Quinton said:

---

Genuine question: this fire and leadership just doesn't come naturally to Dave. It feels like he finally realizes this is it, and he's throwing absolutely everything into making this a decent year. But even if they pull off a 9-win season, does he actually have what it takes to summon the energy again and sustain that?

Probably not. He's already proven he doesn't have "it" -- not just in his press conferences or public presence, but in his ability to inspire these guys for a full 60 minutes.. to get them to play smart and execute on a consistent basis.. to play physical. Does he finally find his eureka moment in Year 7? Who knows. But we all probably know the answer.

---

Contrary to what you see posted here, Dave Aranda does have strengths as a head coach.

While many fans have quit on him, his players and coaches never have, which tells you the culture he builds is real. As a lifelong Baylor fan, I've seen teams quit on a coach several times. That's never happened with Aranda in games, seasons or between seasons.

Every time I think he's going to bottom out the program, he manages to pull a win out of his keister -- be that an actual win, a recruiting win or significant coaching hire I didn't think we had the cache or momentum to make. There's something to be said for getting buy-in regardless of results. That's a strength that could be harnessed if he could ever get things right on the football side.

Which brings me back around to why I have some optimism. I think he's finally solved the football side by hiring good people and getting himself out of day to day of it. I think if he lets this staff coach and these players play and focuses on the things he does well, this team can be competitive and fun to watch, which is all I really desire out of our football team. In the NIL era, I have no delusions that we'll ever be a juggernaut because we don't invest at the level needed to do so.

Youre a clown said:

---

An 8 win season is not a reason to pop bottles. And if you look at the teams we beat in 2024, we were very, very lucky to play such a weak schedule

---

NIce strawman. No one has said eight wins is reason to pop bottles. Only that it's a successful season at Baylor -- and most other places that invest at the mediocre level we can/do.

An 8-4 season is a successful season for any Baylor coach in the NIL era (and before it as well, frankly). There's no reason in my opinion to exclude Dave from that standard. Anything better is great, and 7-5 is passable most years -- though it wouldn't be good enough IMO to save Dave's job under the present circumstances and given his mediocre job performance to date.

bear2be2 said:

---

This would be as good a thread as any to get everyone's threshold for a season successful enough to save Dave's job.

I've already stated mine at 8-4. That's a good season at Baylor, and if we achieve that record or better, I'll be OK giving Dave another go with what looks like his best staff yet. But anything less than that, I think it's time to start over with a new coach.

What say y'all?

---

12-0

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

This would be as good a thread as any to get everyone's threshold for a season successful enough to save Dave's job.

I've already stated mine at 8-4. That's a good season at Baylor, and if we achieve that record or better, I'll be OK giving Dave another go with what looks like his best staff yet. But anything less than that, I think it's time to start over with a new coach.

What say y'all?

---

12-0

---

Then you might as well take this season off ... and next, too, if we win upwards of seven games because your expectations aren't remotely in line with the administration's -- or reality frankly.

bear2be2 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

An 8 win season is not a reason to pop bottles. And if you look at the teams we beat in 2024, we were very, very lucky to play such a weak schedule

---

NIce strawman. No one has said eight wins is reason to pop bottles. Only that it's a successful season at Baylor -- and most other places that invest at the mediocre level we can/do.

An 8-4 season is a successful season for any Baylor coach. There's no reason in my opinion to exclude Dave from that standard.

---

Kids, this is a great example of "arguing semantics". He doesn't like the fact that I said "popping bottles" because it embarrassed him, so he's taking issue with that hyperbolic phrasing instead of the fact that he's arguing an 8 win season as a success

Honestly, I'm not really sure how to even converse with someone who genuinely does not care about seeing a millionaire coach held to some sort of standard so that their team can win at a high level.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

This would be as good a thread as any to get everyone's threshold for a season successful enough to save Dave's job.

I've already stated mine at 8-4. That's a good season at Baylor, and if we achieve that record or better, I'll be OK giving Dave another go with what looks like his best staff yet. But anything less than that, I think it's time to start over with a new coach.

What say y'all?

---

12-0

---

Then you might as well take this season off ... and next, too, if we win upwards of seven games because your expectations aren't remotely in line with the administration's -- or reality frankly.

---

Ok. 11-1

Youre a clown said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

An 8 win season is not a reason to pop bottles. And if you look at the teams we beat in 2024, we were very, very lucky to play such a weak schedule

---

NIce strawman. No one has said eight wins is reason to pop bottles. Only that it's a successful season at Baylor -- and most other places that invest at the mediocre level we can/do.

