized because "but 2021!"

---

I started to realize that 2021 was a fluke midway thru 2022, first game of 2023 sealed the deal.

---

Correct. It's been downhill since then with a few lucky wins against mostly terrible teams sprinkled in here and there