ColomboLQ said:

---

Brian Ethridge said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

Care to tell anyone what the revisionist is or the apologetics (sp)?

---

Sure thing, thanks for asking.

Talking about how "lucky" (revisionist) the 2016 team was to win 7 games (not one person has ever mentioned this until 2017 happened) as a way to set up the failure that came in 2017 (apologetics). And the 2016 team story could not be complete without mentioning how school leadership was actively doing things to derail the season and yet he doesn't mention it once (revisionist). He then uses this to state that Rhule was set up to fail in 2017 no matter what (apologetics). The guy says we were "crappy" in 2016 as a way to help further absolve Rhule of his massive failure in 2017 (complete apologetics).

If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.

---

Maybe Forza wanted to stick to things that can actually be quantified. Did that thought ever occur to you?

Crash Davis said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Brian Ethridge said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

Care to tell anyone what the revisionist is or the apologetics (sp)?

---

Sure thing, thanks for asking.

Talking about how "lucky" (revisionist) the 2016 team was to win 7 games (not one person has ever mentioned this until 2017 happened) as a way to set up the failure that came in 2017 (apologetics). And the 2016 team story could not be complete without mentioning how school leadership was actively doing things to derail the season and yet he doesn't mention it once (revisionist). He then uses this to state that Rhule was set up to fail in 2017 no matter what (apologetics). The guy says we were "crappy" in 2016 as a way to help further absolve Rhule of his massive failure in 2017 (complete apologetics).

If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.

---

Maybe Forza wanted to stick to things that can actually be quantified. Did that thought ever occur to you?

---

That does sound like a good idea, but you can certainly quantify the Friday evening dump, that the BOR was taking on the team for several weeks in 2016.

The way it went down would crush the will power of almost any team. Besides that, sure, it is hard to quantify a lot that went wrong that year.

Forest Bueller said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

Brian Ethridge said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

Care to tell anyone what the revisionist is or the apologetics (sp)?

---

Sure thing, thanks for asking.

Talking about how "lucky" (revisionist) the 2016 team was to win 7 games (not one person has ever mentioned this until 2017 happened) as a way to set up the failure that came in 2017 (apologetics). And the 2016 team story could not be complete without mentioning how school leadership was actively doing things to derail the season and yet he doesn't mention it once (revisionist). He then uses this to state that Rhule was set up to fail in 2017 no matter what (apologetics). The guy says we were "crappy" in 2016 as a way to help further absolve Rhule of his massive failure in 2017 (complete apologetics).

If you have any further questions, please feel free to ask.

---

Maybe Forza wanted to stick to things that can actually be quantified. Did that thought ever occur to you?

---

That does sound like a good idea, but you can certainly quantify the Friday evening dump, that the BOR was taking on the team for several weeks in 2016.

The way it went down would crush the will power of almost any team. Besides that, sure, it is hard to quantify a lot that went wrong that year.

---

Actually, it can't be quantified.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

What is the point in getting into a back and forth over something so abstract?

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

A bunch of y'all always seem to forget that the most important reason for the 6-0 start and the 0-6 finish to the regular season has a name.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

Can I ask just one question? I remember being in the stands at the UT game. I remember watching the last few plays that CKB called when we went down. Not much time left but being what we were with CABs offense I still had a little hope left in the tank. What do you call the ridiculous running plays CKB called Seth to do?? I ask that for 2 reasons- 1 is I think the publications finally got to the team before this game, and I think the publications just prior to this game caused them to say **** it and tank the rest of the season (Lebby or CKBs money tweet after winning six games for their bonus didn't help). Just asking your opinion is all.

Whatever else you can say about Rhule, he is pretty magnetic and motivational when he wants to be. Can't wait to see what he can pull off in the next few years.

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

BUBear24 said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

Can I ask just one question? I remember being in the stands at the UT game. I remember watching the last few plays that CKB called when we went down. Not much time left but being what we were with CABs offense I still had a little hope left in the tank. What do you call the ridiculous running plays CKB called Seth to do?? I ask that for 2 reasons- 1 is I think the publications finally got to the team before this game, and I think the publications just prior to this game caused them to say **** it and tank the rest of the season (Lebby or CKBs money tweet after winning six games for their bonus didn't help). Just asking your opinion is all.