An 8-4 season is a successful season for any Baylor coach. There's no reason in my opinion to exclude Dave from that standard.

---

Kids, this is a great example of "arguing semantics". He doesn't like the fact that I said "popping bottles" because it embarrassed him, so he's taking issue with that hyperbolic phrasing instead of the fact that he's arguing an 8 win season as a success

Honestly, I'm not really sure how to even converse with someone who genuinely does not care about seeing a millionaire coach held to some sort of standard so that their team can win at a high level.

---

Every head coach in Power 4 college football is a millionaire. Dave isn't even in the top half of Big 12 coach's pay currently.

Is he underachieving? Sure. But we're getting the mediocrity we're willing to pay for currently. Our payroll is near the bottom of our conference and our coach's pay is in the bottom half.

Eight wins is absolutely a fair threshold for success given what we're willing and able to invest in the program currently. That your expectations are completely out of line with reality is your problem.

Be miserable and die mad. I don't care.

8 wins

What I really want to see is that the program is improving again and not just treading water. In spite of last season, Aranda has been able to assemble great coaches and recruit at a decent level. Whether he pans out or not, getting Lagway was noteworthy. I may not be forever content with 8 win seasons, but an 8 win regular season this year and being competitive in the games we lose and especially finishing strong would seem to indicate that the trajectory of the program is going in the right direction.

Chuckroast said:

---

What I really want to see is that the program is improving again and not just treading water. In spite of last season, Aranda has been able to assemble great coaches and recruit at a decent level. Whether he pans out or not, getting Lagway was noteworthy. I may not be forever content with 8 win seasons, but an 8 win regular season this year and being competitive in the games we lose and especially finishing strong would seem to indicate that the trajectory of the program is going in the right direction.

---

My thoughts exactly.

2024 was a fun season. Was it perfect? Obviously not. But we improved over the course of the season, finished strong and looked like a reasonably well-coached team after the 2-4 start.

Give me that, and I'll be happy for now. But it's also important to sustain success at some point -- something Aranda has struggled mightily to do as a head coach.

Baylorbears111 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Youre a clown said:

---

An 8 win season is not a reason to pop bottles. And if you look at the teams we beat in 2024, we were very, very lucky to play such a weak schedule

---

NIce strawman. No one has said eight wins is reason to pop bottles. Only that it's a successful season at Baylor -- and most other places that invest at the mediocre level we can/do.

An 8-4 season is a successful season for any Baylor coach in the NIL era (and before it as well, frankly). There's no reason in my opinion to exclude Dave from that standard. Anything better is great, and 7-5 is passable most years -- though it wouldn't be good enough IMO to save Dave's job under the present circumstances and given his mediocre job performance to date.

---

8 wins should be the minimum in the new conference alignment. That people haven't come around to the fact that we don't play in the Big 12 south anymore is a real problem. We replaced OU/Texas:m/A&M with Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Itah and BYU. Not bad programs, but much more winnable.

People are too comfortable with cellar life.

---

Why, based on what we're spending, should that be the minimum in your opinion?

What inherent advantages does Baylor possess that should make it automatically successful while investing near the bottom of the new Big 12?

The Big 12 isn't a great football conference, but virtually everyone (other than Tech) is investing at a similar level and has similar expectations. Unless you're willing to spend more than everyone else -- as Tech is -- you're winning games on the margins like everyone else is. We need to do a better job of that obviously, but we're not investing enough currently to be expecting Big 12 championships.

Baylorbears111 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

This would be as good a thread as any to get everyone's threshold for a season successful enough to save Dave's job.

I've already stated mine at 8-4. That's a good season at Baylor, and if we achieve that record or better, I'll be OK giving Dave another go with what looks like his best staff yet. But anything less than that, I think it's time to start over with a new coach.

What say y'all?

---

12-0

---

Then you might as well take this season off ... and next, too, if we win upwards of seven games because your expectations aren't remotely in line with the administration's -- or reality frankly.

---

Aranda has taken three seasons off at this juncture, but you let him stick around.

---

I didn't have anything to do with Aranda's retention. If I had been in charge we'd have had a new coach after the 2-4 start to 2024.

But I'm not going to spend four months *****ing because I didn't get my way. I'll let this team play and judge it on its merits.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

This would be as good a thread as any to get everyone's threshold for a season successful enough to save Dave's job.

I've already stated mine at 8-4. That's a good season at Baylor, and if we achieve that record or better, I'll be OK giving Dave another go with what looks like his best staff yet. But anything less than that, I think it's time to start over with a new coach.

