Mo money, mo problems. The SC expectations are really high and if you Google what's being said of him currently, they want him out but are not interested in the $80 million cost to do so. A perfect fit is a negotiated buy-out and/or someone else comes and gets him.

He fits the profile we are looking for: Texas guy; knows Texas high schools; offensive-minded. And way-less pressure here in the Big 12 (which he knows) than playing Indiana, Ohio State this weekend, and the other big boys.

There's no place like home either: Muleshoe, TX is within driving distance.

USC isnt good because it is a liberal crap hole. Same with Texas, USC, Oregon etc

I don't think them being in liberal places is why they suck.

100% it is

Based on what

LA being a liberal crap hole and USC being a activist school?

https://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/how-to-stop-woke-takeover-of-education-goldwater-manhattan-institutes-plan/

Sure… I'm not liberal but I'm failing to see how this relates to football ucla is 7th in the nation. Michigan won a title 3 years ago…. I don't see the connection

OffshoreBear said:

---

Lincoln has a 76% winning percentage % and developed 3 Heisman winners. Of course he should be on the list as a top 3-4 candidate.

---

At blue blood programs, from which he ultimately fled (the SEC was too tough at OU) or will be fired (he's been trash at USC).

Lincoln Riley is soft as hell, and his team's reflect it.

Do not want. At all.

You mentioned earlier that you don't want Riley or a few other coaches because they don't coach defense. Fair… but you've been Jeff Traulors #1 supporter for multiple years. Care to guess where his defenses rank? I'll give you a helpful hint? Pretty ****ing bad. We can't knock guys for being bad on one side of the ball while glazing other candidates who quite frankly aren't great on one side of the ball either.
I like Traylor but this board is glazing him and some sort of can't miss coaching prospect. And he's simply not that

Bearfan1998 said:

---

Sure… I'm not liberal but I'm failing to see how this relates to football ucla is 7th in the nation. Michigan won a title 3 years ago…. I don't see the connection

---

Should see all the schools who are bad at football in "conservative" states or cities.

IowaBear said:

---

You mentioned earlier that you don't want Riley or a few other coaches because they don't coach defense. Fair… but you've been Jeff Traulors #1 supporter for multiple years. Care to guess where his defenses rank? I'll give you a helpful hint? Pretty ****ing bad. We can't knock guys for being bad on one side of the ball while glazing other candidates who quite frankly aren't great on one side of the ball either.
I like Traylor but this board is glazing him and some sort of can't miss coaching prospect. And he's simply not that

---

Giving up 28 points a game isn't good?

28 a game and almost 400 yards.. no, definitely not good.

IowaBear said:

---

28 a game and almost 400 yards.. no, definitely not good.

---

That doesn't sound great to me

IowaBear said:

---

You mentioned earlier that you don't want Riley or a few other coaches because they don't coach defense. Fair… but you've been Jeff Traulors #1 supporter for multiple years. Care to guess where his defenses rank? I'll give you a helpful hint? Pretty ****ing bad. We can't knock guys for being bad on one side of the ball while glazing other candidates who quite frankly aren't great on one side of the ball either.
I like Traylor but this board is glazing him and some sort of can't miss coaching prospect. And he's simply not that

---

Traylor doesn't have the NIL budget at UTSA to build a great defense. He has literally a third the budget of the most resourced teams in his league, which he still beats on the field with frequency. But any defensive struggles are not for lack of emphasis or priority.

The guys I'm talking about literally don't care about defense. Like Art Briles before them, they're offensive coordinators in a head coaching role. That is not the case at all for Jeff Traylor, who wants to build complete football teams and has on several occasions throughout his college head coaching career.

Give Jeff Traylor Baylor's resources and he'd likely field the best defense he's had in his career. Give Kittley, Kinne or Riley Baylor's resources and they'd blow them all on offense at the expense of every other phase on their team.