---

Hell, I'll let you ask me more than one if you feel so inclined. As to your question, this is what I think. I don't believe our coaching staff tanked, and definitely didn't in that UT game. I think CKB simply choked at the end of the game with the play calling. I don't think there was anything intentionally bad or intentionally made to make the team lose. I don't believe the staff tanked the rest of the year either. The biggest indicator to me is the bowl game. If the coaches really did tank the last half of the year, there is no way that they could have gotten the players to have played well at all that last game. How in the world could they convince the players to play hard for them and trust them as coaches if they had been tanking the last half of the year? As human beings, that makes no sense. The more probable answer is that the coaching (and playing) suffered with all the repeated distractions and injuries they were faced with the second half of the year that they didn't have the first half.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

---

Well when you fail to mention by far the biggest obstacle the team faced in 2016, it takes away your credibility for the rest of your post. The story of the 2016 team can't be told without the scandal and weekly BOR releases being involved.

As far as comparing the talent level of the 2016 team to the previous 3 years, I don't believe anyone would (or has) disagree with you on there. Now how much of a talent dip the 2017 team had from the 2016 team has been up for debate (not that there was one, just how much of one). The 2017 team returned 3 OL starters plus another player that was basically a starter during 2016. This is a fact. Considering how Vegas expected us to go to a bowl game and the vast majority of posters on here were expecting the same, I have my doubts just how much the talent had dipped in 2017. Were injuries and lack of depth a factor? Absolutely. The problem is that those things weren't factors until later in the year and can not explain away disasters like Liberty and UTSA.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

---

Well when you fail to mention by far the biggest obstacle the team faced in 2016, it takes away your credibility for the rest of your post. The story of the 2016 team can't be told without the scandal and weekly BOR releases being involved.

As far as comparing the talent level of the 2016 team to the previous 3 years, I don't believe anyone would (or has) disagree with you on there. Now how much of a talent dip the 2017 team had from the 2016 team has been up for debate (not that there was one, just how much of one). The 2017 team returned 3 OL starters plus another player that was basically a starter during 2016. This is a fact. Considering how Vegas expected us to go to a bowl game and the vast majority of posters on here were expecting the same, I have my doubts just how much the talent had dipped in 2017. Were injuries and lack of depth a factor? Absolutely. The problem is that those things weren't factors until later in the year and can not explain away disasters like Liberty and UTSA.

---

And you lose all credibility when you say that my post was revisionist history and apologetics when none of it was. As I said before, I was responding to cowboycwr who said that all you need to know is that we won 7 games in 2016 and 1 in 2017. I disagreed that that is all you need to know, and I pointed out a number of issues that 2017 had that 2016 didn't have and that in 2016 we weren't that great. If I have no credibility with you because I didn't also point out that the BOR did some things in 2016 that were counterproductive, so be it. I'll have to live with that.

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

---

Well when you fail to mention by far the biggest obstacle the team faced in 2016, it takes away your credibility for the rest of your post. The story of the 2016 team can't be told without the scandal and weekly BOR releases being involved.

As far as comparing the talent level of the 2016 team to the previous 3 years, I don't believe anyone would (or has) disagree with you on there. Now how much of a talent dip the 2017 team had from the 2016 team has been up for debate (not that there was one, just how much of one). The 2017 team returned 3 OL starters plus another player that was basically a starter during 2016. This is a fact. Considering how Vegas expected us to go to a bowl game and the vast majority of posters on here were expecting the same, I have my doubts just how much the talent had dipped in 2017. Were injuries and lack of depth a factor? Absolutely. The problem is that those things weren't factors until later in the year and can not explain away disasters like Liberty and UTSA.

---

You're being disingenous if you think team depth was not an issue at the start of the season. There were players, but not much experience. As for injuries not being a problem until later in the year, for the opening game the following were injured either before or during the game: Terence Williams, Grayland Arnold, Jamychal Hasty, Taion Sells, Jameson Houston, Davion Hall, Raleigh Texada, Jordan Tolbert, Tre'von Lewis, Henry Black, Rajah Preciado. That's a lot of guys out at the start, and it got worse just about every game. And you have concerns about my credibility?