What say y'all?

---

12-0

---

Then you might as well take this season off ... and next, too, if we win upwards of seven games because your expectations aren't remotely in line with the administration's -- or reality frankly.

---

We got pretty close to that in 2021. Why haven't we since then? Please complete the following survey:

Excuse #1 _______________________________________________
Excuse #2 _______________________________________________
Excuse #3 _______________________________________________

...ad infinitum

Those were Rhule's kids that got us the 2021 season. You see what Dave has done since.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Those were Rhule's kids that got us the 2021 season. You see what Dave has done since.

---

For sure, but all the excuses will be NIL, NIL, NIL, NiL..........ad infinitum.

canoso said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

This would be as good a thread as any to get everyone's threshold for a season successful enough to save Dave's job.

I've already stated mine at 8-4. That's a good season at Baylor, and if we achieve that record or better, I'll be OK giving Dave another go with what looks like his best staff yet. But anything less than that, I think it's time to start over with a new coach.

What say y'all?

---

12-0

---

Then you might as well take this season off ... and next, too, if we win upwards of seven games because your expectations aren't remotely in line with the administration's -- or reality frankly.

---

We got pretty close to that in 2021. Why haven't we since then? Please complete the following survey:

Excuse #1 _______________________________________________
Excuse #2 _______________________________________________
Excuse #3 _______________________________________________

...ad infinitum

---

Are you really asking what changed in college football between 2021 and now? Oh I don't know ... everything.

Teams built like our 2021 squad of experienced third-, fourth- and fifth-year players, most of whom were recruited to and developed in the program, will never happen again. NIL and the transfer portal have guaranteed that.

canoso said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Those were Rhule's kids that got us the 2021 season. You see what Dave has done since.

---

For sure, but all the excuses will be NIL, NIL, NIL, NiL..........ad infinitum.

---

How exactly is that an excuse? It's just reality. In the modern era, the teams with the most money are going to get the best players. Period. And those without elite resources are going to lose their best players to teams that can pay them more.

If we can't even acknowledge the basic realities of modern college football, what are we doing here?

It's his in game decision making that drives me most crazy. He has absolutely no "feel" for the situation. Reverse every "analytic" decision he made Saturday and we win. Reading a 4th down note card isn't coaching. Anybody can do that.

I'll give him credit for stepping away and hiring what appears to be a decent staff to actually prepare the team.

Yeah the Big12 sucks and we have two cupcakes

8 wins in his 7th year would be a travesty

8wins including a bowl victory and I'm in.
The vibe is just different with the players this year and I'm sure it has more to do with the assistants than Aranda. But whomever is responsible, we did finally bring in players who have that DAWG chip in the shoulder type mentality and I'm eager to see how it plays out the rest of the season.

To compete you basically need NIL/Donors to pull $20M+ for a team to have a chance...and that will only happen if there's a HC/Program they have faith in. That's not gonna happen with Aranda unless he has a miracle season and its not going to happen with Livingstone who testified directly before Congress regarding NIL and college athletics governance in favor of regulation, salary caps, and limits on direct player compensation. Her instinct is to regulate, slow down, and stabilize college athletics rather than lean into an unregulated free market bidding war...so there's no way she's on board with any of this.

Bear51 said:

---

8wins including a bowl victory and I'm in.
The vibe is just different with the players this year and I'm sure it has more to do with the assistants than Aranda. But whomever is responsible, we did finally bring in players who have that DAWG chip in the shoulder type mentality and I'm eager to see how it plays out the rest of the season.

---

Aranda is really good at building chemistry from a camaraderie/family perspective IMO, but he either needs hyper-competitive players or help from his staff on building a hate for losing because he doesn't have it.

We'll see what kind of competitive fire this team has in Big 12 play because I suspect we'll be in a lot of games. We need to start winning a lot more of those.

Doc Holliday said:

---

To compete you basically need NIL/Donors to pull $20M+ for a team to have a chance...and that will only happen if there's a HC/Program they have faith in. That's not gonna happen with Aranda unless he has a miracle season and its not going to happen with Livingstone who testified directly before Congress regarding NIL and college athletics governance in favor of regulation, salary caps, and limits on direct player compensation. Her instinct is to regulate, slow down, and stabilize college athletics rather than lean into an unregulated free market bidding war...so there's no way she's on board with any of this.