So Traylor has the NIL budget to build competitive offenses but dog**** defenses? Traylor doesn't get a pass from me in that area. If we're going to discredit coaches in certain areas that's fine. And should be done. But we don't get to cherry pick based on our own personal preferences. We have to look at the whole pictures. Most years his defense is ass.
Like I said many times I'd be ok hiring Traylor. But he's certainly not the unicorn people are trying to make him out to be

Jorkel said:

---

IowaBear said:

---

28 a game and almost 400 yards.. no, definitely not good.

---

That doesn't sound great to me

---

It's 26 points and 391.5 yards per game, which has been enough for them to shut down both South Florida and Tulane on their way to the American Conference lead.

Is their defense great? No. But it's a touchdown better than Florida Atlantic over half a touchdown better than Texas State's. USC's is better statistically, but it damn sure better be with the NIL budget they have compared to most of the teams in their conference.

Now go tell me where Tulane and USF rank nationally offensively? If I recall both are struggling massively this year scoring points.
I don't get the point in trying to defend a bad defense here.
101st scoring offense USF
108th scoring offense Tulane

IowaBear said:

---

So Traylor has the NIL budget to build competitive offenses but dog**** defenses? Traylor doesn't get a pass from me in that area. If we're going to discredit coaches in certain areas that's fine. And should be done. But we don't get to cherry pick based on our own personal preferences. We have to look at the whole pictures. Most years his defense is ass.
Like I said many times I'd be ok hiring Traylor. But he's certainly not the unicorn people are trying to make him out to be

---

It's not dog****, when compared to the other coaches we're talking about here. It's a full touchdown better than what Kittley has put on the field this season and over half a touchdown better than what Kinne's defense is doing. If you don't find that to be significant, we'll just agree to disagree. But it's literally the difference between winning and losing games.

UTSA has had some really bad defensive games this season. But they've also had some defensive performances this season that have allowed them to earn wins in games they would have lost without them.

I never said it wasn't significant. I just find your defense of Traylors defense to be cherry picking at best. His defenses suck. There's no other way to put it.
Also I'm not sure where your getting your statistics from but you may want to double check… uSC is giving up less PPG then UTSA

IowaBear said:

---

Now go tell me where Tulane and USF rank nationally offensively? If I recall both are struggling massively this year scoring points.
I don't get the point in trying to defend a bad defense here.
101st scoring offense USF
108th scoring offense Tulane

---

Those are two of the premier programs in the American is the point, both with significantly better resources than UTSA. They're looking up at UTSA in the standings today in part because they couldn't score enough points on the Roadrunners' defense to beat them.

If Jeff Traylor's not good enough for you as a Baylor fan, I don't know what to tell you. I like guys who win and win consistently.

Does Riley not win consistently? Isn't the guy like 96-30?!
Also where did I ever say Traylor wasn't good enough for me? I've said he was…. Many times

IowaBear said:

---

Does Riley not win consistently? Isn't the guy like 96-30?!
Also where did I ever say Traylor wasn't good enough for me? I've said he was…. Many times

---

I think yall might be arguing two different arguments at this point

IowaBear said:

---

Does Riley not win consistently? Isn't the guy like 96-30?!
Also where did I ever say Traylor wasn't good enough for me? I've said he was…. Many times

---

At schools with 911-334-47 and 814-339-40 all-time records, respectively.

He's never had to coach anywhere without extreme resource advantages on most of his conference foes, and he's still been well below program average at USC.

And beyond that, he's an excuse-making ***** that I don't want anywhere near my program. Dude's soft as hell, and his teams reflect it.

Where did I say Traylor wasn't good enough for Baylor? Or is that another of your wild accusations because my takes didn't align with yours ?

IowaBear said:

---

Where did I say Traylor wasn't good enough for Baylor? Or is that another of your wild accusations because my takes didn't align with yours ?

---

You're picking apart his resume in ways you're not others. It was an assumption on my part. Apologies if it was the wrong one.

If Lincoln Riley actually leaves USC, can he bring their Song Girls with him?