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

---

Well when you fail to mention by far the biggest obstacle the team faced in 2016, it takes away your credibility for the rest of your post. The story of the 2016 team can't be told without the scandal and weekly BOR releases being involved.

As far as comparing the talent level of the 2016 team to the previous 3 years, I don't believe anyone would (or has) disagree with you on there. Now how much of a talent dip the 2017 team had from the 2016 team has been up for debate (not that there was one, just how much of one). The 2017 team returned 3 OL starters plus another player that was basically a starter during 2016. This is a fact. Considering how Vegas expected us to go to a bowl game and the vast majority of posters on here were expecting the same, I have my doubts just how much the talent had dipped in 2017. Were injuries and lack of depth a factor? Absolutely. The problem is that those things weren't factors until later in the year and can not explain away disasters like Liberty and UTSA.

---

You're being disingenous if you think team depth was not an issue at the start of the season. There were players, but not much experience. As for injuries not being a problem until later in the year, for the opening game the following were injured either before or during the game: Terence Williams, Grayland Arnold, Jamychal Hasty, Taion Sells, Jameson Houston, Davion Hall, Raleigh Texada, Jordan Tolbert, Tre'von Lewis, Henry Black, Rajah Preciado. That's a lot of guys out at the start, and it got worse just about every game. And you have concerns about my credibility?

---

So if I'm understanding you correctly, we did not have enough talent and depth at the beginning of the season to beat Liberty and UTSA? That's really what you want to argue? If you really think that is the case, then the the answer to your last question is absolutely.

Quote:

---

So if I'm understanding you correctly, we did not have enough talent and depth at the beginning of the season to beat Liberty and UTSA? That's really what you want to argue? If you really think that is the case, then the the answer to your last question is absolutely.

---

Yep. Its the Liberty game that makes me fear what may happen this year. It absolutely reeks of UNLV circa 1999. No way we didn't possess the talent or depth to beat Liberty.

Quote:

---

LOL nobody said we didn't have the talent and depth to beat Liberty.

---

So that one is on CMR and staff?

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

---

Well when you fail to mention by far the biggest obstacle the team faced in 2016, it takes away your credibility for the rest of your post. The story of the 2016 team can't be told without the scandal and weekly BOR releases being involved.

As far as comparing the talent level of the 2016 team to the previous 3 years, I don't believe anyone would (or has) disagree with you on there. Now how much of a talent dip the 2017 team had from the 2016 team has been up for debate (not that there was one, just how much of one). The 2017 team returned 3 OL starters plus another player that was basically a starter during 2016. This is a fact. Considering how Vegas expected us to go to a bowl game and the vast majority of posters on here were expecting the same, I have my doubts just how much the talent had dipped in 2017. Were injuries and lack of depth a factor? Absolutely. The problem is that those things weren't factors until later in the year and can not explain away disasters like Liberty and UTSA.

---

You're being disingenous if you think team depth was not an issue at the start of the season. There were players, but not much experience. As for injuries not being a problem until later in the year, for the opening game the following were injured either before or during the game: Terence Williams, Grayland Arnold, Jamychal Hasty, Taion Sells, Jameson Houston, Davion Hall, Raleigh Texada, Jordan Tolbert, Tre'von Lewis, Henry Black, Rajah Preciado. That's a lot of guys out at the start, and it got worse just about every game. And you have concerns about my credibility?

---

So if I'm understanding you correctly, we did not have enough talent and depth at the beginning of the season to beat Liberty and UTSA? That's really what you want to argue? If you really think that is the case, then the the answer to your last question is absolutely.

---

You said depth and injuries were not an issue until later in the season. I said we were not deep at the beginning and that we had a lot of guys injured even before the season started. Please point out where I said that we didn't have enough talent to beat Liberty. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension or do you just like to pretend that you do so that you can act like a d***?

CorsicanaBear said:

---

Quote:

---

LOL nobody said we didn't have the talent and depth to beat Liberty.