---

It's probably closer to $25 million at a minimum now (the number keeps rising). And odds are high Baylor will never get there regardless of who the head coach is.

bear2be2 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

To compete you basically need NIL/Donors to pull $20M+ for a team to have a chance...and that will only happen if there's a HC/Program they have faith in. That's not gonna happen with Aranda unless he has a miracle season and its not going to happen with Livingstone who testified directly before Congress regarding NIL and college athletics governance in favor of regulation, salary caps, and limits on direct player compensation. Her instinct is to regulate, slow down, and stabilize college athletics rather than lean into an unregulated free market bidding war...so there's no way she's on board with any of this.

---

It's probably closer to $25 million at a minimum now (the number keeps rising). And odds are high Baylor will never get there regardless of who the head coach is.

---

Yeah its a long shot even if Baylor had the perfect HC

Aranda would be a great coach for an intramural curling team at a D3 school in Minnesota.

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Genuine question: this fire and leadership just doesn't come naturally to Dave. It feels like he finally realizes this is it, and he's throwing absolutely everything into making this a decent year. But even if they pull off a 9-win season, does he actually have what it takes to summon the energy again and sustain that?

Probably not. He's already proven he doesn't have "it" -- not just in his press conferences or public presence, but in his ability to inspire these guys for a full 60 minutes.. to get them to play smart and execute on a consistent basis.. to play physical. Does he finally find his eureka moment in Year 7? Who knows. But we all probably know the answer.

---

Contrary to what you see posted here, Dave Aranda does have strengths as a head coach.

While many fans have quit on him, his players and coaches never have, which tells you the culture he builds is real. As a lifelong Baylor fan, I've seen teams quit on a coach several times. That's never happened with Aranda in games, seasons or between seasons.

Every time I think he's going to bottom out the program, he manages to pull a win out of his keister -- be that an actual win, a recruiting win or significant coaching hire I didn't think we had the cache or momentum to make. There's something to be said for getting buy-in regardless of results. That's a strength that could be harnessed if he could ever get things right on the football side.

Which brings me back around to why I have some optimism. I think he's finally solved the football side by hiring good people and getting himself out of day to day of it. I think if he lets this staff coach and these players play and focuses on the things he does well, this team can be competitive and fun to watch, which is all I really desire out of our football team. In the NIL era, I have no delusions that we'll ever be a juggernaut because we don't invest at the level needed to do so.

---

I have no interest in Baylor just being "competitive and fun to watch". IU showed us that you can hire the right coach at any school and they can win. Yes, Cig seems like a generational type of hire, but why not us? Why can't we do the same?

Fine, the players and coaches never quit on him. Sure, the culture he builds is real. However, it is a losing culture based on a bunch of moral victories and metrics that don't lead to winning games.

Let's assume that he's solved the football side by hiring good people. What happens when those good people leave? We are still left with a coach who can't win on his own. I don't want that anymore.

BayouCity said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Genuine question: this fire and leadership just doesn't come naturally to Dave. It feels like he finally realizes this is it, and he's throwing absolutely everything into making this a decent year. But even if they pull off a 9-win season, does he actually have what it takes to summon the energy again and sustain that?

Probably not. He's already proven he doesn't have "it" -- not just in his press conferences or public presence, but in his ability to inspire these guys for a full 60 minutes.. to get them to play smart and execute on a consistent basis.. to play physical. Does he finally find his eureka moment in Year 7? Who knows. But we all probably know the answer.

---

Contrary to what you see posted here, Dave Aranda does have strengths as a head coach.

While many fans have quit on him, his players and coaches never have, which tells you the culture he builds is real. As a lifelong Baylor fan, I've seen teams quit on a coach several times. That's never happened with Aranda in games, seasons or between seasons.

Every time I think he's going to bottom out the program, he manages to pull a win out of his keister -- be that an actual win, a recruiting win or significant coaching hire I didn't think we had the cache or momentum to make. There's something to be said for getting buy-in regardless of results. That's a strength that could be harnessed if he could ever get things right on the football side.

Which brings me back around to why I have some optimism. I think he's finally solved the football side by hiring good people and getting himself out of day to day of it. I think if he lets this staff coach and these players play and focuses on the things he does well, this team can be competitive and fun to watch, which is all I really desire out of our football team. In the NIL era, I have no delusions that we'll ever be a juggernaut because we don't invest at the level needed to do so.

---

I have no interest in Baylor just being "competitive and fun to watch". IU showed us that you can hire the right coach at any school and they can win. Yes, Cig seems like a generational type of hire, but why not us? Why can't we do the same?

