1. When I walked into my men's group Tuesday morning (in Lubbock), I was greeted with "sic'em's" because of the bball game. The guys are mostly Tech and UT fans, but all mentioned how well Baylor sports was doing.

2. Stopped at a Bush's chicken in Brownfield, and the manager, an Aggie fan, noticed my Baylor sweatshirt, and told me how great Baylor sports are.

beardoc said:

---

1. When I walked into my men's group Tuesday morning (in Lubbock), I was greeted with "sic'em's" because of the bball game. The guys are mostly Tech and UT fans, but all mentioned how well Baylor sports was doing.

2. Stopped at a Bush's chicken in Brownfield, and the manager, an Aggie fan, noticed my Baylor sweatshirt, and told me how great Baylor sports are.

---

Love it....that sure wasn't happening in 2016 and 2017. We've come a long way perception wise in a short amount of time.... Although it sure did not feel short when it was happening

Yep..yall right..Rhule strikes me as someone who would have set on his fat ass in the offseason and think we dont need to improve on offense defense or special teams..

His track record at Temple and his 3 years here certainly backs up his complacency and refusal to try and improve year to year.

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yep..yall right..Rhule strikes me as someone who would have set on his fat ass in the offseason and think we dont need to improve on offense defense or special teams..

His track record at Temple and his 3 years here certainly backs up his complacency and refusal to try and improve year to year.

---

It would help if he stayed at one team for more than three years.

What are you babbling about..it would help who what if he stayed longer than 3 years?

At 44 i think hes done pretty good so far with his career decisions.

Stefano DiMera said:

---

What are you babbling about..it would help who what if he stayed longer than 3 years?

At 44 i think hes done pretty good so far with his career decisions.

---

It would help if he stayed at one team for more than three years.

If that's unclear to you, I really don't know how to help you. It looks like a pretty straightforward sentence. You're sitting here telling us how he'd do in year 4 and he hasn't ever been a head coach for four years. Your guess isn't any more or less speculative than mine.

If you don't like it, that's your problem.

How could anyone say that Rhule was not interested in improving when he went from 1-2 wins in year 1, 6-7 years in year 2, to 10-11 wins in year 3--and he did this at both Temple & Baylor. And for someone to suggest he only stays at a place for 3 years must not remember that he was at Temple for 4.

Now that he has his dream job, one would expect him to remain at Carolina much longer. Why should we care if he's there for 3 years or 20? He's gone & not coming back so we have moved on to Aranda. CMR did a great service to Baylor and we can hope that Aranda will pick up where Rhule left off.

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Compounding said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Rhule served a purpose and put some backbone guys in the team. We'll know more next year, but he was kind of a triage coach who swallowed some hard medicine.

When it's all said and done, I'll say he peaked while he was here and the only improvement he brought us was Snow's defense. I didn't see a continued upward trajectory because I didn't see his commitment to recruiting or offensive philosophy.

---

Well said. The greatest college coaches need just a little more of that thing. Stoops was a good example as well. Good but some major recurring soft spots / weaknesses. The aggregate managing approach at all times.

A Saban would get very focused and detailed on those specific areas if he had to while still doing a top down managing for the strong areas. Saban would be on the o-line (I believe Aranda will be as well) yesterday if needed. Not that Rhule wouldn't but I sense he wouldn't as much or say take a bit more hold of the offense when needed (middle of this year).

---

Stooper started off on fire. He was a defensive coach, and he hired the mother of all OC's in Leach. They took a John Blake squad that had an abundance of RB's and won a title. But then it was a game of watching his first litter of coaches get picked off one by one, season by season.
As time wore on, he sorted of retreated back to his comfort zone and that's how Briles was able to exploit him.

By the time he fired his ****** brother, he'd tapped his network for the most part.

That approach works until you run out of good replacements.


Actually when Mangino replaced Leach as offensive coordinator the Sooners started winning big again. Mangino ran a more balanced offense that fit the Sooners better with the running back talent they had in school.

---

Quote:

---

ctually when Mangino replaced Leach as offensive coordinator the Sooners started winning big again. Mangino ran a more balanced offense that fit the Sooners better with the running back talent they had in school.

---

Agree with your point here, but Mangino proceeded the firing of Stoops brother. That was kind of where my timeline went. The question is, did his offensive talent get better when Mangino was coaching, too?

Blake left Stoops talent, but not receivers. They(Leach) converted a lot of running backs who had to flat out learn to catch. That was a monumental task to me.

You could probably make the case that T. Mangino was a better coach, just burned out faster.