---

So that one is on CMR and staff?

---

Absolutely. Injuries may have contributed to the loss, but that doesn't excuse it. Should have beat Liberty and UTSA...no queststion about that.

Quote:

---

Should have beat Liberty and UTSA...no queststion about that.

---

And that's what concerns me for the coming season.

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

ColomboLQ said:

---

forza orsi said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Lance_smith15 said:

---

"I stopped reading two sentences in when the author clearly has no clue what he was talking about."

Opinion. Also, are you seriously implying that Bill Connelly has no idea what he's talking about? Covering college football is his job, pretty sure he knows what he's talking about..

"7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know."
Opinion

"First year coaches win ALL THE TIME."

This statement implies that Matt Rhule had a similar situation to another successful first year coach which is a laughable claim.

"And yet everyone wants to give Rhule a pass because he is a nice guy or something. All one has to do is watch his post game pressers to see he is lost and has no clue."

Who's giving Rhule a pass? 1-11 is unacceptable and should never happen again. Also, "he is lost and has no clue" opinion. I didn't think that NFL teams interviewed people that are lost and have no clue

"And of course if he wins 2 games this year he will be called the savior of Baylor Football."

Opinion. If Rhule wins 2 games next season I garauntee you that no one on this board will he applauding him.

Just stop..

---

I said nothing of the sort. You took it that way. I simply said he had no idea what he is talking about in this one article. He may cover college football but that does not mean he could possibly know and understand everything happening with all 128 teams. This article shows that.

7 wins to 1 win is an absolute fact. Stop trying to pretend it isn't.

First year coaches win all the time. Fact. The situation had little to do with it. You and all the others who want to support a guy who can't even beat LIBERTY want to use it as a crutch. But again it comes back to the 7 win team being lead by such a great coach that he can only beat one team.

---

7 wins to 1 win IS an absolute fact. You just like to pretend that the drop off was mainly due to coaching. The 7 win year was a pretty crappy year too when you look at it. We started with 6 straight wins, which were 3 nonconference cupcakes, Iowa State, Kansas, and somehow got it together for a win over Okie State. All of that was with Seth Russell at QB. It was then followed by 6 straight losses when we played decent teams, that including complete hammerings from TCU, OU, Tech, and KSU. Most of that without Seth. And we got it together for a bowl game victory over an uninspired Boise State. So pointing to the 7 wins the previous year as an indication of how much worse we were in 2017 is disingenuous, as we were pretty crappy in 2016 too.

From that mediocre at best 2016 team we lost our starting QB, starting RB, our 3 best receivers, 3 starting DBs and 2 contributors, starting LB, starting DT, and starting C to graduation or early to the NFL. Additionally, Sean Muir and Dom Desouza retired and Johnny Jefferson left school. Our 2016 recruiting class basically vanished, and Stidham had transferred, a couple of other guys got in trouble (Hammad, Autry, Faulk), so there was pretty much nothing to replace all the talent that left.

Pretending like Rhule walked into a situation where he had a winner just waiting to be led is ridiculous. We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016 that lost all its best players and replaced them with some half-decent true freshmen. If you take what was left and look at the injuries they had, the 2017 team was set up to lose a bunch of games, regardless.

---

There are some serious apologetics going on with this one. Not to mention some serious revisionist history.

---

We weren't very good in 2016. I measure that by the fact that in the regular season we beat one team with a pulse and we got pounded by the majority of the decent teams we played. Going into the season the 2017 team was appreciably less talented than the 2016 team and far less experienced. The 2017 team had a lot of injuries, including many at the beginning of the season that exacerbated the talent issue. Please point out what is revisionist about that.

---

Uh, how about the fact that you left off the single biggest factor influencing the 2016 season, which was the scandal and Baylor leadership actively trying to derail the season (which they did). Your opinion is that we were "crappy" in 2016 and got "lucky" to win 7 games. My opinion is that we actually WERE a good team until the BOR started their weekly releases and articles that served as a huge distraction and undermined the team itself. There was nothing "lucky" about them winning 7 games in 2016.