Fine, the players and coaches never quit on him. Sure, the culture he builds is real. However, it is a losing culture based on a bunch of moral victories and metrics that don't lead to winning games.

Let's assume that he's solved the football side by hiring good people. What happens when those good people leave? We are still left with a coach who can't win on his own. I don't want that anymore.

---

Giving a coach credit for his players not quitting on him is a complete non-achievement. It's on par with giving him credit for not having a scandal, or for simply getting up in the morning and having his 14 cups of coffee and putting in a hard days work. Those things are nice to see, but he gets paid millions a year to win games

Copium

BayouCity said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Genuine question: this fire and leadership just doesn't come naturally to Dave. It feels like he finally realizes this is it, and he's throwing absolutely everything into making this a decent year. But even if they pull off a 9-win season, does he actually have what it takes to summon the energy again and sustain that?

Probably not. He's already proven he doesn't have "it" -- not just in his press conferences or public presence, but in his ability to inspire these guys for a full 60 minutes.. to get them to play smart and execute on a consistent basis.. to play physical. Does he finally find his eureka moment in Year 7? Who knows. But we all probably know the answer.

---

Contrary to what you see posted here, Dave Aranda does have strengths as a head coach.

While many fans have quit on him, his players and coaches never have, which tells you the culture he builds is real. As a lifelong Baylor fan, I've seen teams quit on a coach several times. That's never happened with Aranda in games, seasons or between seasons.

Every time I think he's going to bottom out the program, he manages to pull a win out of his keister -- be that an actual win, a recruiting win or significant coaching hire I didn't think we had the cache or momentum to make. There's something to be said for getting buy-in regardless of results. That's a strength that could be harnessed if he could ever get things right on the football side.

Which brings me back around to why I have some optimism. I think he's finally solved the football side by hiring good people and getting himself out of day to day of it. I think if he lets this staff coach and these players play and focuses on the things he does well, this team can be competitive and fun to watch, which is all I really desire out of our football team. In the NIL era, I have no delusions that we'll ever be a juggernaut because we don't invest at the level needed to do so.

---

I have no interest in Baylor just being "competitive and fun to watch". IU showed us that you can hire the right coach at any school and they can win. Yes, Cig seems like a generational type of hire, but why not us? Why can't we do the same?

Fine, the players and coaches never quit on him. Sure, the culture he builds is real. However, it is a losing culture based on a bunch of moral victories and metrics that don't lead to winning games.

Let's assume that he's solved the football side by hiring good people. What happens when those good people leave? We are still left with a coach who can't win on his own. I don't want that anymore.

---

Indiana, while historically a football graveyard, is in the Big Ten, which is no small detail in the Power 2 era.

The new Big 12 will likely never get a coach the quality of Cignetti, who is truly one of one. And if a Big 12 school ever was to luck into such a coach, he'd be gone for the SEC or Big Ten at the first sign of success.

Too many of you are operating under the realities and expectations of a bygone era. Unless we find a billionaire benefactor willing to bankroll our program at the level that Cody Campbell and Co. are spending at Tech, our days as a contender for anything meaningful are almost certainly done. And the same is true for everyone else in the Big 12 not named Tech and everyone in the ACC not named Florida State, Clemson and Miami.

That sucks, but it's reality. We've already been relegated. That doesn't mean we can't have a one off season here or there where we put everything together and compete for a Big 12 title, but we're not sustaining anything because we don't invest/pay enough to do so.

It will be important then to hire good coaches who can take advantage of market inefficiencies and maximize the talent we're able to acquire, and I think a very strong case can be made that Dave's not that guy. But any coach we hire is going to be fighting an uphill battle because the deck is stacked against us in the NIL era.

You seen FSU lately? They're closer to our level than most understand. Young donor base. There's a reason Mike Norvell wasn't fired last year ($). Their transfer QB backed up Jackson Arnold at Auburn for most of last year before Freeze gave him a few starts. If they had money I'd think Norvell could've landed a bigger name.

If current spending keeps up there will only be a handful of schools in the SEC and Big10 plus TTU that can fund a championship roster.

We are in a position like Arkansas. We have donors who could fund a championship roster but don't. They prefer investing in long term things, not a one year rental edge rusher like David Bailey. I don't blame the donors. If I had a million dollars to give I wouldn't want to hand it to a 20 year old kid under the guise of "signing autographs".

boykin_spaniel said:

---

You seen FSU lately? They're closer to our level than most understand. Young donor base. There's a reason Mike Norvell wasn't fired last year ($). Their transfer QB backed up Jackson Arnold at Auburn for most of last year before Freeze gave him a few starts. If they had money I'd think Norvell could've landed a bigger name.