Wrong.. I've picked apart resumes of everyone even my personal favorite Lance Taylor.
But you're doing the same thing my man… you're tearing into Riley while completely ignoring the elephant in the room with Traylor.. his defenses suck. It's cherry picking. Everyone knows the flaws with Riley. Myself included. He's not even top 3 for me. Every potential hire is going to have flaws. That was my entire point.

Agreed. Think he would probably be solid but not the can't miss many are pitching (not bear2). I also don't understand the absolute no's on Riley.

Was Ou kind of soft at times.. sure. Were they also the clear best program in the conference and always had good talent and a well coached offense.. also yes.

If Riley puts a little more emphasis on D (was starting to happen), I don't see an obvious coach head and shoulders above him in the league. And again, not my top choice but everyone balking on the dude offhand is wild

You don't win as much as Riley does without being a good coach. I'm sorry but that's the truth. To say otherwise just makes someone a hater. He's 41-20 at USC. This board acts like he's 20-41. USC was garbage for half a decade before he arrived. Has he underachieved there? Yes, to a degree. But the guy wins. I don't care what excuse you want to make for why he's winning. He wins. And let's also be real here.. winning in the B10 is significantly more difficult then winning in the B12 would be for Riley

IowaBear said:

---

So Traylor has the NIL budget to build competitive offenses but dog**** defenses? Traylor doesn't get a pass from me in that area. If we're going to discredit coaches in certain areas that's fine. And should be done. But we don't get to cherry pick based on our own personal preferences. We have to look at the whole pictures. Most years his defense is ass.
Like I said many times I'd be ok hiring Traylor. But he's certainly not the unicorn people are trying to make him out to be

---

I'm pretty synoptic with on Traylor but I don't think a unicorn coach exists in terms of a BU niche and expectations, both real and imagined.

I do know Traylor's had some really good defensive talent pulled away. That's not to say he would have shut folks down, though.

IowaBear said:

---

Wrong again.. I've picked apart resumes of everyone even my personal favorite.
But you're doing the same thing my man… you're tearing into Riley while completely ignoring the elephant in the room with Traylor.. his defenses suck. It's cherry picking. Everyone knows the flaws with Riley. Myself included. He's not even top 3 for me. Every potential hire is going to have flaws. That was my entire point.

---

I grade on a curve. Winning at places where everyone wins doesn't impress me at all, unless it's at a national title level (like Kirby Smart).

Judging someone with a $5 million NIL budget to the same defensive standards of someone with a $40 million budget is a stupid exercise IMO.

I judge people based on the way they perform relative to their resources.

There is no argument that can be made that Jeff Traylor hasn't overachieved at UTSA. And there is no argument to be made that Riley hasn't underachieved at USC.

When it comes to hiring coaches at Baylor, I want guys (and gals) who have done more with less. Those are the types of coaches we have always had the most success with.

I mean is BYU, Utah, Ok st, or Houston's coach (the best coaches imo) huge step above Riley?.. I don't think so. I guess leaving for Tech is a risk since he's a better coach than Joey.

Does anybody really doubt he'd avg around 9 wins a game with Bu's schedule once he got going? And that's conservative imo.

Can Lincoln Riley coach and recruit? Yes, absolutely.

Having already left one blue-blood (Oklahoma), if he also left blue-blood USC, how long would he be content to coach at Baylor?

Perhaps I underestimate the allure of Lake Waco, Cameron Park and Elm Mott (not even mentioning All-University Sing). Please correct me if I am wrong.

That'll be true with any hire who finds success at Baylor though. But I consider that a good thing. If Baylor hires let's say Danielson and he gets poached by Georgia in 5 years that means Baylor was winning at an incredible level.

IowaBear said:

---

That'll be true with any hire who finds success at Baylor though. But I consider that a good thing. If Baylor hires let's say Danielson and he gets poached by Georgia in 5 years that means Baylor was winning at an incredible level.

---

I always remember that Grant Teaff turned down the USC job.