---

To be clear, I'm not saying that we were lucky to win the games we won. I mean that we were lucky that our schedule started with 5 really bad teams in the first six games. We beat Northwestern State, SMU, Rice, Kansas (2-10), and Iowa State (3-9) (by 3 points) in that stretch. For a guy that is so skeptical now you were apparently pretty easily impressed in 2016.

---

Sorry, when I read "We had a team that was lucky to be .500 in 2016" that doesn't exactly tell me that we were lucky because of the way the schedule was set up as you now indicate was your intent. As to your last comment, given all the team had to endure that year (scandal, no head coach, BOR weekly releases, opposing fan bases calling them all rapists, injuries, etc), I do think it's amazing they won 7 games to be honest.

---

I've never said that the 2016 team didn't have obstacles. Regardless, I think that 2016 was not nearly as talented a team as the teams of the previous three years, even if it hadn't had those obstacles. The 2017 team was another step down in talent from 2016, it was less experienced, had well less than a full roster, and it had more key injuries. That's the short version of what my original comment said, and I don't think that any of those things are the "revisionist" statements that you allege them to be. My original comment was in response to cowboycwr whose response to the article was "7 win team to 1 win team.... that is all anyone needs to know." Even if you hate the BOR actions, if you're trying to evaluate Rhule objectively, it's not "all anyone needs to know."

---

Well when you fail to mention by far the biggest obstacle the team faced in 2016, it takes away your credibility for the rest of your post. The story of the 2016 team can't be told without the scandal and weekly BOR releases being involved.

As far as comparing the talent level of the 2016 team to the previous 3 years, I don't believe anyone would (or has) disagree with you on there. Now how much of a talent dip the 2017 team had from the 2016 team has been up for debate (not that there was one, just how much of one). The 2017 team returned 3 OL starters plus another player that was basically a starter during 2016. This is a fact. Considering how Vegas expected us to go to a bowl game and the vast majority of posters on here were expecting the same, I have my doubts just how much the talent had dipped in 2017. Were injuries and lack of depth a factor? Absolutely. The problem is that those things weren't factors until later in the year and can not explain away disasters like Liberty and UTSA.

---

You're being disingenous if you think team depth was not an issue at the start of the season. There were players, but not much experience. As for injuries not being a problem until later in the year, for the opening game the following were injured either before or during the game: Terence Williams, Grayland Arnold, Jamychal Hasty, Taion Sells, Jameson Houston, Davion Hall, Raleigh Texada, Jordan Tolbert, Tre'von Lewis, Henry Black, Rajah Preciado. That's a lot of guys out at the start, and it got worse just about every game. And you have concerns about my credibility?

---

So if I'm understanding you correctly, we did not have enough talent and depth at the beginning of the season to beat Liberty and UTSA? That's really what you want to argue? If you really think that is the case, then the the answer to your last question is absolutely.

---

You said depth and injuries were not an issue until later in the season. I said we were not deep at the beginning and that we had a lot of guys injured even before the season started. Please point out where I said that we didn't have enough talent to beat Liberty. Do you have a problem with reading comprehension or do you just like to pretend that you do so that you can act like a d***?

---

No reading comprehension problems here; I just don't think you like your posts looked at closely and scrutinized. Let me ask you this point blank then. Did we have the talent and depth to beat Liberty and UTSA to start the year, yes or no? I say yes and that is why I said we didn't have talent and depth issues until later in the year.

CorsicanaBear said:

---

Quote:

---

Should have beat Liberty and UTSA...no queststion about that.

---

And that's what concerns me for the coming season.

---

The list of coaches that haven't suffered embarrassing losses is virtually non existent. Sometimes it even happens twice in a season.

In terms of projecting towards the 2018 season, I'm far more interested in what a Charlie Brewer led team looked like in November than an Anu Solomon led team looked like last September. Those losses sucked and shouldn't have happened, but I don't think they tell us much of anything about this upcoming season.

CorsicanaBear said:

---

Quote:

---

Should have beat Liberty and UTSA...no queststion about that.

---

And that's what concerns me for the coming season.

---

If the team had been such that they would have lost to Liberty or UTSA at the end of the season, your concern would be justified.