If current spending keeps up there will only be a handful of schools in the SEC and Big10 plus TTU that can fund a championship roster.

We are in a position like Arkansas. We have donors who could fund a championship roster but don't. They prefer investing in long term things, not a one year rental edge rusher like David Bailey. I don't blame the donors. If I had a million dollars to give I wouldn't want to hand it to a 20 year old kid under the guise of "signing autographs".

---

FSU is a disaster currently because of decisions they've made. But that program has the infrastructure, support and resources to turn things around quickly.

Like Texas in their lean years, that program won't be down forever. What separates Florida State from Pittsburgh, NC State, Virginia Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, etc. is that program's ceiling. A program like FSU is always one good hire away from being a perennial playoff contender. The same is not true of most of the Big 12 or ACC.

bear2be2 said:

---

BayouCity said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Quinton said:

---

Genuine question: this fire and leadership just doesn't come naturally to Dave. It feels like he finally realizes this is it, and he's throwing absolutely everything into making this a decent year. But even if they pull off a 9-win season, does he actually have what it takes to summon the energy again and sustain that?

Probably not. He's already proven he doesn't have "it" -- not just in his press conferences or public presence, but in his ability to inspire these guys for a full 60 minutes.. to get them to play smart and execute on a consistent basis.. to play physical. Does he finally find his eureka moment in Year 7? Who knows. But we all probably know the answer.

---

Contrary to what you see posted here, Dave Aranda does have strengths as a head coach.

While many fans have quit on him, his players and coaches never have, which tells you the culture he builds is real. As a lifelong Baylor fan, I've seen teams quit on a coach several times. That's never happened with Aranda in games, seasons or between seasons.

Every time I think he's going to bottom out the program, he manages to pull a win out of his keister -- be that an actual win, a recruiting win or significant coaching hire I didn't think we had the cache or momentum to make. There's something to be said for getting buy-in regardless of results. That's a strength that could be harnessed if he could ever get things right on the football side.

Which brings me back around to why I have some optimism. I think he's finally solved the football side by hiring good people and getting himself out of day to day of it. I think if he lets this staff coach and these players play and focuses on the things he does well, this team can be competitive and fun to watch, which is all I really desire out of our football team. In the NIL era, I have no delusions that we'll ever be a juggernaut because we don't invest at the level needed to do so.

---

I have no interest in Baylor just being "competitive and fun to watch". IU showed us that you can hire the right coach at any school and they can win. Yes, Cig seems like a generational type of hire, but why not us? Why can't we do the same?

Fine, the players and coaches never quit on him. Sure, the culture he builds is real. However, it is a losing culture based on a bunch of moral victories and metrics that don't lead to winning games.

Let's assume that he's solved the football side by hiring good people. What happens when those good people leave? We are still left with a coach who can't win on his own. I don't want that anymore.

---

Indiana, while historically a football graveyard, is in the Big Ten, which is no small detail in the Power 2 era.

The new Big 12 will likely never get a coach the quality of Cignetti, who is truly one of one. And if a Big 12 school ever was to luck into such a coach, he'd be gone for the SEC or Big Ten at the first sign of success.

Too many of you are operating under the realities and expectations of a bygone era. Unless we find a billionaire benefactor willing to bankroll our program at the level that Cody Campbell and Co. are spending at Tech, our days as a contender for anything meaningful are almost certainly done. And the same is true for everyone else in the Big 12 not named Tech and everyone in the ACC not named Florida State, Clemson and Miami.

That sucks, but it's reality. We've already been relegated. That doesn't mean we can't have a one off season here or there where we put everything together and compete for a Big 12 title, but we're not sustaining anything because we don't invest/pay enough to do so.

It will be important then to hire good coaches who can take advantage of market inefficiencies and maximize the talent we're able to acquire, and I think a very strong case can be made that Dave's not that guy. But any coach we hire is going to be fighting an uphill battle because the deck is stacked against us in the NIL era.

---

Cignetti came from JMU. Are you saying that if Baylor had offered to hire him and IU wasn't on the table, he would have declined on the grounds that he was waiting for a bigger conference? Maybe, but I doubt it. Look what that did for Billy Napier. His name was on everyone's list for several years while he waited around for a big SEC job. That didn't last long.

IU did what they did last year without the big money donors stepping up the way they are now. It very well may take big support from alums like Mark Cuban for them to maintain that level, but they won without a huge payroll.

Again, why not us?